Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #475042 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-10-16 20:12 +0100 |
| Last post | 2018-10-29 17:26 +0100 |
| Articles | 10 on this page of 150 — 13 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 20:12 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-17 08:56 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 13:34 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-17 16:45 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-17 18:58 -0500
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-18 10:09 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-18 22:34 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-18 15:54 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 00:37 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-18 20:05 -0400
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-18 18:25 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-18 19:07 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 07:53 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-19 19:29 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 22:19 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-20 02:32 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 23:04 -0400
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-20 12:11 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-20 13:25 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-19 08:25 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-22 08:14 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2018-10-19 11:17 +1100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 09:50 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-19 07:53 -0500
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 14:16 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2018-10-20 15:10 +1100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 08:37 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-20 07:27 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 17:31 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-20 18:40 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 21:56 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-20 22:04 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-21 00:05 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-21 06:52 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-21 13:06 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-21 01:55 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-20 16:03 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-21 02:17 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-21 02:21 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-21 10:09 -0500
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-21 17:32 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-21 09:15 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-22 20:38 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-23 08:09 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-23 15:34 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-23 23:46 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-23 18:21 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-24 09:16 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-21 19:34 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-21 19:55 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-22 20:43 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-21 08:30 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-20 10:18 -0500
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-21 09:09 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-21 10:17 -0500
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-21 18:34 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-22 12:18 -0500
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-22 20:09 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-23 01:38 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-21 08:25 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-22 12:23 -0500
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-23 07:31 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-23 15:07 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-23 09:13 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-23 18:47 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Gil Callow <snam@nawem.co> - 2018-10-23 23:01 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-24 06:15 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-24 11:33 -0500
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-24 13:36 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Gil Callow <snam@nawem.co> - 2018-10-24 20:41 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-10-22 09:04 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-22 12:32 -0500
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-22 10:34 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-10-23 13:08 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-10-23 13:15 +0200
Yet Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-22 14:34 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 13:45 -0400
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-20 19:18 -0500
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 23:18 -0400
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-22 12:40 -0500
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-10-25 20:39 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 20:07 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 20:07 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-21 01:56 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 01:08 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 06:40 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 16:42 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 19:34 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-19 19:35 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 21:08 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-19 22:45 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 22:46 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-20 02:37 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 23:08 -0400
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-20 10:20 -0500
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-20 09:31 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 06:52 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-20 12:31 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-20 02:42 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-20 12:15 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-20 04:42 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-20 02:40 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-19 22:00 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-20 02:38 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 20:37 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 22:53 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 22:45 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 22:53 -0400
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 11:01 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-20 12:48 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-20 08:13 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 13:39 -0400
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-20 20:15 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 22:35 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-21 00:09 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 23:12 -0400
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-21 09:16 -0500
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 22:26 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-20 22:11 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 23:10 -0400
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-21 09:38 -0500
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-21 16:51 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2018-10-22 19:09 +1100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-22 10:12 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-22 15:46 -0400
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-22 15:41 -0400
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-22 23:42 -0500
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-21 08:46 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-21 17:25 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-21 11:03 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-20 02:36 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-19 07:59 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-18 19:43 -0400
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 01:08 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-22 15:11 -0500
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-10-26 18:47 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-26 19:34 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-26 16:55 -0400
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-27 18:42 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-26 22:45 +0000
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-26 15:56 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-27 09:14 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-27 08:31 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-10-27 16:45 +0200
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-27 08:11 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-10-28 16:08 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-28 16:48 +0100
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-28 11:55 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-28 11:53 -0700
Re: Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-10-29 17:26 +0100
Page 8 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-26 15:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7885203a-c490-4bec-91a9-a62589bdb036@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #475678 |
On Saturday, 27 October 2018 00:45:43 UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: > What governs physical behaviors are not “causes” but laws of physics. Laws > of physics are regularities observed or inferred from nature. Even your fellow idiot Tom R could explain you you're wrong. Well, he did it many times. But you're so dumb…
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-27 09:14 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <Z7VAD.101207$Do.20732@fx31.am4> |
| In reply to | #475678 |
On 26/10/2018 23:45, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
>> Am 22.10.2018 um 22:11 schrieb Tom Roberts:
>>> Today physicists often apply the term "wave" to a quantity that
>>> satisfies a wave equation (i.e. a partial differential equation that is
>>> second order in both time and spatial coordinates).
For example a "sound wave", traveling down a pipe, satisfies the equation:
d2 P / d t^2 = c^2 * d2 P / d x^2
where d should be a 'partial d' which i can't type
P is the pressure at x at time t.
c is the velocity of the wave.
Note that 'P' is essentially a MACROSCOPIC measurement.
At the ATOMIC LEVEL, there is no way to measure the pressure
at some point x at some time t. There exists only probabilities
of collisions, at the ATOMIC/molecular LEVEL.
