Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #670143
| From | Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity, sci.electronics.design, sci.math |
| Subject | Re: energy and mass |
| Date | 2026-03-19 18:24 +1100 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <10pg8ck$ggtm$4@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (22 earlier) <69BA53EC.676@ix.netcom.com> <10pdt44$3n2fa$3@dont-email.me> <69BAE9E5.712@ix.netcom.com> <10pfspv$d4ji$5@dont-email.me> <69BB92B9.1DB0@ix.netcom.com> |
Cross-posted to 3 groups.
On 19/03/2026 5:07 pm, The Starmaker wrote: > Bill Sloman wrote: >> >> On 19/03/2026 5:07 am, The Starmaker wrote: >>> Bill Sloman wrote: >>>> >>>> On 18/03/2026 6:27 pm, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>> Bill Sloman wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 18/03/2026 4:34 am, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>>> Bill Sloman wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 17/03/2026 7:14 pm, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>>>>> Bill Sloman wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 17/03/2026 2:55 am, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Bill Sloman wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 16/03/2026 3:42 pm, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Bill Sloman wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 13/03/2026 8:24 pm, Thomas Heger wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am Donnerstag000012, 12.03.2026 um 12:29 schrieb Bill Sloman: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> True. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and isn't worth the effort until you have lots of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> observations to make sense of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nonsense. Your naive positivism is playing up again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best counterexample: general relativity. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It wasn't based on any observation. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure, it was based on some madness of an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> insane crazy instead. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Einstein was about as sane as anybody could be. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I personally think, that Einstein was what I would call a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'disinformation agent'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are free to think that. I wouldn't go around telling other people >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that you think that - it would suggest that you had a rather poor >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> grasp of reality >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Most likely he wasn't even a Jew and a Swiss from birth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lots of people were happy to claim him as being Jewish after he got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> famous. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If Einstein wasn't actually a Jew, this would be a possible explanation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for why he rejected the presidency of Israel, which was offered to him. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Would have been quite dangerous, if he had actually accepted and would >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been asked to prove his jewishness. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> A much more likely explanation is that he didn't fancy becoming some >>>>>>>>>>>>>> kind of figurehead to be rolled out on ceremonial occasions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It would have distracted him from the scientific work that he kept on >>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing all his life. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh Yes, the scientific work that he kept on >>>>>>>>>>>>> doing all his life was figuring out how to teleport a Navy war ship from >>>>>>>>>>>>> one city to another city... >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Einstein was working on...Quantum Teleportation. Called "The Einstein's >>>>>>>>>>>>> Continuum of Spatio-Temporal" >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> "The Einstein's continuum of spatio-temporal which enabled idea of >>>>>>>>>>>>> quantum teleportation, which represents technique of dematerialization >>>>>>>>>>>>> of the matter, in one location and 'faxing', namely, electronic >>>>>>>>>>>>> transmission to quantum state on the other >>>>>>>>>>>>> location, in order to be materialized there." >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> (dematerialization in one location, and materialized on the other >>>>>>>>>>>>> location). >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Larry Niven described it better - as a science fiction author he had to. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Attributing it to Einstein seems to be pure invention. It didn't show up >>>>>>>>>>>> in 1950's science fiction, and Einstein died in 1955. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Put simply, it would get you from here to there... >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> You. or something that might look very like you. Transforming some 70kgm >>>>>>>>>>>> of matter into energy and transforming it back to matter implies >>>>>>>>>>>> transmitting great deal of energy. A hydrogen bomb transforms 0.7kgm of >>>>>>>>>>>> mass into energy. Transforming the energy into exactly the right sort of >>>>>>>>>>>> matter to exactly duplicate you might be tricky >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> "exactly duplicate", or making a copy is not how it works. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> It is simply a 'cut and paste'. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You cut it from and paste it there. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Like on a computer.. >>>>>>>>>>> you just highlight the whole folder with a blue light, then you, >>>>>>>>>>> you...cut-and-paste it >>>>>>>>>>> to your other hard drive and it reappears there! >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Not copy and paste, cut and paste. