Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #364857 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-09-21 18:05 +0000 |
| Last post | 2015-10-24 00:03 +1100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 292 — 34 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-09-21 18:05 +0000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 19:00 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-09-22 03:04 +0000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2015-09-21 21:24 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-09-22 04:42 +0000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2015-09-21 21:48 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-09-22 09:03 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2015-09-22 07:11 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Helmut Wabnig <hwabnig@.- --- -.dotat> - 2015-09-22 19:08 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2015-09-21 21:53 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-09-22 05:02 +0000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2015-09-21 22:21 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-09-21 23:54 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-09-22 05:28 +0000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 17:37 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-09-28 12:24 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-09-29 07:47 +1000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-09-28 22:06 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-03 08:26 +1000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 17:47 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Henry Wilson <HW@.....> - 2015-10-05 04:47 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-04 18:00 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-05 09:46 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-05 11:48 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-05 20:19 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-05 13:28 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-05 21:16 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Henry Wilson <HW@.....> - 2015-10-05 20:01 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-05 11:52 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Henry Wilson <HW@.....> - 2015-10-06 04:55 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 07:59 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-10-06 20:55 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-07 07:50 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-10-07 11:15 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-06 14:52 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 19:15 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-09 07:36 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-05 07:39 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Henry Wilson <HW@.....> - 2015-10-06 05:03 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-05 14:20 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-06 15:02 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 07:48 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-10-06 06:05 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-07 07:40 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 17:59 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 19:17 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-09 07:34 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity underante <underante@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-08 14:56 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-09 11:32 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-10-06 01:44 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-10-08 10:42 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-09 08:14 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 14:28 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-09 11:35 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-10-08 17:36 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 22:24 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-09-29 11:00 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-28 16:29 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 14:29 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Katarina Bulakova <katabu@transmatric.org> - 2015-10-06 21:36 +0000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 14:55 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Katarina Bulakova <katabu@transmatric.org> - 2015-10-06 22:02 +0000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-10-06 23:20 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-07 13:45 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-07 22:50 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-10-08 10:26 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-08 18:38 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-10-08 12:59 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-08 22:43 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 14:26 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-08 23:55 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 15:15 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-10-08 23:29 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-10-09 10:09 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-09 17:33 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Natalina Nazvarova <natana42@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-09 16:10 +0000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-17 21:37 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-17 21:24 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Natalina Nazvarova <natana42@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-08 16:39 +0000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-09 07:50 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-10-08 20:48 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-09 14:19 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-10-09 00:10 -0400
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-08 21:11 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-10-09 00:18 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 22:59 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 07:54 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-10-09 10:13 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 09:06 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 12:55 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Henry Wilson <HW@.....> - 2015-10-09 19:52 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-10-09 03:37 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 07:51 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-10-09 10:17 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-09 17:22 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-10 08:21 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 17:07 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-09 15:22 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 15:41 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-11 08:15 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-10 14:50 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-12 07:37 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-10-11 19:27 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-12 07:36 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-11 16:25 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-10-12 12:23 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-10-12 00:09 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-11 16:20 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-12 10:05 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-11 20:28 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-11 16:21 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-10-12 00:17 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-12 10:08 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-11 20:29 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-12 20:13 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-12 10:38 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-10-12 13:25 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-13 07:53 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-12 15:00 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-10-13 06:24 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-13 07:44 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-10-13 11:20 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <HG@nowhere.com> - 2015-10-14 21:51 +0000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-15 10:05 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) - 2015-10-16 06:17 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-15 13:18 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-16 08:14 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-15 18:19 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-10-15 16:18 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-16 10:54 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-15 15:33 