Note that the sound wave itself disappears at the atomic level.
There is no physical thing which shoots down the pipe at a
velocity 'c' at the atomic level. All that is traveling down
the pipe at the atomic/molecular level is a 'STATISTIC' eh!
>> A wave is not a quantity, but a physical phenomenon in nature.
>>
>> The debate was about the cause and nature of this phenomenon, not
>> whether or not it fulfills a second order differential equation.
>>
>> I also wonder what you want to plug into an equation, if you do not
>> understand, how the thing you try to model works.
>>
>>>> IF there is no medium you CANNOT call it waves.
>>>
>>> Not true. See above.
>>>
>>> For example, in many physical situations the probability of detecting a
>>> photon behaves in a wavelike manner, and satisfies a wave equation. We
>>> call this light waves, even though there is no medium involved
>>> (probabilities inherently require no medium). Similarly for phonons.
>>
>> probabilities are most likely not a physical entity neither.
>>
>> Both (quantities and probabilities) belong to mathematics.
>>
>> But math is not a science, since it is not about phenomena in nature.
>>
>> If you want to apply a mathematical construct to a model in physics, it
>> deserves a reason and an explanation, which is both hard to find, if the
>> phenomenon to model is not understood.
>>
>> TH
>>
>>
>
> There’s more to it than that. Math is not primary in physics, but it’s not
> an afterthought either. It’s quite a bit more integrated than what you
> suggest.
>
> What governs physical behaviors are not “causes” but laws of physics. Laws
> of physics are regularities observed or inferred from nature. Like
> conservation of momentum — this is an inferred regularity, and there is no
> “causal agent” behind momentum conservation. These laws are almost always
> expressive in mathematical form, in the sense of equations that can be
> solved. The way physics relies on math is that the solutions to the
> mathematical equations are magically the observed behaviors of the physical
> systems. That is how math brings its power into physics: providing the path
> from constraining laws to possible behaviors of the system. That path is
> virtually intractable to draw out with mathematics.
>
The wave nature of light is only 'visible' at the MACROSCOPIC scale,
a bit like sound eh!
keith stein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-27 08:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <01f9a4c8-1561-4fcd-90fb-1903200c55c2@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #475689 |
On Saturday, October 27, 2018 at 3:14:52 AM UTC-5, Keith Stein wrote: > On 26/10/2018 23:45, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote: > >> Am 22.10.2018 um 22:11 schrieb Tom Roberts: > > >>> Today physicists often apply the term "wave" to a quantity that > >>> satisfies a wave equation (i.e. a partial differential equation that is > >>> second order in both time and spatial coordinates). > > For example a "sound wave", traveling down a pipe, satisfies the equation: > > d2 P / d t^2 = c^2 * d2 P / d x^2 > > where d should be a 'partial d' which i can't type > P is the pressure at x at time t. > c is the velocity of the wave. > > Note that 'P' is essentially a MACROSCOPIC measurement. > > At the ATOMIC LEVEL, there is no way to measure the pressure > at some point x at some time t. There exists only probabilities > of collisions, at the ATOMIC/molecular LEVEL. Total System Pressure https://docs.google.com/document/d/17W_L19_YvxkKXv1vNya0YekR0vb8K31XTq4_4-CssSM https://docs.google.com/document/d/14dGOjOuRXXIBSg-0N-vBovhwDCnrMbBioONasYH9FG0 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PblbQbB2optGDOWxGdI_yudDy-7M_yWaARB7X2UZ1cA > > Note that the sound wave itself disappears at the atomic level. > There is no physical thing which shoots down the pipe at a > velocity 'c' at the atomic level. All that is traveling down > the pipe at the atomic/molecular level is a 'STATISTIC' eh! > > > >> A wave is not a quantity, but a physical phenomenon in nature. > >> > >> The debate was about the cause and nature of this phenomenon, not > >> whether or not it fulfills a second order differential equation. > >> > >> I also wonder what you want to plug into an equation, if you do not > >> understand, how the thing you try to model works. > >> > >>>> IF there is no medium you CANNOT call it waves. > >>> > >>> Not true. See above. > >>> > >>> For example, in many physical situations the probability of detecting a > >>> photon behaves in a wavelike manner, and satisfies a wave equation. We > >>> call this light waves, even though there is no medium involved > >>> (probabilities inherently require no medium). Similarly for phonons. > >> > >> probabilities are most likely not a physical entity neither. > >> > >> Both (quantities and probabilities) belong to mathematics. > >> > >> But math is not a science, since it is not about phenomena in nature. > >> > >> If you want to apply a mathematical construct to a model in physics, it > >> deserves a reason and an explanation, which is both hard to find, if the > >> phenomenon to model is not understood. > >> > >> TH > >> > >> > > > > There’s more to it than that. Math is not primary in physics, but it’s not > > an afterthought either. It’s quite a bit more integrated than what you > > suggest. > > > > What governs physical behaviors are not “causes” but laws of physics. Laws > > of physics are regularities observed or inferred from nature. Like > > conservation of momentum — this is an inferred regularity, and there is no > > “causal agent” behind momentum conservation. These laws are almost always > > expressive in mathematical form, in the sense of equations that can be > > solved. The way physics relies on math is that the solutions to the > > mathematical equations are magically the observed behaviors of the physical > > systems. That is how math brings its power into physics: providing the path > > from constraining laws to possible behaviors of the system. That path is > > virtually intractable to draw out with mathematics. > > > > The wave nature of light is only 'visible' at the MACROSCOPIC scale, > a bit like sound eh! > > keith stein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-27 16:45 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <g3jc09FmofvU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #475678 |