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> A distinction without meaning. "Cut and paste" is just "copy and paste" >>>>>>>>>> followed by "delete the original". Somebody with a very tight memory >>>>>>>>>> budget might cut, paste and delete in very small chunks. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You scan each atom >>>>>>>>>>> delete it. and paste it there. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Which would mean that there would be a point where you'd have half a >>>>>>>>>> person at each end of the link, both dead, unless you could complete the >>>>>>>>>> process in less than a millisecond. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> spooky at a distance. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Why do you think Einstein didn't finish it? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Have you any evidence to suggest that Einstein even started on it? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yes, you gave us the evidence. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You wrote: "It would have distracted him from the scientific work that >>>>>>>>> he kept on doing all his life." >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You were referring to his Grand Unified Theory he was working on all his >>>>>>>>> life. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> What do you think the Grand Unified Theory 'is'? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It includes gravity as well as electromagnetism and the weak and strong >>>>>>>> nuclear forces. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In 'science jargon' it's: 'When a mass moves, the force acting on other >>>>>>>>> masses had been considered to adjust instantaneously to the new location >>>>>>>>> of the displaced mass.' >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In other words... make a ship invisible and transport it to another >>>>>>>>> place. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> No. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You scan the atom (all the atoms) of the ship, delete it, and paste it >>>>>>>>> another place. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Lovely if you could do it, but you probably need to invent a new >>>>>>>> universe with new and different physical laws to make it possible >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "The Office of Naval Research (ONR) has stated that the use of force >>>>>>>>> fields to make a ship and her crew invisible does not conform to known >>>>>>>>> physical laws. >>>>>>>>> ONR also claims that Dr. Albert Einstein's Unified Field Theory was >>>>>>>>> never completed. >>>>>>>>> During 1943-1944, Einstein was a part-time consultant with the Navy's >>>>>>>>> Bureau of Ordnance, undertaking theoretical research on explosives and >>>>>>>>> explosions. " >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The Bureau of Ordance wanted a celebrity name to play with. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think I have around somewhere a blackboard with all the math on it >>>>>>>>> 'about getting from here to there' teleportation...celestial mechanics. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://x.com/Starmaker111/status/2033817198998000030/photo/1 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> but it is not finished... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Like a lot of other research projects. Mostly when you dig deep enough, >>>>>>>> you find out that an idea is never going to work. If your success rate >>>>>>>> is better than 30% you are going to get scooped by other researchers >>>>>>>> uncomfortably often. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Good ideas have a nasty habit of striking different people in different >>>>>>>> places at much the same time. A friend ended up making $A12 million out >>>>>>>> of an idea he patented. Tektronix had applied for a provisional patent >>>>>>>> six weeks earlier, but abandoned it without spending the much larger >>>>>>>> sums that would have been required to register an actual patent. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It's also not science fiction as you claim to be...\\ >>>>>> >>>>>> It certainly is science fiction, which doesn't stop people having >>>>>> half-baked ideas about using it in real life. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Using refined tools and long series of experiments, Anton Zeilinger started to use entangled quantum states. >>>>>>> Among other things, his research group has demonstrated a phenomenon called quantum teleportation, which makes it possible to move a quantum state from one particle to one at a distance. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=4ae20d8bd47daad1&hl=en&gbv=2&sxsrf=ANbL-n4iBGManDUb2_O74J964ltj7MZlqg%3A1773767645872&q=nobel+prize+quantum+telepor >>>>>> >>>>>> A quantum state doesn't have any mass. >>>>>> >>>>>>> The 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to Alain Aspect, John F. Clauser, and Anton Zeilinger >>>>>>> for their pioneering work on quantum entanglement, which laid the foundation for the field of quantum information science, including quantum teleportation. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/2022/press-release/#:~:text=Using%20refined%20tools%20and%20long,the%20Nobel%20Committee%20for%20Physics. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> and that 'blackboard' is Albert Einstein's promotion for...teleportation. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://x.com/Starmaker111/status/2033817198998000030/photo/1 > >>>>>>> 'beam me up, Scotty.' >>>>>> >>>>>> Since Scotty was always pixels on a screen, \it an illusion. >>>>>> >>>>>>> I notice you have a Scottish accent... >>>>>> >>>>>> Via my wife I hung out with quite a few dialect experts. My accent is >>>>>> educated Australian, slightly soften by 22 years living in England. One >>>>>> work colleague - with whom I'm still in contact - is Scottish, but I >>>>>> don't seem to have picked up his accent. >>>>>> >>>>>>> are you slow? >>>>>> >>>>>> My surname is a west country surname - there are more pages of Slomans >>>>>> in the Taunton telephone directory than in the London telephone >>>>>> directory - and it is a contraction of Sloughman, who was some who >>>>>> farmed bottom land close to a river. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm not slow - both my parents had university degrees and I got a Ph.D. >>>>>> All my nieces and nephews have been to university and graduated - one >>>>>> now works for Google. My father's sister married a very clever vet, who >>>>>> ended up with a D.Sc, and both their kids were professors at Adelaide >>>>>> University for a bit. It isn't a high prestige school and both moved on >>>>>> to better jobs. That is the clever branch of the family. My father's 25 >>>>>> patents - I've only got three - instills a certain measure of humility. >>> >>> From slow +? man, a nickname for a sluggish person. >> >> Always corrupted into snowman. >> >>> https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Sloman >>>>> Now I understand why teachers blow up in rocketships...the engineers >>>>> don't understand physics. >>>> >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Challenger_disaster >>> >>>> The engineers has warned management, "but neither NASA nor the SRB >>>> manufacturer Morton Thiokol had addressed this known defect. NASA >>>> managers also disregarded engineers' warnings about the dangers of >>>> launching in low temperatures and did not report these technical >>>> concerns to their superiors." >>>> >>>> It was a management screw up. The engineers had done their jobs and >>>> warned management, but management ignored them. It happens a lot. >>> >>> "It happens a lot."???? You mean, you look the other way. >> >> I was never management, though I got close. I later found out that my >> refusal to waste time on pointless paper-shuffling counted against me. >> >>> then you take bets in the bathroom, will she live or die? >> >> It doesn't work like that. The managers worry about more important stuff >> - pointless paper-shuffling. >> >>> I can bet on that today, can I? Kalshi. >> >> You can bet on anything you like. It's a character defect, but not yet a >> crime. >> >>> no more bathroom bets. >>> >>> I bet she dies...I seen the engineers...too weak. >> >> That's built into the system. Engineers - like British scientists -have >> to be on tap rather than on top. >> >>> You know, no one ever told the teacher what were the odds... >> >> They were well known. Going into space has always been a risky business, >> but you do get a lot of publicity, which strikes as even stronger >> demotivator. >> -- >> Bill Sloman, Sydney > > > The internal reality > > After the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster, the Rogers Commission > uncovered a huge gap: > > NASA management often cited failure odds around 1 in 100,000 > (extremely optimistic) > > Engineers and some contractors believed the real risk could be > closer to 1 in 100 or even worse > > That enormous mismatch shows that even within NASA, there wasn’t a > single honest, agreed-upon number — so it certainly wasn’t clearly > communicated to McAuliffe. McAuliffe could count. NASA had killed a number of astronauts over the years. > She wasn’t told specific odds — and if she had been told the most > realistic internal estimates, it might have sounded very different from > the "safe routine flight" image the Shuttle program projected at the > time. > > That teacher was murdered. NASA needed the money... Don't be silly. They sincerely didn't want her dead, but bureaucracies put a lot more emphasis on meeting schedules than they do on avoiding disasters > But, it's okay to look the other way... It most certainly isn't > Every time they send a rocket up...everybody looks the other way...they > got mouths to feed. Far from it. But when the whole organisation is focussed on staging impressive events and getting them to happen when promised, concerns about safety get a lower priority. -- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-12 10:35 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-12 22:29 +1100
Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-13 10:24 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-14 03:42 +1100
Re: energy and mass The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-03-15 21:42 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-16 21:50 +1100
Re: energy and mass The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-03-16 08:55 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-17 18:06 +1100
Re: energy and mass The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-03-17 01:14 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-18 00:29 +1100
Re: energy and mass The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-03-17 10:34 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-18 15:49 +1100
Re: energy and mass The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-03-18 00:27 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-18 21:00 +1100
Re: energy and mass The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-03-18 11:07 -0700
Re: energy and mass The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-03-18 11:47 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-19 15:14 +1100
Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-19 07:47 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-19 18:11 +1100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-19 15:07 +1100
Re: energy and mass The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-03-18 23:07 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-19 18:24 +1100
Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-19 09:31 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-19 20:38 +1100
Re: energy and mass The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-03-19 11:54 -0700
Re: energy and mass The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-03-20 11:59 -0700
Re: energy and mass The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-03-20 15:28 -0700
Re: energy and mass The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-03-22 12:12 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-23 23:05 +1100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-21 16:23 +1100
Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-19 07:47 +0100
Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-18 07:32 -0700
csiph-web