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-16 08:14 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-15 16:49 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-16 12:37 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-15 19:24 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-16 06:53 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-17 19:05 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-17 03:47 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-18 09:00 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-17 15:39 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-18 11:20 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-17 20:29 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-19 20:20 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-19 04:31 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-19 08:55 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-16 06:55 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-16 13:11 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-16 22:15 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-16 14:25 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-17 09:59 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-16 15:33 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-16 14:38 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-16 16:42 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-10-19 13:20 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-20 09:36 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-10-20 22:09 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-22 16:34 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-10-21 00:16 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-10-21 22:48 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-22 16:40 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-10-22 13:38 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) - 2015-10-23 03:01 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-22 09:29 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-10-24 11:48 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) - 2015-10-25 04:20 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-24 11:13 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-10-24 13:38 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-10-24 11:51 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) - 2015-10-25 06:00 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-24 12:31 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity James Sinclair Jr <jamis@portalbnova.org> - 2015-10-24 19:45 +0000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-24 14:10 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity James Sinclair Jr <jamis@portalbnova.org> - 2015-10-24 21:42 +0000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) - 2015-10-26 03:31 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-10-26 00:22 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-24 21:34 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-24 21:44 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2015-10-26 18:54 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-27 17:51 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 07:45 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-28 08:56 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 17:07 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 16:07 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-28 11:40 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-27 18:26 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-28 20:10 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-28 04:51 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) - 2015-10-29 04:28 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-28 10:42 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-29 09:08 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-28 18:26 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Jack Weidner <jackwd@webportal.au> - 2015-10-31 11:48 +0000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Jack Weidner <jackwd@webportal.au> - 2015-10-31 12:16 +0000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) - 2015-11-01 03:53 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Wayne Olmstead <wayols@eclipseevenet.org> - 2015-11-01 16:28 +0000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-10-25 09:54 +0100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) - 2015-10-26 03:30 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-10-26 09:58 +0100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-27 08:41 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-26 15:27 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-26 15:44 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-27 17:52 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-27 04:32 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-10-27 20:30 +0100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-28 09:02 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-10-28 09:23 +0100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-28 20:33 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-10-28 21:16 +0100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) - 2015-10-30 04:46 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-10-29 20:02 +0100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) - 2015-10-31 04:58 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-10-31 11:41 +0100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) - 2015-11-01 04:03 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-11-01 01:14 +0100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-11-01 21:11 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-10-22 11:29 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-22 18:46 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-10-22 12:50 -0400
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-22 19:05 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-22 10:14 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-10-22 10:18 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Scott Finnegan <scofi@NNTPSwitch.org> - 2015-10-22 17:26 +0000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-10-22 16:14 -0400
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Erebus Xanthopoulos <elefxa@spacepark.au> - 2015-10-23 11:28 +0000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) - 2015-10-23 05:03 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-22 12:04 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) - 2015-10-23 04:59 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-22 11:54 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-10-22 14:58 -0400
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-10-22 12:27 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-23 08:03 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-22 14:27 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-22 23:32 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-22 15:26 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-10-22 23:44 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) - 2015-10-23 20:40 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-23 05:03 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-10-23 05:15 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-23 06:05 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-10-23 06:27 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2015-10-23 07:46 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-23 16:59 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Erebus Xanthopoulos <elefxa@spacepark.au> - 2015-10-23 12:17 +0000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-26 09:47 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-27 08:42 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-10-26 15:18 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-26 17:39 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-27 17:53 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 07:45 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity underante <underante@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-22 16:03 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-26 09:16 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-10-21 23:58 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-10-22 00:41 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-10-22 13:21 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-26 09:23 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-10-26 09:42 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-26 12:17 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-10-26 13:41 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-26 17:36 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 09:13 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 12:18 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-10-27 12:23 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 22:28 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 11:44 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-28 10:35 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 23:06 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 11:47 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 22:32 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 03:48 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 10:53 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 16:52 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 22:59 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 10:01 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 09:48 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 12:21 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 21:48 -0800
