Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #415648 > unrolled thread

Science School

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  Science School The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-09 13:03 -0700
    Re: Science School The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-04-09 13:33 -0700
    Re: Science School Robert Bannister <robban@clubtelco.com> - 2017-04-11 10:10 +0800
      Re: Science School Paul Colquhoun <newsposter@andor.dropbear.id.au> - 2017-04-11 17:39 +1000
      Re: Science School Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-11 15:06 +0200
        Re: Science School Jolie Osokuro <uuol@oowo.ou> - 2017-04-11 13:32 +0000
          Re: Science School Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 15:48 +0200
        Re: Science School kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-11 08:25 -0700
          Re: Science School Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-04-11 18:16 +0200
            Re: Science School Wendi Maddox <ox@awdodww.oe> - 2017-04-14 14:40 +0000
          Speed of light (was: Science School) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-11 18:21 +0200
            Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-11 11:25 -0700
              Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-11 20:49 +0200
                Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-11 12:17 -0700
                  Re: Speed of light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-11 22:00 +0200
                Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-12 06:34 -0700
                  Re: Speed of light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-13 00:36 +0200
                    Re: Speed of light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-13 05:29 -0700
                      Re: Speed of light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-13 14:41 +0200
                        Re: Speed of light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-13 06:07 -0700
                          Re: Speed of light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-13 15:20 +0200
                            Re: Speed of light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-13 06:25 -0700
                              Re: Speed of light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-13 15:43 +0200
                                Re: Speed of light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-13 06:53 -0700
                    Re: Speed of light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-13 05:47 -0700
                      Re: Speed of light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-13 15:15 +0200
                      Re: Speed of light moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-13 16:54 +0000
                        Re: Speed of light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-13 10:44 -0700
                          Re: Speed of light moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-13 21:33 +0000
              Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-11 20:22 +0000
                Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-12 07:16 -0700
                  Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-12 15:49 +0000
                    Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-12 10:04 -0700
                    Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-13 05:22 -0700
                      Re: Speed of light (was: Science School) moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-13 16:33 +0000
    Re: Science School Nobody <nobody@nowhere.nohow> - 2017-04-11 00:41 -0400

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#415648 — Science School

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_GERMANY_JEWISH_CAMPUS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-04-09-05-11-10


If you disagree with the science professor, ...you're anti-semitic. It's Jewish Science!


For example: 'Nothing travels faster than the speed of light' is jewish science. Not even a 'thought experiment' are 
allowed to think in terms of anything traveling faster than the speed of light.

If you think past 99.99999 percent of light speed, it's "Anti-Semitism,", am I correct?

At least Albert Einstein would say "that is Correcto" How do you say "corrector" in a jewish campus?? my german is not too guten...


(i learned german from reading comic books) Acktoon, acktoon...mac schnell. you kaput. dumkoff. 






Associated Press
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_GERMANY_JEWISH_CAMPUS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-04-09-05-11-10

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#415650

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_GERMANY_JEWISH_CAMPUS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-04-09-05-11-10
> 
> If you disagree with the science professor, ...you're anti-semitic. It's Jewish Science!
> 
> For example: 'Nothing travels faster than the speed of light' is jewish science. Not even a 'thought experiment' are
> allowed to think in terms of anything traveling faster than the speed of light.
> 
> If you think past 99.99999 percent of light speed, it's "Anti-Semitism,", am I correct?
> 
> At least Albert Einstein would say "that is Correcto" How do you say "corrector" in a jewish campus?? my german is not too guten...
> 
> (i learned german from reading comic books) Acktoon, acktoon...mac schnell. you kaput. dumkoff.
> 
> Associated Press
> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_GERMANY_JEWISH_CAMPUS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-04-09-05-11-10

""'Teichtal says he wants the Jewish campus to be open to everyone.

"It should become a place where Jews and non-Jews can come together and meet," he said.'""



 quote from Mein Kampf:


 "That gentleman [the rector] assured me that the drawings I had submitted incontrovertibly showed my unfitness for painting."

[the rector] 
person in charge of a campus.





""Everyone in Europe talks about fears and uncertainties, we're talking about going forward," said the 44-year-old orthodox rabbi, 
looking across the large empty plot where a few containers have been set up as a temporary extension of Chabad's kindergarten."


http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_GERMANY_JEWISH_CAMPUS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-04-09-05-11-10


Those "few containers" are ...an act of WAR. The kindergarten shouldn't even be there....


I guess they are...asking for it, ...again.


They say "Never Again", I say...never again.


