Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #378592 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Luigi Durante <luigdu@jaccappo.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-03-11 18:18 +0000 |
| Last post | 2016-03-12 15:46 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 101 — 16 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
SR and GR, soon to become History Luigi Durante <luigdu@jaccappo.org> - 2016-03-11 18:18 +0000
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-03-11 12:30 -0600
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-03-11 10:51 -0800
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-11 11:59 -0800
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-11 20:49 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-11 13:25 -0800
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-11 14:30 -0800
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-18 10:34 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-18 13:19 -0500
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-18 11:56 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-18 17:27 -0500
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-18 23:41 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-18 16:01 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-19 00:22 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-18 16:39 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-18 17:50 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-18 20:24 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-18 20:28 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-19 10:53 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-19 13:26 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-19 10:25 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-19 13:27 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-19 15:58 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-19 16:16 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-20 13:31 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-20 23:02 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-21 10:09 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-21 10:55 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-21 13:02 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-21 13:13 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-21 13:37 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-21 15:42 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-21 16:50 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-21 21:13 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-21 21:41 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-21 16:39 -0500
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-21 16:41 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-22 00:14 -0500
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-22 09:41 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-21 22:29 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-22 09:45 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-22 11:10 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-22 13:01 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-22 14:51 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-22 15:34 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-22 16:41 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-23 07:28 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History bear making dust <bear@bearmakingdust.net> - 2016-03-23 14:36 +0000
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-23 09:07 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-23 09:34 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-23 12:48 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-23 17:09 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-23 10:13 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-23 18:26 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-23 13:55 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-23 22:55 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-23 15:18 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-23 23:46 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-23 10:59 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-19 08:50 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-03-19 13:27 +0000
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-22 11:13 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-22 19:31 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-22 11:44 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-22 19:47 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-22 11:49 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-22 20:40 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-22 13:08 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-22 21:42 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-22 15:00 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-23 17:15 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-23 09:43 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-23 18:10 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-23 10:16 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-23 18:27 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-23 10:33 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-23 10:32 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-23 10:18 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-23 19:10 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-23 11:54 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-23 20:08 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-23 13:34 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-23 22:48 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History bear making dust <bear@bearmakingdust.net> - 2016-03-23 19:24 +0000
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-23 13:33 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-23 15:25 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-18 17:42 -0700
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History dlzc <dlzc1@cox.net> - 2016-03-11 11:08 -0800
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-03-11 20:46 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Luigi Durante <luigdu@jaccappo.org> - 2016-03-11 21:06 +0000
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-03-11 22:31 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Luigi Durante <luigdu@jaccappo.org> - 2016-03-11 21:41 +0000
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History dlzc <dlzc1@cox.net> - 2016-03-11 13:42 -0800
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Luigi Durante <luigdu@jaccappo.org> - 2016-03-11 21:51 +0000
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-03-12 04:22 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Luigi Durante <luigdu@jaccappo.org> - 2016-03-11 21:24 +0000
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-03-11 22:28 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Luigi Durante <luigdu@jaccappo.org> - 2016-03-11 21:34 +0000
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-03-11 22:39 +0100
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History Yeriychow Patroklos <yeriypat@kambuneta.com> - 2016-03-12 10:08 +0000
Re: SR and GR, soon to become History moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-03-12 15:46 +0000
Page 1 of 6 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 Next page →
| From | Luigi Durante <luigdu@jaccappo.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-11 18:18 +0000 |
| Subject | SR and GR, soon to become History |
| Message-ID | <nbv24q$186c$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
It looks like Relativity will soon be invalidate retroactively. http://yournewswire.com/cern-scientists-discover-particle-that-doesnt-follow-laws-of-physics/ "if it exists, has not been predicted by the standard model which basically means it opens up a new and unexplored world for physicist to explore and could lead them towards the discovery of a set of previously unknown and unexplored particles, which in turn could change everything we know about physics." "It weighs about 750 GeV, corresponding to about six times heavier than the Higgs boson, and almost 800 times heavier than the proton,’ said Professor Ellis."