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-29 10:51 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 11:27 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 21:52 -0800
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) - 2015-10-23 03:52 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-10-26 14:16 -0500
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Günther Huldiberaht <gunhu@allrportos.org> - 2015-10-26 19:48 +0000
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-10-08 23:55 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 10:58 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-09 22:59 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 14:16 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-10 09:57 +0200
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-11 23:29 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 22:27 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 11:01 -0700
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-10 08:15 +1100
Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-10-24 00:03 +1100
Page 2 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 15 Next page →
| From | Henry Wilson <HW@.....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 04:47 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <qro21bdh42m82fj245n89566883mhb0b9a@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #366058 |
On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 17:47:55 -0500, Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: >On 10/2/15 5:26 PM, HGW wrote: >> 'Wavelength' only exists in the frame of the wave itself. > > > Where did you come up this horseshit, Henry? Wormey, you should always have confidence that you are not too old to learn something new. Imagine you are out in the ocean somewhere and there is a big swell. How would you measure the (absolute) distance between wavecrests? Of course that length DOES exist in all frames and remains consant, which is why I used parentheis around the word wavelength.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-04 18:00 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <tM2dne5gXdkdMozLnZ2dnUU7-U-dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #366158 |
On 10/4/15 12:47 PM, Henry Wilson wrote: > > Wormey, you should always have confidence that you are not too old to learn > something new. Imagine you are out in the ocean somewhere and there is a big > swell. How would you measure the (absolute) distance between wavecrests? > > Of course that length DOES exist in all frames and remains consant, which is > why I used parentheis around the word wavelength. > Don't be silly Ralph--Distance measurement and time measurements for inertial observers is observer dependent based on their relative velocity to that being measured. Spacetime intervals are the same for all inertial observers, however. -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 09:46 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mut9st$fji$1@node1.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #366175 |
Użytkownik "Sam Wormley" napisał w wiadomości grup dyskusyjnych:tM2dne5gXdkdMozLnZ2dnUU7-U-dnZ2d@giganews.com... | Don't be silly Ralph--Distance measurement and time measurements | for inertial observers is observer dependent based on their relative | velocity to that being measured. You see, Sam, for a brainwashed fanatic moron like you, measurement are always supporting any shit he imagine. Even Earth poles accelerating in opposite directions. | Spacetime intervals are the same for all inertial observers, however. Too bad you're unable to measure them.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 11:48 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <j-OdnW52TKJ1NI_LnZ2dnUU7-LWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #366198 |
On 10/5/15 2:46 AM, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > You see, Sam, for a brainwashed fanatic moron like you, measurement > are always supporting any shit he imagine. Even Earth poles accelerating What force is "accelerating" the earth's poles? -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 20:19 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <muueve$nvb$1@node1.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #366222 |
Użytkownik "Sam Wormley" napisał w wiadomości grup dyskusyjnych:j-OdnW52TKJ1NI_LnZ2dnUU7-LWdnZ2d@giganews.com... On 10/5/15 2:46 AM, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > You see, Sam, for a brainwashed fanatic moron like you, measurement > are always supporting any shit he imagine. Even Earth poles accelerating | What force is "accelerating" the earth's poles? Ask Ken F., not me. Of course, his mumble is a bit non-standard (though in my opinion it's closer to Great Guru's mumble than your mumble is), still, he is a good example, what The Shit is doing to a brain of its pray.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 13:28 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <j-OdnWN2TKLNXI_LnZ2dnUU7-LWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #366234 |
On 10/5/15 1:19 PM, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > > > Użytkownik "Sam Wormley" napisał w wiadomości grup > dyskusyjnych:j-OdnW52TKJ1NI_LnZ2dnUU7-LWdnZ2d@giganews.com... > > On 10/5/15 2:46 AM, Maciej Woźniak wrote: >> You see, Sam, for a brainwashed fanatic moron like you, measurement >> are always supporting any shit he imagine. Even Earth poles accelerating > > | What force is "accelerating" the earth's poles? > > Ask Ken F., not me. > Of course, his mumble is a bit non-standard (though in > my opinion it's closer to Great Guru's mumble than > your mumble is), still, he is a good example, what The > Shit is doing to a brain of its pray. I'm asking you Maciej--What force is "accelerating" the earth's poles? -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 21:16 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <muuiac$hk8$1@node2.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #366236 |
Użytkownik "Sam Wormley" napisał w wiadomości grup dyskusyjnych:j-OdnWN2TKLNXI_LnZ2dnUU7-LWdnZ2d@giganews.com... On 10/5/15 1:19 PM, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > > > Użytkownik "Sam Wormley" napisał w wiadomości grup > dyskusyjnych:j-OdnW52TKJ1NI_LnZ2dnUU7-LWdnZ2d@giganews.com... > > On 10/5/15 2:46 AM, Maciej Woźniak wrote: >> You see, Sam, for a brainwashed fanatic moron like you, measurement >> are always supporting any shit he imagine. Even Earth poles accelerating > > | What force is "accelerating" the earth's poles? > > Ask Ken F., not me. > Of course, his mumble is a bit non-standard (though in > my opinion it's closer to Great Guru's mumble than > your mumble is), still, he is a good example, what The > Shit is doing to a brain of its pray. | I'm asking you Maciej--What force is "accelerating" the earth's poles? If you mean the acceleration I was writing about, none. It's just another idiocy invented by a relatiistic moron. As I said, I know, that Ken is not a standard relativistic moron, but he is still one.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Henry Wilson <HW@.....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 20:01 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <51f41bdag7eg9avuaqau5ms4dnruj5ebce@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #366175 |
On Sun, 4 Oct 2015 18:00:16 -0500, Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: >On 10/4/15 12:47 PM, Henry Wilson wrote: >> >> Wormey, you should always have confidence that you are not too old to learn >> something new. Imagine you are out in the ocean somewhere and there is a big >> swell. How would you measure the (absolute) distance between wavecrests? >> >> Of course that length DOES exist in all frames and remains consant, which is >> why I used parentheis around the word wavelength. >> > > Don't be silly Ralph--Distance measurement and time measurements > for inertial observers is observer dependent based on their relative > velocity to that being measured. Don't be silly Wormey. Time cannot be a function of itself. Do you know what that means? > Spacetime intervals are the same for all inertial observers, however.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 11:52 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <j-OdnWl2TKJHN4_LnZ2dnUU7-LUAAAAA@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #366207 |
On 10/5/15 4:01 AM, Henry Wilson wrote:
>
> Don't be silly Wormey. Time cannot be a function of itself.