The Starmaker

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415824

On 10/4/17 4:03 am, The Starmaker wrote:
> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_GERMANY_JEWISH_CAMPUS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-04-09-05-11-10
> 
> 
> If you disagree with the science professor, ...you're anti-semitic. It's Jewish Science!
> 
> 
> For example: 'Nothing travels faster than the speed of light' is jewish science. Not even a 'thought experiment' are
> allowed to think in terms of anything traveling faster than the speed of light.

"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts"
Albert Einstein

> 
> If you think past 99.99999 percent of light speed, it's "Anti-Semitism,", am I correct?
> 
> At least Albert Einstein would say "that is Correcto" How do you say "corrector" in a jewish campus?? my german is not too guten...
> 
> 
> (i learned german from reading comic books) Acktoon, acktoon...mac schnell. you kaput. dumkoff.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Associated Press
> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_GERMANY_JEWISH_CAMPUS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-04-09-05-11-10
> 


-- 
Robert B. born England a long time ago;
Western Australia since 1972

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415848

On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 10:10:02 +0800, Robert Bannister <robban@clubtelco.com> wrote:
| On 10/4/17 4:03 am, The Starmaker wrote:
|> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_GERMANY_JEWISH_CAMPUS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-04-09-05-11-10
|> 
|> 
|> If you disagree with the science professor, ...you're anti-semitic. It's Jewish Science!
|> 
|> 
|> For example: 'Nothing travels faster than the speed of light' is jewish science. Not even a 'thought experiment' are
|> allowed to think in terms of anything traveling faster than the speed of light.
|
| "If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts"
| Albert Einstein

 
All that speculation about tachyons must never have happened...


|> If you think past 99.99999 percent of light speed, it's "Anti-Semitism,", am I correct?


As usual, the answer is "No".


-- 
Reverend Paul Colquhoun, ULC.     http://andor.dropbear.id.au/
  Asking for technical help in newsgroups?  Read this first:
     http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#intro

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415860

Robert Bannister wrote:

> On 10/4/17 4:03 am, The Starmaker wrote:
>> If you disagree with the science professor, ...you're anti-semitic. It's
>> Jewish Science!

“Jewish science” is a term that the Nazis used to discredit Jewish 
scientists just because they were Jews.

>> For example: 'Nothing travels faster than the speed of light' is jewish
>> science. Not even a 'thought experiment' are allowed to think in terms of
>> anything traveling faster than the speed of light.

Delusional, anti-semitic nonsense.

Delusional, because the “Starmaker” troll actually thinks he knows science 
when he has not the shadow of a trace of a clue about it.

Anti-semitic, because he thinks his utter lack of understanding of science 
has anything to do with the fact that it was someone from a Jewish family 
(*non-religious* Ashkenazi, BTW) who first proposed the concepts that he is 
unable or unwilling to understand.

Nonsense, because he is completely missing the point, which is:

Einstein did his all thought experiments *based on prior experimental 
evidence*.

Regarding light, it is really very simple:

How can and how do we get information about events in the first place?  
Primarily by light; in general, electromagnetic radiation.  Either emitted 
originally from there (e.g., stars) or reflected back from there (e.g., 
planets and moons).  So the speed of light and the *experimental fact* that 
it is limited and the same for all inertial observers, do matter.  For 
example, you will not realize that the Sun does not longer exist before 
about 8 minutes later than it ceased to exist there, because it takes that 
time for the information of that event to travel to you.  IOW, your Now 
*here* is different from the Now *closer to the Sun*; doubly so if the Sun 
were considerably moving away from you or towards you.

> "If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts"
> Albert Einstein

He never said that.

<https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein#Misattributed>

>> If you think past 99.99999 percent of light speed, it's "Anti-Semitism,",
>> am I correct?
>> 
>> At least Albert Einstein would say "that is Correcto"

He would not.  For two reasons:  One, the word „Correcto“ does not exist in 
German.  Two, contrary to hateful people like you, Einstein has never 
confused his zionism with his work in physics.  He was smarter than that, a 
lot smarter than you are able to give him credit for, projecting your own 
inability and insecurity.

>> How do you say "corrector" in a jewish campus??

What does that even mean?  Were you thinking of English “co-rector”?
Then it is „Korektor“ or „Co-Rektor“ (“assistant director” 
„stellvertretender Rektor“) in German.

“corrector” (one who makes corrections) would be „Korrektor“ (in general) or 
(in the case of a work of literature) „Lektor“ instead.

>> my german is not too guten...
>> 
>> 
>> (i learned german from reading comic books)

One would never have thought…

>> Acktoon, acktoon...mac schnell. you kaput. dumkoff.