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-11 12:30 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <u9adnVbKH8pZk37LnZ2dnUU7-a2dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #378592 |
SR and GR being a hundred years or more old, certainly are historical. They may someday be replaced with something that incorporates them, but until that day, in the future, they remain rock solid fruitful tools of physics. -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-11 10:51 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <nbv3ti$cpl$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #378595 |
"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@gmail.com> meant to say & wrote: > > SR and GR, soon to become history, ending up on > the dust-heap of history along with the Dingleberries > who worship Albert's sphincter... all 4 having shown > to be utterly useless. Pity > > > > -- > > 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 | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-11 11:59 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <e8f0c4cd-375d-4f09-9681-d2bfddc33885@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #378597 |
On Friday, March 11, 2016 at 10:51:26 AM UTC-8, hanson wrote: > "Sam Wormley" <swormley1@gmail.com> meant to say & wrote: > > > > SR and GR, soon to become history, ending up on > > the dust-heap of history along with the Dingleberries > > who worship Albert's sphincter... all 4 having shown > > to be utterly useless. Pity > > > > > > > > -- > > > > sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated > > to the discussion of physics, news from the physics > > community, and physics-related social issues. > > Looks like you forgot to paste the obligatory "ahahanson". -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-11 20:49 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <nbv7go$1ea$1@node1.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #378595 |
Użytkownik "Sam Wormley" napisał w wiadomości grup dyskusyjnych:u9adnVbKH8pZk37LnZ2dnUU7-a2dnZ2d@giganews.com... | but until that day, in the future, they remain rock solid fruitful | tools of physics. A lie, as expected from relativistic trash. They didn't destroy physics completely only because even physicists are not stupid enough to treat them seriously.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | alsor@interia.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-11 13:25 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a7bd465f-85c8-4f17-9939-1d59b7cb3989@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #378595 |
W dniu piątek, 11 marca 2016 19:30:31 UTC+1 użytkownik Sam Wormley napisał: > SR and GR being a hundred years or more old, certainly are historical. > They may someday be replaced with something that incorporates them, > but until that day, in the future, they remain rock solid fruitful > tools of physics. Nonsense. The geocentric model has survived over thousand years, despite it was ussefull, but still completely wrong, in general - none of continuation is possible! The SR, GR, ect. are the same type of theory - this type of... people's activity, is just called-as a pseudoscience or dogma.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-11 14:30 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <01d32f02-1637-4191-aa95-ac051e527ccf@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #378595 |
On Friday, March 11, 2016 at 10:30:31 AM UTC-8, Sam Wormley wrote: > SR and GR being a hundred years or more old, certainly are historical. > They may someday be replaced with something that incorporates them, > but until that day, in the future, they remain rock solid fruitful > tools of physics. Realistically, "replaced" will mean like quantum mechanics "replacing" classical mechanics. In other words, relativity will stay forever, just like Newtonian mechanics. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-18 10:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <628e278e-a6e5-4411-8f6f-07ca5ee95e07@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #378644 |
On March 11, JanPB wrote: >> SR and GR being a hundred years or more old, certainly are historical. >> They may someday be replaced with something that incorporates them, > > Realistically, "replaced" will mean like quantum mechanics "replacing" > classical mechanics. In other words, relativity will stay forever, just > like Newtonian mechanics. The reason classical mechanics exists, is because we live in an apparently 'classical world', which really means our scales are much larger than Plank's constant, h. Which then raises the question, how large would h have to be, in order for quantum physics to appear the norm, where the classical approximation no longer works? And, what's the largest value of h which can support life? Or smallest value? Of course this is speculative, but still interesting, considering the anthropic principle, and the debates over that in cosmology. -- Rich