> Do you know what that means?
>
Time dilation is observer dependent, Ralph. So is distance
foreshortening. Let me illustrate time dilation AND length
contraction with cosmic muons.
Let ∆t_muon be an interval of proper time in the inertial frame
of reference of a cosmic muon, say 2.2 µs.
Let ∆t_muon' be the muon's time interval as measured by an observer
on the surface of the earth.
Then it follow that from the Earth Surface Perspective:
∆t_muon' = γ ∆t_muon
Muon-Earth Surface Distance' = Muon-Earth Surface Distance
And from the Muon Perspective:
∆t_muon' = ∆t_muon
Muon-Earth Surface Distance' = Muon-Earth Surface Distance / γ
Where v is the relative velocity between muon and Earth Surface and
γ = 1/√(1-v^2/c^2)
--
sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Henry Wilson <HW@.....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-06 04:55 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <o5e51b1pk4ev1topc03rl4uv51vmsbiu1r@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #366223 |
On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 11:52:42 -0500, Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: >On 10/5/15 4:01 AM, Henry Wilson wrote: >> >> Don't be silly Wormey. Time cannot be a function of itself. >> Do you know what that means? >> > > Time dilation is observer dependent, Ralph. So is distance > foreshortening. Let me illustrate time dilation AND length > contraction with cosmic muons. > > Let ?t_muon be an interval of proper time in the inertial frame > of reference of a cosmic muon, say 2.2 µs. > > Let ?t_muon' be the muon's time interval as measured by an observer > on the surface of the earth. > > Then it follow that from the Earth Surface Perspective: > > ?t_muon' = ? ?t_muon > Muon-Earth Surface Distance' = Muon-Earth Surface Distance > > And from the Muon Perspective: > > ?t_muon' = ?t_muon > Muon-Earth Surface Distance' = Muon-Earth Surface Distance / ? > > Where v is the relative velocity between muon and Earth Surface and > > ? = 1/?(1-v^2/c^2) Yes we have been through this many times, Wormey. The experiment shows that muons often travel at speeds far greater than c relative to earth.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-06 07:59 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <a_2dnRovm_kzWI7LnZ2dnUU7-W2dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #366241 |
On 10/5/15 12:55 PM, Henry Wilson wrote: > The experiment shows that > muons often travel at speeds far greater than c relative to earth. That's so funny, Ralph, I forgot to laugh. -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-06 20:55 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mv15fl$gg8$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #366241 |
On 05.10.2015 19:55, Henry Wilson wrote: > On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 11:52:42 -0500, Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> Time dilation is observer dependent, Ralph. So is distance >> foreshortening. Let me illustrate time dilation AND length >> contraction with cosmic muons. >> >> Let ?t_muon be an interval of proper time in the inertial frame >> of reference of a cosmic muon, say 2.2 µs. >> >> Let ?t_muon' be the muon's time interval as measured by an observer >> on the surface of the earth. >> >> Then it follow that from the Earth Surface Perspective: >> >> ?t_muon' = ? ?t_muon >> Muon-Earth Surface Distance' = Muon-Earth Surface Distance >> >> And from the Muon Perspective: >> >> ?t_muon' = ?t_muon >> Muon-Earth Surface Distance' = Muon-Earth Surface Distance / ? >> >> Where v is the relative velocity between muon and Earth Surface and >> >> ? = 1/?(1-v^2/c^2) > > Yes we have been through this many times, Wormey. The experiment shows that > muons often travel at speeds far greater than c relative to earth. Another stupid list of nauseating experimental evidence: https://paulba.no/paper/Frisch_Smith.pdf https://paulba.no/paper/Liu.pdf https://paulba.no/paper/Remmen_McCreary.pdf The idiot laughs at what he doesn't understand. Will Ralph Malcom Rabbidge laugh? -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <xxx@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-07 07:50 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ufc81bl540mnms57tbv2tfcohjohr2en46@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #366332 |