I am German.  This gerberish™ certainly is not.
 
-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415867

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

>>> Acktoon, acktoon...mac schnell. you kaput. dumkoff.
> 
> I am German.  This gerberish™ certainly is not.

Incorrect. Think again, empirically you must be half Russian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415871

On 04/11/2017 03:32 PM, Jolie Osokuro wrote:
> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>
>>>> Acktoon, acktoon...mac schnell. you kaput. dumkoff.
>>
>> I am German.  This gerberish™ certainly is not.
>
> Incorrect. Think again, empirically you must be half Russian.

The above is a very poor attempt to look as German.

-- 
Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415894

On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 9:06:04 AM UTC-4, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> Robert Bannister wrote:
> 
> > On 10/4/17 4:03 am, The Starmaker wrote:
> >> If you disagree with the science professor, ...you're anti-semitic. It's
> >> Jewish Science!
> 
> “Jewish science” is a term that the Nazis used to discredit Jewish 
> scientists just because they were Jews.
> 
> >> For example: 'Nothing travels faster than the speed of light' is jewish
> >> science. Not even a 'thought experiment' are allowed to think in terms of
> >> anything traveling faster than the speed of light.
> 
> Delusional, anti-semitic nonsense.
> 
> Delusional, because the “Starmaker” troll actually thinks he knows science 
> when he has not the shadow of a trace of a clue about it.
> 
> Anti-semitic, because he thinks his utter lack of understanding of science 
> has anything to do with the fact that it was someone from a Jewish family 
> (*non-religious* Ashkenazi, BTW) who first proposed the concepts that he is 
> unable or unwilling to understand.
> 
> Nonsense, because he is completely missing the point, which is:
> 
> Einstein did his all thought experiments *based on prior experimental 
> evidence*.
> 
> Regarding light, it is really very simple:
> 
> How can and how do we get information about events in the first place?  
> Primarily by light; in general, electromagnetic radiation.  Either emitted 
> originally from there (e.g., stars) or reflected back from there (e.g., 
> planets and moons).  So the speed of light and the *experimental fact* that 
> it is limited and the same for all inertial observers, do matter.  For 
> example, you will not realize that the Sun does not longer exist before 
> about 8 minutes later than it ceased to exist there, because it takes that 
> time for the information of that event to travel to you.  IOW, your Now 
> *here* is different from the Now *closer to the Sun*; doubly so if the Sun 
> were considerably moving away from you or towards you.

Your argument supports the concept that light is being transmitted by a medium occupying space.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415904

Op 11-apr-2017 om 17:25 schreef kenseto:
> On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 9:06:04 AM UTC-4, Thomas 'PointedEars'
> Lahn wrote:

>
> Your argument supports the concept that light is being transmitted by
> a medium occupying space.

Your space occupies the argument that light is being supported by
a concept transmitting a medium.

Dirk Vdm

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#416297

Dirk Van de moortel wrote:

> Op 11-apr-2017 om 17:25 schreef kenseto:
>> On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 9:06:04 AM UTC-4, Thomas 'PointedEars'
>> Lahn wrote: 
>> Your argument supports the concept that light is being transmitted by a
>> medium occupying space.
> 
> Your space occupies the argument that light is being supported by a
> concept transmitting a medium. Dirk Vdm

Ohh, now thanks. This makes pretty much sense.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415909 — Speed of light (was: Science School)

kenseto wrote:

> [Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:]
>> Einstein did his all thought experiments *based on prior experimental
>> evidence*.
>> 
>> Regarding light, it is really very simple:
>> 
>> How can and how do we get information about events in the first place?
>> Primarily by light; in general, electromagnetic radiation.  Either
>> emitted originally from there (e.g., stars) or reflected back from there
>> (e.g., planets and moons).  So the speed of light and the *experimental
>> fact* that it is limited and the same for all inertial observers, do
>> matter.  For example, you will not realize that the Sun does not longer
>> exist before about 8 minutes later than it ceased to exist there, because
>> it takes that time for the information of that event to travel to you. 
>> IOW, your Now *here* is different from the Now *closer to the Sun*;
>> doubly so if the Sun were considerably moving away from you or towards
>> you.
> 
> Your argument supports the concept that light is being transmitted by a
> medium occupying space.

No, it does not.  How did you get that idea?