Am 27.10.2018 um 00:45 schrieb Odd Bodkin: > Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote: >> Am 22.10.2018 um 22:11 schrieb Tom Roberts: >>> On 10/18/18 6:43 PM, benj wrote: >>>> Waves are DEFINED as disturbances in a medium. >>> >>> Not really, at least not anymore, in physics. >>> >>> Today physicists often apply the term "wave" to a quantity that >>> satisfies a wave equation (i.e. a partial differential equation that is >>> second order in both time and spatial coordinates). >> >> >> A wave is not a quantity, but a physical phenomenon in nature. >> >> The debate was about the cause and nature of this phenomenon, not >> whether or not it fulfills a second order differential equation. >> >> I also wonder what you want to plug into an equation, if you do not >> understand, how the thing you try to model works. >> >>>> IF there is no medium you CANNOT call it waves. >>> >>> Not true. See above. >>> >>> For example, in many physical situations the probability of detecting a >>> photon behaves in a wavelike manner, and satisfies a wave equation. We >>> call this light waves, even though there is no medium involved >>> (probabilities inherently require no medium). Similarly for phonons. >> >> probabilities are most likely not a physical entity neither. >> >> Both (quantities and probabilities) belong to mathematics. >> >> But math is not a science, since it is not about phenomena in nature. >> >> If you want to apply a mathematical construct to a model in physics, it >> deserves a reason and an explanation, which is both hard to find, if the >> phenomenon to model is not understood. >> >> TH >> >> > > There’s more to it than that. Math is not primary in physics, but it’s not > an afterthought either. It’s quite a bit more integrated than what you > suggest. > > What governs physical behaviors are not “causes” but laws of physics. Laws > of physics are regularities observed or inferred from nature. Like > conservation of momentum — this is an inferred regularity, and there is no > “causal agent” behind momentum conservation. These laws are almost always > expressive in mathematical form, in the sense of equations that can be > solved. The way physics relies on math is that the solutions to the > mathematical equations are magically the observed behaviors of the physical > systems. That is how math brings its power into physics: providing the path > from constraining laws to possible behaviors of the system. That path is > virtually intractable to draw out with mathematics. > Why nature behaves very mathematical, that is actually a good question. If - for instance - the entire universe is just a large simulation, running somewhere in a HUGE computer, then everything would follow the rules of some sort of computer logic. If - as another possibility - nature uses at a very fundamental level principles, which are also principles in some kind of algebra or similar, then everything in nature would behave mathematically. If that would be the case, we only need to identify the fitting mathematical construct and could then, in principle, understand all kinds of phenomena as expressions of this fundamental connection between math and nature. I personally think, this is in fact true, mainly because I have tried such an approach and assumed, that certain mathematical objects called 'bi-quaternions' and an algebra called 'Pauli algebra' would fit to the description. See here: https://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dd8jz2tx_3gfzvqgd6 TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-27 08:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20ca4073-9c40-4087-bd4e-0b0c7c7c3bde@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #475693 |
On Saturday, 27 October 2018 16:45:32 UTC+2, Thomas Heger wrote: > Why nature behaves very mathematical, that is actually a good question. But it doesn't. You're just trained to spot it this way.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-28 16:08 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <g3m1miF902aU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #475695 |
Am 27.10.2018 um 17:11 schrieb mlwozniak@wp.pl: > On Saturday, 27 October 2018 16:45:32 UTC+2, Thomas Heger wrote: > >> Why nature behaves very mathematical, that is actually a good question. > > > But it doesn't. You're just trained to spot it > this way. > There are a lot of different methods and constructs in mathematics and most certainly nature uses methods, that are not used quite often. (Otherwise those methods are obvious and everybody would know them) So you may think, that nature does not behave very mathematically, since you cannot see the patterns or identify the methods. But that would not rule out the possibility, that nature uses at a fundamental level methods, which are similar to mathematical methods. I wanted to use quaternions and a certain formula for quaternions, which describe rotations in 3d space. ( v'= p* v* p^-1) This could be understood as if the points of space would behave like quaternions, which have a connection to the neighbors in a way similar to how quaternions are multiplied. (Now I prefer a slightly different construct called 'bi-quaternions', aka 'complex four vectors'. It is very similar to how engineers use complex numbers in electric circuits, but not 'flat' (2d). Instead we need