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 20:55:44 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> wrote: >On 05.10.2015 19:55, Henry Wilson wrote: >> >> Yes we have been through this many times, Wormey. The experiment shows that >> muons often travel at speeds far greater than c relative to earth. > >Another stupid list of nauseating experimental evidence: >https://paulba.no/paper/Frisch_Smith.pdf >https://paulba.no/paper/Liu.pdf >https://paulba.no/paper/Remmen_McCreary.pdf It is incredibly easy to misinterpret poorly designed experiments in order to make them appear to support Einstein's ridiculous theory....and there are plenty of fools desperately looking for just the smallest piece of evidence. They will accept anything. >The idiot laughs at what he doesn't understand. >Will Henry George Wilson laugh? HAHAHHHAHAHAHHAHAHHA! i UNDERSTAND YOUR MOTIVES PERFECTLY. You are incurably indoctrinated and will say anything to support your religious faith in your god Einstein. Your own light clock animation proves your insanity...as does your sagnac theory....bent light beams....really Paul!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-07 11:15 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mv2nrl$esq$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #366348 |
On 06.10.2015 22:50, HGW wrote: > On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 20:55:44 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" wrote: >> >> Another stupid list of nauseating experimental evidence: >> https://paulba.no/paper/Frisch_Smith.pdf >> https://paulba.no/paper/Liu.pdf >> https://paulba.no/paper/Remmen_McCreary.pdf > > It is incredibly easy to misinterpret poorly designed experiments in order to > make them appear to support Einstein's ridiculous theory....and there are > plenty of fools desperately looking for just the smallest piece of evidence. > They will accept anything. > >> The idiot laughs at what he doesn't understand. >> Will Henry George Wilson laugh? > > HAHAHHHAHAHAHHAHAHHA! i UNDERSTAND YOUR MOTIVES PERFECTLY. You are incurably > indoctrinated and will say anything to support your religious faith in your god > Einstein. :-D > Your own light clock animation proves your insanity...as does your > sagnac theory https://paulba.no/LightClock.html https://paulba.no/pdf/sagnac_ring.pdf https://paulba.no/pdf/four_mirror_sagnac.pdf > ....bent light beams....really Paul! https://paulba.no/div/RalphOnBentLight.pdf -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <xxx@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-06 14:52 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <kbh61bligudfegdboo4m30ttag6a31i4mi@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #366175 |
On Sun, 4 Oct 2015 18:00:16 -0500, Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: >On 10/4/15 12:47 PM, Henry Wilson wrote: >> >> Wormey, you should always have confidence that you are not too old to learn >> something new. Imagine you are out in the ocean somewhere and there is a big >> swell. How would you measure the (absolute) distance between wavecrests? >> >> Of course that length DOES exist in all frames and remains consant, which is >> why I used parentheis around the word wavelength. >> > > Don't be silly Henry--Distance measurement and time measurements > for inertial observers is observer dependent based on their relative > velocity to that being measured. Time has nothing to do with distance or speed. How could it when speed is dx/dt? 't' cannot be a function of itself. Only a real idiot would think it could. The distance between water waves is easily measured by an observer at rest with the waves. Do you disagree? It is difficult to measure by an observer who is moving relative to them...but he gets the same answer. > Spacetime intervals are the same for all inertial observers, however. They certainly are in Newtonian 4D.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-06 19:15 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <FpmdnQ57576U-YnLnZ2dnUU7-QmdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #366283 |
On 10/5/15 10:52 PM, HGW wrote: > The distance between water waves is easily measured by an observer at rest with > the waves. Do you disagree? It is difficult to measure by an observer who is > moving relative to them...but he gets the same answer. Nevertheless, Ralph, distance measurement and time measurements for inertial observers are observer dependent based on relative velocity to that being measured. Spacetime intervals are the same for all inertial observers, however. -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <xxx@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-09 07:36 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <6rkd1bdensb3ouo647d38qbk0ch9ba7cgp@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #366381 |
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 19:15:04 -0500, Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: >On 10/5/15 10:52 PM, HGW wrote: >> The distance between water waves is easily measured by an observer at rest with >> the waves. Do you disagree? It is difficult to measure by an observer who is >> moving relative to them...but he gets the same answer. > > > Nevertheless, Ralph, distance measurement and time measurements > for inertial observers are observer dependent based on relative > velocity to that being measured. Wormey don't preach your religious nonsense to me, please. > Spacetime intervals are the same for all inertial observers, however. In Newtonian spacetime, yes. Einstein's Spacetime is pure nonsense.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 07:39 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mutr2q$12k$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #366158 |