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415931 — Re: Speed of light (was: Science School)

On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 12:21:20 PM UTC-4, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> kenseto wrote:
> 
> > [Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:]
> >> Einstein did his all thought experiments *based on prior experimental
> >> evidence*.
> >> 
> >> Regarding light, it is really very simple:
> >> 
> >> How can and how do we get information about events in the first place?
> >> Primarily by light; in general, electromagnetic radiation.  Either
> >> emitted originally from there (e.g., stars) or reflected back from there
> >> (e.g., planets and moons).  So the speed of light and the *experimental
> >> fact* that it is limited and the same for all inertial observers, do
> >> matter.  For example, you will not realize that the Sun does not longer
> >> exist before about 8 minutes later than it ceased to exist there, because
> >> it takes that time for the information of that event to travel to you. 
> >> IOW, your Now *here* is different from the Now *closer to the Sun*;
> >> doubly so if the Sun were considerably moving away from you or towards
> >> you.
> > 
> > Your argument supports the concept that light is being transmitted by a
> > medium occupying space.
> 
> No, it does not.  How did you get that idea?

You said that light takes 8 minute from the sun to arrive at the earth.....that means that light is being transmitted by a medium and the speed of light in that medium is 300,000 km/sec. With that speed it takes 8 minute for light from the sun to arrive at the earth.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415937 — Re: Speed of light (was: Science School)

kenseto wrote:

> On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 12:21:20 PM UTC-4, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
> wrote:
>> kenseto wrote:
>> > Your argument supports the concept that light is being transmitted by a
>> > medium occupying space.
>> No, it does not.  How did you get that idea?
> 
> You said that light takes 8 minute from the sun to arrive at the
> earth.....

About 8 minutes [∆t = (1 AU)∕c₀], yes.

> that means that light is being transmitted by a medium

No.  See also <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light> (*all* of it).

> and the speed of light in that medium is 300,000 km/sec.

The speed of light in vacuum is c₀ = 299'792'458 m∕s.  You can either say 
that the vacuum is the medium through which (_not_: by which) light is 
transmitted, or as vacuum is defined as “space void of matter” (QFTs 
notwithstanding), that there is no medium.  It is usually generally stated 
that the transmission of light, and electromagnetic radiation in general, 
does not require a medium.

In the case of the Sun it makes sense to consider the interplanetary medium, 
because that is not a perfect vacuum, and so the speed of light in that 
medium is less than c₀.  But that is not a medium that allows, but one that 
*hinders* (slightly, given the miniscule number of particles and their 
kinetic energies) the transmission of light.

> With that speed it takes 8 minute for light from the sun to arrive at the
> earth.

The travel time would be about the same in a perfect vacuum, i.e. with no 
other (real) particles in-between.

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415939 — Re: Speed of light (was: Science School)

W dniu wtorek, 11 kwietnia 2017 20:49:45 UTC+2 użytkownik Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn napisał:

> The speed of light in vacuum is c₀ = 299'792'458 m∕s. 

Even your idiot guru couldn't insist on this idiocy for
long and his GR shit rejected it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415949 — Re: Speed of light

mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote:

> W dniu wtorek, 11 kwietnia 2017 20:49:45 UTC+2 użytkownik Thomas
> 'PointedEars' Lahn napisał:

Attribution *line*, _not_ attribution novel.

>> The speed of light in vacuum is c₀ = 299'792'458 m∕s.
> 
> Even your idiot guru couldn't insist on this idiocy for
> long and his GR shit rejected it.

Whom are you talking about?

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#416016 — Re: Speed of light (was: Science School)

On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 2:49:45 PM UTC-4, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> kenseto wrote:
> 
> > On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 12:21:20 PM UTC-4, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
> > wrote:
> >> kenseto wrote:
> >> > Your argument supports the concept that light is being transmitted by a
> >> > medium occupying space.
> >> No, it does not.  How did you get that idea?
> > 
> > You said that light takes 8 minute from the sun to arrive at the
> > earth.....
> 
> About 8 minutes [∆t = (1 AU)∕c₀], yes.
> 
> > that means that light is being transmitted by a medium
> 
> No.  See also <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light> (*all* of it).
> 
> > and the speed of light in that medium is 300,000 km/sec.
> 
> The speed of light in vacuum is c₀ = 299'792'458 m∕s.  

This is an artificiallyThe fields of QFT  defined speed and it is based on the circular definition for the meter that a meter is 1/299,792,458 light-second.

>You can either say 
> that the vacuum is the medium through which (_not_: by which) light is 
> transmitted, or as vacuum is defined as “space void of matter” (QFTs 
> notwithstanding), that there is no medium.  It is usually generally stated 
> that the transmission of light, and electromagnetic radiation in general, 
> does not require a medium.

