Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #670235
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity, sci.electronics.design, sci.math |
| Subject | Re: energy and mass |
| Date | 2026-03-20 15:28 -0700 |
| Organization | The Starmaker Organization |
| Message-ID | <69BDCA17.3165@ix.netcom.com> (permalink) |
| References | (25 earlier) <10pfspv$d4ji$5@dont-email.me> <69BB92B9.1DB0@ix.netcom.com> <10pg8ck$ggtm$4@dont-email.me> <69BC4656.1060@ix.netcom.com> <69BD9920.571A@ix.netcom.com> |
Cross-posted to 3 groups.
The Starmaker wrote: > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > Bill Sloman wrote: > > > > > > 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+t > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> 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. > > > > dats wat i said...you look the other way. > > > > Look at the numbers: > > > > NASA management often cited failure odds around 1 in 100,000 > > > > Engineers and some contractors believed the real risk could be > > closer to 1 in 100 or even worse > > > > They told the teacher..."safe routine flight". > > > > I would call it...'human error'. She trusted you guys. > > > > They told her, "Don't worry, it's safe...get your fat ass in dat washing machine, you stupid bitch!" > > > > You people are soooo stupid. NASA shows you a picture of a 'blurred hole' and call it a black hole. > > > > And you don't investigate why the picture is a blurred hole. > > > > NASA will tell you..."OH, dats the way it came out!" > > > > When I first saw the photograph..i need to sharpen it! It's BLURRY! > > > > Since I'm an expert in sharpening photos, I can now see what it REALLY looks like. > > > > > > > > > > > > https://x.com/Starmaker111/status/1120048519715229696 > > > > https://x.com/Starmaker111/status/1120048519715229696/photo/1 > > > > https://x.com/Starmaker111/status/1120048519715229696/photo/2 > > > > If you show this photo to Ai, (don't metioned it's suppose to be a black hole) > > > > and ask "In what direction are the gravitional waves moving, inward or outward?" > > > > Ai will say, "Outward!" > > > > That means everything is escaping a black hole. > > > > > > furthermore, if you download it and look at it in Photoshop, and enlarge > it more... > you see there is no black hole...but a lot of activity all the way down. > https://x.com/Starmaker111/status/1120048519715229696/photo/1 > > In order to make it a Black Hole, just do a Gaussian Blur: Radius around > 29.1 and it is exactly > how NASA present it to you... > > but there is no black hole, just less light...swirling waves...all the > way. Okay, you have seen the top view of a black hole... Here is a sideview of a Black hole... https://x.com/Starmaker111/status/2035119648690356476/photo/1 -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
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> - 2026-03-13 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