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-18 13:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <J5qdnWg_Y5sD23HLnZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #379442 |
On 3/18/16 3/18/16 - 12:34 PM, RichD wrote: > On March 11, JanPB wrote: >>> SR and GR being a hundred years or more old, certainly are historical. >>> They may someday be replaced with something that incorporates them, >> >> Realistically, "replaced" will mean like quantum mechanics "replacing" >> classical mechanics. In other words, relativity will stay forever, just >> like Newtonian mechanics. > > The reason classical mechanics exists, is because > we live in an apparently 'classical world', which > really means our scales are much larger than Plank's > constant, h. That's one way of thinking about it. A better way is to realize that all the experiments that confirmed and supported the older (classical) theories have not disappeared, and they all remain valid. So what actually happened is that Newtonian mechanics did not "disappear" or get "replaced", what happened is that newer experiments showed that the domain in which NM is valid does not include all possible phenomena -- they narrowed its domain of applicability. You can imagine an abstract "landscape" of physical phenomena, with the various theories being valid in various domains of the landscape. So, for instance, the phenomena involved in our everyday lives are covered by Newtonian mechanics, SR, GR, QM, and QFT; we naturally use NM for them because it is accurate enough and VASTLY easier to apply in this domain. Similarly, phenomena at an atomic scale or smaller are only covered by QM and QFT, elementary-particle phenomena at high-energy accelerators are covered by SR and QFT, and phenomena at a cosmological scale are covered only by GR. At present we have a "patchwork" of theories none of which is valid everywhere. It is clear that nature does something throughout the entire landscape, and therefore we humans ought to be able to formulate a theory that reflects what nature actually does, and is thus valid everywhere. But so far, attempts at such a "theory of everything" have fallen far short of the mark. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | alsor@interia.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-18 11:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1694b93e-71e2-4d96-9d1f-39e14972b24f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #379444 |
W dniu piątek, 18 marca 2016 19:19:12 UTC+1 użytkownik tjrob137 napisał: > That's one way of thinking about it. A better way is to realize that all the > experiments that confirmed and supported the older (classical) theories have not > disappeared, and they all remain valid. So what actually happened is that > Newtonian mechanics did not "disappear" or get "replaced", what happened is that > newer experiments showed that the domain in which NM is valid does not include > all possible phenomena -- they narrowed its domain of applicability. Realy? So, show me the experimets incomptible with the Newton laws. For example, show me an example where: action <> reaction. You dont know what you are talking about... Your stupid - improvised models, besed on nonsensical postulates are incompatible only.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-18 17:27 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <KOqdnWNTt7ZAHXHLnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #379446 |
On 3/18/16 3/18/16 - 1:56 PM, alsor@interia.pl wrote: > W dniu piątek, 18 marca 2016 19:19:12 UTC+1 użytkownik tjrob137 napisał: >> That's one way of thinking about it. A better way is to realize that all the >> experiments that confirmed and supported the older (classical) theories have not >> disappeared, and they all remain valid. So what actually happened is that >> Newtonian mechanics did not "disappear" or get "replaced", what happened is that >> newer experiments showed that the domain in which NM is valid does not include >> all possible phenomena -- they narrowed its domain of applicability. > > Realy? > So, show me the experimets incomptible with the Newton laws. Any experiment involving speeds approaching c. Newtonian energy and momentum conservation are violated by huge factors. But the conservation of 4-momentum in SR is observed to be obeyed. Essentially no process occurring at the atomic scale or smaller can be modeled using Newton's laws. For instance, the observed stability of atoms cannot be explained using Newton's laws. Observations where gravity is strong or the precision is exquisite are other examples. Newton's laws cannot explain either the precession of perihelia in the solar system or the behavior of binary pulsars. Practically any experiment in electrodynamics violates Newton's laws, because NM and classical electrodynamics are fundamentally incompatible (they have different symmetry groups). > For example, show me an example where: action <> reaction. Any 2-body particle decay in which the products have significantly different masses. Newton's "action = reaction" implies that Newtonian momentum should be conserved, BUT IT ISN'T -- observations show that 4-momentum is conserved. > You dont know what you are talking about... No, it is YOU who doesn't understand this. The fact that you don't understand the limitations of Newton's laws is just one instance of your personal ignorance and illiteracy in physics. Like so many around here, all you have is bluster.... Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-18 23:41 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <nci07c$7nf$1@node2.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #379466 |