On 10/4/2015 12:47 PM, Henry Wilson wrote: > On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 17:47:55 -0500, Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 10/2/15 5:26 PM, HGW wrote: >>> 'Wavelength' only exists in the frame of the wave itself. >> >> >> Where did you come up this horseshit, Henry? > > Wormey, you should always have confidence that you are not too old to learn > something new. Imagine you are out in the ocean somewhere and there is a big > swell. How would you measure the (absolute) distance between wavecrests? > > Of course that length DOES exist in all frames and remains consant, which is > why I used parentheis around the word wavelength. > Henry, the word you attempted to type is "parentheses", not to mention "constant". You didn't use parentheses around the word wavelength, you used single quotes. And I see no connection between the statement that that length DOES exist in all frames and the motivation to put single quotes around it. Maybe you shouldn't try to post when you're that drunk. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Henry Wilson <HW@.....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-06 05:03 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <1ge51b576fbg1bqlogtrnmmjoptk1q9us3@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #366213 |
On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 07:39:55 -0500, Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> wrote: >On 10/4/2015 12:47 PM, Henry Wilson wrote: >>>> 'Wavelength' only exists in the frame of the wave itself. >>> >>> >>> Where did you come up this horseshit, Henry? >> >> Wormey, you should always have confidence that you are not too old to learn >> something new. Imagine you are out in the ocean somewhere and there is a big >> swell. How would you measure the (absolute) distance between wavecrests? >> >> Of course that length DOES exist in all frames and remains consant, which is >> why I used parentheis around the word wavelength. >> > >Henry, the word you attempted to type is "parentheses", not to mention >"constant". You didn't use parentheses around the word wavelength, you >used single quotes. And I see no connection between the statement that >that length DOES exist in all frames and the motivation to put single >quotes around it. Bodkin, the fact is, the wavelength of any traveling wave is defined as the distance between points of equal phase AS MEASURED IN THE FRAME OF THE DISTURBANCE. >Maybe you shouldn't try to post when you're that drunk. Bodkin you seem particularly difficult today. Does the fact that you mentioned the word 'drunk' have anything to do with this?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-05 14:20 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <muuiid$th8$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #366243 |
On 10/5/2015 1:03 PM, Henry Wilson wrote: > On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 07:39:55 -0500, Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 10/4/2015 12:47 PM, Henry Wilson wrote: > >>>>> 'Wavelength' only exists in the frame of the wave itself. >>>> >>>> >>>> Where did you come up this horseshit, Henry? >>> >>> Wormey, you should always have confidence that you are not too old to learn >>> something new. Imagine you are out in the ocean somewhere and there is a big >>> swell. How would you measure the (absolute) distance between wavecrests? >>> >>> Of course that length DOES exist in all frames and remains consant, which is >>> why I used parentheis around the word wavelength. >>> >> >> Henry, the word you attempted to type is "parentheses", not to mention >> "constant". You didn't use parentheses around the word wavelength, you >> used single quotes. And I see no connection between the statement that >> that length DOES exist in all frames and the motivation to put single >> quotes around it. > > Bodkin, the fact is, the wavelength of any traveling wave is defined as the > distance between points of equal phase AS MEASURED IN THE FRAME OF THE > DISTURBANCE. Defined where, other than from your mouth? I mean, you can define anything to be whatever you want to. You can declare that mass is DEFINED to be color of water when it is poured from a jar at -12 C, if you like. But nobody else will care about your definition, will they? > >> Maybe you shouldn't try to post when you're that drunk. > > Bodkin you seem particularly difficult today. Does the fact that you mentioned > the word 'drunk' have anything to do with this? > Oh, I do think that when you are drunk, you perceive me to be particularly difficult, yes. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 15 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web