something similar, but with volume. And these complex four vectors would fit. ) So lets assume a point in space would be a 'thing', has features and would be connected to the neighbors as if the points would twist each other. This would generate certain patterns and those are, what we call 'matter'. This is a mathematical concept, which could be related to fundamental behavior of nature. This sounds a little odd, since it would allow to create matter from nothing (or make matter disappear without a trace). But there in fact a few hints, this is in fact possible. One thing, which is highly compatible with my idea is the so called 'Growing Earth' hypothesis. Another is called 'magic dust', which means: dust at impossible locations. (I assume you could create dust inside sealed containers by applying pulse microwaves). TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-28 16:48 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <445997b5-8f6f-72f8-ba30-7d047c1eaab4@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #475755 |
Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 27.10.2018 um 17:11 schrieb mlwozniak@wp.pl: >> On Saturday, 27 October 2018 16:45:32 UTC+2, Thomas Heger wrote: >>> Why nature behaves very mathematical, that is actually a good question. >> >> But it doesn't. You're just trained to spot it >> this way. > > There are a lot of different methods and constructs in mathematics and > most certainly nature uses methods, that are not used quite often. > (Otherwise those methods are obvious and everybody would know them) > [more crackpot nonsense] Unfortunately, because of you inability to grasp basic concepts of science, you are very confused. The only thing in your rambling that remotely makes any sense is that Nature is mathematical. But that is NOT so in the sense that Nature "uses" mathematical methods as if she is calculating anything to work, but that she can be *described* using mathematics, an invention by humans. It is because of this that physics uses mathematics to describe and predict Nature (as) exactly (as possible). -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-28 11:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1aa424ea-1c55-46b9-a598-ac1dbb51833d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #475757 |
On Sunday, 28 October 2018 16:49:02 UTC+1, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > It is because of this that physics uses mathematics to describe and predict > Nature (as) exactly (as possible). Or, at least, it did before your idiot guru started this moronic quest against common sense.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-28 11:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <464807ce-28c5-49ef-9044-3c9bd4cb595f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #475755 |
On Sunday, 28 October 2018 16:08:04 UTC+1, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 27.10.2018 um 17:11 schrieb mlwozniak@wp.pl: > > On Saturday, 27 October 2018 16:45:32 UTC+2, Thomas Heger wrote: > > > >> Why nature behaves very mathematical, that is actually a good question. > > > > > > But it doesn't. You're just trained to spot it > > this way. > > > > > There are a lot of different methods and constructs in mathematics and > most certainly nature uses methods, that are not used quite often. No. Nature doesn't use any "methods". They are human invention.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-29 17:26 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <g3oqm9Fqr3hU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #475763 |
Am 28.10.2018 um 19:53 schrieb mlwozniak@wp.pl: >>>> Why nature behaves very mathematical, that is actually a good question. >>> >>> >>> But it doesn't. You're just trained to spot it >>> this way. >>> >> >> >> There are a lot of different methods and constructs in mathematics and >> most certainly nature uses methods, that are not used quite often. > > > No. Nature doesn't use any "methods". > They are human invention. > Maybe the word 'method' wasn't a good choice... But somehow nature functions and we as humans want to understand, how that happens. To do this, we could try a simulation. This simulation would use methods and their aim is to mimic natural behavior. Nature is not supposed to aim anything. Things in nature are as they are. (But actually we don't know, whether or not there is an intention.) So back to the simulation... This should function like we think, that nature would function on a very fundamental level. We cannot mimic natural behavior, since we do not have infinite amounts of time, information and computation power. But we could test certain possibilities and look, if they would allow to generate structure, that we observe in the real world (from particles, fields, cells, sun beams, planets, up to black holes). We have restrictions, nevertheless, since nature is most likely not using too many different systems. Since we find many fractals in nature, a solution with objects somehow similar to complex numbers would be necessary (with at least three dimensions), since those generate fractals. Then we could think about a field of these (mathematical) objects, which are not material. These objects then interact in certain ways and the emerging patterns should be possible to relate to phenomena in nature. The concept is a little similar to string theory - but without strings. My idea about this is called 'structured spacetime': ( https://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dd8jz2tx_3gfzvqgd6 ) The reason is, that I have tried to connect GR to QM. So I take the spacetime of GR (as field of events) and 'generate' the entities of QM as internal structure of spacetime. (And this does in fact work, in my opinion, even if nobody took any attention of my 'book' for the last ten years...) TH
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web