Użytkownik "Tom Roberts" napisał w wiadomości grup dyskusyjnych:KOqdnWNTt7ZAHXHLnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com... > So, show me the experimets incomptible with the Newton laws. |Any experiment involving speeds approaching c. Newtonian energy and momentum |conservation are violated by huge factors. No, they are not. Newtonian theory is built seriously, and it can take about anything. Though, of course, morons like you are too stupid to notice it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-18 16:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <25ba604f-f883-4987-8018-dba94ecdb18b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #379470 |
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:41:50 PM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > Użytkownik "Tom Roberts" napisał w wiadomości grup > dyskusyjnych:KOqdnWNTt7ZAHXHLnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com... > > > > So, show me the experimets incomptible with the Newton laws. > > |Any experiment involving speeds approaching c. Newtonian energy and > momentum > |conservation are violated by huge factors. > > No, they are not. Newtonian theory is built seriously, > and it can take about anything. Though, of course, morons > like you are too stupid to notice it. False. Sorry to burst your bubble. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-19 00:22 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <nci2k9$9fp$1@node1.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #379472 |
Użytkownik "JanPB" napisał w wiadomości grup dyskusyjnych:25ba604f-f883-4987-8018-dba94ecdb18b@googlegroups.com... On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:41:50 PM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > Użytkownik "Tom Roberts" napisał w wiadomości grup > dyskusyjnych:KOqdnWNTt7ZAHXHLnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com... > > > > So, show me the experimets incomptible with the Newton laws. > > |Any experiment involving speeds approaching c. Newtonian energy and > momentum > |conservation are violated by huge factors. > > No, they are not. Newtonian theory is built seriously, > and it can take about anything. Though, of course, morons > like you are too stupid to notice it. |False. Sorry to burst your bubble. You're too stupid to burst anything, and what I said is true.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-18 16:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f86bb980-5c30-43e4-bd81-6f176ae2d232@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #379476 |
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 4:22:51 PM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > Użytkownik "JanPB" napisał w wiadomości grup > dyskusyjnych:25ba604f-f883-4987-8018-dba94ecdb18b@googlegroups.com... > > On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:41:50 PM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > > Użytkownik "Tom Roberts" napisał w wiadomości grup > > dyskusyjnych:KOqdnWNTt7ZAHXHLnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com... > > > > > > > So, show me the experimets incomptible with the Newton laws. > > > > |Any experiment involving speeds approaching c. Newtonian energy and > > momentum > > |conservation are violated by huge factors. > > > > No, they are not. Newtonian theory is built seriously, > > and it can take about anything. Though, of course, morons > > like you are too stupid to notice it. > > |False. Sorry to burst your bubble. > > You're too stupid to burst anything, and what I said is true. False. Sorry. There is simply nothing you can do about it. Newtonian mechanics doesn't work in accelerators. Don't bother talking to me, talk to the bankers and business groups that fund those devices. They cost a lot of money and I'm sure they'll be eternally grateful to you for your advice. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | alsor@interia.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-18 17:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4d50af27-ef2f-470d-a2fe-37a8c003cc68@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #379478 |
