Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Guys this is absolutely off topic but it's keeping me awake.  If anyone can help me out here please do.  If they can start a thread on the subject then I'll definitely be up for discussion.  I have no idea how to start a thread. 

I've watched one of Michio Kaku's videos on time travel.  He referenced Einstein's theory of Relativity - I think 'General' - that proposed that time dilates - decreasing in proportion to increased speed.  Not sure if there's a proposed ratio.  I know nothing about this.  I just heard Kaku mention that at close to light speed then time virtually stops.  I've heard all this before - but never really paid it much heed.  I've got my own take on time.  In any event - this is the puzzle.

I googled the rate of our planet's spin.  It's circumference is apparently 40 075 kilometers which gives one 1669.8 kilometers per hour - and over a twenty four hour period it completes an entire axial spin.  Now.  I have a spaceman - goes up in a ship which is sent into orbit.   It locks into a position that - unlike our moon - stays in precisely one position - let's say directly over Ntebe in Uganda - near the equator.  The space ship has compensated it's speed and travels faster - to ensure that it stays in precisely that same position over Ntebe.  Therefore sun up and sun down co-incides with Ntebe's sun up sun down.  But it's speed may have increased to  plus/minus 3 396 kilometers per hour to accommodate the greater distance in it's movement through a wider circumference.  Then tell me what time dilation does that spaceman experience?   He still sees the sun come up and the sun go down - he still travels through a time that is entirely co-incident with our day and our night.  Not only that - but the experiment is theoretically feasible.  And yet his 24 hours will precisely match the 24 hour period enjoyed by the inhabitants of Ntebe.  So.  What price 'time dilation'.  His own time frame matches Greenwich Mean Time.

But then I've got a problem.  Is it then theoretically possible to put the pedal to the metal - so to speak - and travel at, say 6 692 kilometers per hour - either with or against our axial spin?  And then?  What are the consequences?   Would that spaceman then see and earlier sunrise?  Alternatively - if he travelled in the same direction as our axial spin - would he see a later sunrise?  And if he then returned to earth - would it still be co-incident with our own time frame? 

I simply can't work it out.  All references that I've found talk about moving away in a straight line.  What happens when we move in the same space in an orbit?  Reminds me of the poem

'There was a young lady from Bright
Whose speed was much faster than light
She set off one day in a relative way
And returned the previous night.

Anyway - this subject will probably just hang here as so many of my questions do.  But I'd be glad of some comment - or better still - if someone could start a thread.  Then I'll delete this post.

Regards,
Rosemary

EDITED  Thanks Bubba.  I've amended the numbers.  But still not sure if they're right.

[Bubba1]

I googled the rate of our planet's spin.  It's apparently 40 075 kilometers per hour - and over a twenty four hour period it completes an entire axial spin.

I think it's more like 40,075 kilometers/day.  Speed of light is approximately 300,000 kilometers/second, quite a difference.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

I think it's more like 40,075 kilometers/day.  Speed of light is approximately 300,000 kilometers/second, quite a difference.

It seems that I was referencing the the circumference and not the rate of spin.  I think it's amended now.  Thanks for this Bubba. 

ADDED  Actually guys I've got the answer.  He sees the sun relative to it's postion over Ntebe - but just sees it more often depending on his speed... I think.  But that still leave the question related to 'time dilation'.  I don't see any if his position in space stays constant relative to earth and if his orbital velocity is co-incident to our own time frame.

regards
Rosemary

[Rosemary Ainslie]

You'll most likely need the 555, which was stressed in my previous posts. The "over-riding" duty cycle occurs because of interference back to the 555.

Thanks for the advice - but frankly Poynty, I'd prefer to rest on the advices of those experts that I'm working with - is my first point.  And you state - unequivocally that the overriding of the duty cycle is the result of 'interference'?  That's an opinion.  I've already explained that the 555 is NOT subject to interference.  We're doing our switch tests without a load.  So.  Where then is that 'interference' coming from?  The 555 seems not to be efficient.  Certainly not at the level we're looking for.  So.  While you're happy with your opinion there are those of us who simply don't agree.

But try the microcontroller, it will provide a wide range of frequency and duty cycle outputs.

Again.  I'm grateful for your lenience here in 'allowing' us to do the required.  But I'm not sure that it's appropriate to give us advice. We'll do the tests under the advisement of experts.

I doubt the desired quasi-stable oscillation will be achieved with anything other than the right combination of chips, and the 555 seems up to the task, due to its inherent sensitivity to outside influences.

Are you indulging us here Poynty Point -  by 'allowing' us to do these tests but that your OPINION is that it won't work anyway?  In which case would you sooner we not even try this?  I'm really not sure that I care that much whether you think it may or may not work.  We'll do the tests that we need to satisfy our own curiosity about this matter - if you don't mind.

I read that you were going to do an Ainslie Circuit debunk?  May I assure you that you'll need to do this on an alternate thread and better yet - in your own forum - where you first proposed this.  I do not want this thread dominated with a debate on efficacy of the device.  This thread is to present the data when we do those tests.  You can debate that data elsewhere.  Else I suspect that you'll systematically errode the confidence of any readers here very much as Harvey and Glen have managed on their own thread at EF.com.  It's hard enough as it is - bringing this kind of data to the table - without the gratuitous involvement of 'debunkers' no matter their pretended interest in the technology.

R.

[Pirate88179]

Rose:

The only way to stay over a fixed point on the earth in space is to be at 22,500 miles up, known as geostationary orbit.  Orbital velocity is close to 17,500 miles/hour. This was posited by Arthur Clark (of 2001 fame) and later utilized in geosyncro satellite technology.

Einstein's relativity theory was proven by sending up an atomic clock into orbit and then comparing that very accurate time to another one on earth.  The time difference, although minuscule, was measurable and it proved that part of his theory.

Bill