The fields QFT do not exist without a medium. Weinberg said that the fields in QFT are stress and stains in a medium.

> 
> In the case of the Sun it makes sense to consider the interplanetary medium, 
> because that is not a perfect vacuum, and so the speed of light in that 
> medium is less than c₀.  But that is not a medium that allows, but one that 
> *hinders* (slightly, given the miniscule number of particles and their 
> kinetic energies) the transmission of light.
 

> 
> > With that speed it takes 8 minute for light from the sun to arrive at the
> > earth.
> 
> The travel time would be about the same in a perfect vacuum, i.e. with no 
> other (real) particles in-between.
> 
> -- 
> PointedEars
> 
> Twitter: @PointedEars2
> Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#416068 — Re: Speed of light

kenseto wrote:

> On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 2:49:45 PM UTC-4, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
> wrote:

Attribution *line*, _not_ attribution novel.

>> The speed of light in vacuum is c₀ = 299'792'458 m∕s.
> 
> This is an artificially

This is gibberish.  But if you mean “this is artificially”, then no, it is 
not: It is the result of increasingly precise attempts at measurement.

> The fields of QFT  defined speed and it is based on the circular
> definition for the meter that a meter is 1/299,792,458 light-second.

Such a nonsense, it is not even wrong.

Instead:

By 1983, measurements of the speed of light in vacuum had become so precise 
that, whereas in the International System of Units (SI) previously the speed 
of light in vacuum had been based on the meter, with the meter defined based 
on the wavelength of a specific emission line, it is now the other way 
around: the meter is defined as 1∕299'792'458 of the distance that light 
travels in vacuum in 1 second.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metre#Wavelength_definition>
 
>> You can either say that the vacuum is the medium through which (_not_: by
>> which) light is transmitted, or as vacuum is defined as “space void of
>> matter” (QFTs notwithstanding), that there is no medium.  It is usually
>> generally stated that the transmission of light, and electromagnetic
>> radiation in general, does not require a medium.
> 
> The fields QFT do not exist without a medium.

Not even wrong.

> Weinberg said that the fields in QFT are stress and stains in a medium.

Most likely he did not.  But you may cite evidence.

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#416121 — Re: Speed of light

W dniu czwartek, 13 kwietnia 2017 00:36:29 UTC+2 użytkownik Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn napisał:

> By 1983, measurements of the speed of light in vacuum had become so precise 
> that, whereas in the International System of Units (SI) previously the speed 
> of light in vacuum had been based on the meter, with the meter defined based 
> on the wavelength of a specific emission line, it is now the other way 
> around: the meter is defined as 1∕299'792'458 of the distance that light 
> travels in vacuum in 1 second.

And pears are growing on a willow. The willow
is defined this way - I can write this definition
whenever you want, poor idiot.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#416125 — Re: Speed of light

mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote:

> 'PointedEars' Lahn napisał:
>> By 1983, measurements of the speed of light in vacuum had become so
>> precise that, whereas in the International System of Units (SI)
>> previously the speed of light in vacuum had been based on the meter, with
>> the meter defined based on the wavelength of a specific emission line, it
>> is now the other way around: the meter is defined as 1∕299'792'458 of the
>> distance that light travels in vacuum in 1 second.
> 
> And pears are growing on a willow. The willow
> is defined this way - I can write this definition
> whenever you want, [insult]

You can do that, but by contrast to the SI definition you will find very few 
people, if any, agreeing with that, because by contrast your definition has 
nothing to do with reality.

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#416129 — Re: Speed of light

W dniu czwartek, 13 kwietnia 2017 14:41:23 UTC+2 użytkownik Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn napisał:
> mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote:
> 
> > 'PointedEars' Lahn napisał:
> >> By 1983, measurements of the speed of light in vacuum had become so
> >> precise that, whereas in the International System of Units (SI)
> >> previously the speed of light in vacuum had been based on the meter, with
> >> the meter defined based on the wavelength of a specific emission line, it
> >> is now the other way around: the meter is defined as 1∕299'792'458 of the
> >> distance that light travels in vacuum in 1 second.
> > 
> > And pears are growing on a willow. The willow
> > is defined this way - I can write this definition
> > whenever you want, [insult]
> 
> You can do that, but by contrast to the SI definition you will find very few 
> people, if any, agreeing with that, because by contrast your definition has 
> nothing to do with reality.

Unfortunately, you only imagined this contrast:(
Your pathetic attempts of defining have the same 
disadvantage.
And my definition of willow will at least be
consistent. By contrast.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web