W dniu sobota, 19 marca 2016 00:39:57 UTC+1 użytkownik JanPB napisał: > On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 4:22:51 PM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > > Użytkownik "JanPB" napisał w wiadomości grup > > dyskusyjnych:25ba604f-f883-4987-8018-dba94ecdb18b@googlegroups.com... > > > > On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:41:50 PM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > > > Użytkownik "Tom Roberts" napisał w wiadomości grup > > > dyskusyjnych:KOqdnWNTt7ZAHXHLnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com... > > > > > > > > > > So, show me the experimets incomptible with the Newton laws. > > > > > > |Any experiment involving speeds approaching c. Newtonian energy and > > > momentum > > > |conservation are violated by huge factors. > > > > > > No, they are not. Newtonian theory is built seriously, > > > and it can take about anything. Though, of course, morons > > > like you are too stupid to notice it. > > > > |False. Sorry to burst your bubble. > > > > You're too stupid to burst anything, and what I said is true. > > False. Sorry. There is simply nothing you can do about it. Newtonian > mechanics doesn't work in accelerators. Don't bother talking to me, > talk to the bankers and business groups that fund those devices. They cost > a lot of money and I'm sure they'll be eternally grateful to you for your > advice. > > -- > Jan It's works. There is action = reaction, evidently. and therefore you must use: m = m.gamma, instead of simple m. You don't understand the simplest things yet.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-18 20:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9555e68b-9928-47e5-9746-98ae544604b7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #379484 |
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 5:50:58 PM UTC-7, al...@interia.pl wrote: > W dniu sobota, 19 marca 2016 00:39:57 UTC+1 użytkownik JanPB napisał: > > On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 4:22:51 PM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > > > Użytkownik "JanPB" napisał w wiadomości grup > > > dyskusyjnych:25ba604f-f883-4987-8018-dba94ecdb18b@googlegroups.com... > > > > > > On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:41:50 PM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > > > > Użytkownik "Tom Roberts" napisał w wiadomości grup > > > > dyskusyjnych:KOqdnWNTt7ZAHXHLnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com... > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, show me the experimets incomptible with the Newton laws. > > > > > > > > |Any experiment involving speeds approaching c. Newtonian energy and > > > > momentum > > > > |conservation are violated by huge factors. > > > > > > > > No, they are not. Newtonian theory is built seriously, > > > > and it can take about anything. Though, of course, morons > > > > like you are too stupid to notice it. > > > > > > |False. Sorry to burst your bubble. > > > > > > You're too stupid to burst anything, and what I said is true. > > > > False. Sorry. There is simply nothing you can do about it. Newtonian > > mechanics doesn't work in accelerators. Don't bother talking to me, > > talk to the bankers and business groups that fund those devices. They cost > > a lot of money and I'm sure they'll be eternally grateful to you for your > > advice. > > > > -- > > Jan > > It's works. > There is action = reaction, evidently. Even in classical (19th century) electrodynamics this is not true. Consider this standard example: imagine two point charges (equal charges), one of them moving along the positive (say) x-axis, the other one along the positive (say) y-axis, both moving with the same speed, both towards the origin. Exercise: determine the electromagnetic force each charge exerts on the other. Don't agonise over the exact formulas, just determine the directions of both forces. Note: these two forces will be equal but NOT opposite each other. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-18 20:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a501f781-0d16-44b4-921b-884d016eeeee@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #379490 |
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 8:24:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 5:50:58 PM UTC-7, al...@interia.pl wrote: > > W dniu sobota, 19 marca 2016 00:39:57 UTC+1 użytkownik JanPB napisał: > > > On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 4:22:51 PM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > > > > Użytkownik "JanPB" napisał w wiadomości grup > > > > dyskusyjnych:25ba604f-f883-4987-8018-dba94ecdb18b@googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:41:50 PM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > > > > > Użytkownik "Tom Roberts" napisał w wiadomości grup > > > > > dyskusyjnych:KOqdnWNTt7ZAHXHLnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, show me the experimets incomptible with the Newton laws. > > > > > > > > > > |Any experiment involving speeds approaching c. Newtonian energy and > > > > > momentum > > > > > |conservation are violated by huge factors. > > > > > > > > > > No, they are not. Newtonian theory is built seriously, > > > > > and it can take about anything. Though, of course, morons > > > > > like you are too stupid to notice it. > > > > > > > > |False. Sorry to burst your bubble. > > > > > > > > You're too stupid to burst anything, and what I said is true. > > > > > > False. Sorry. There is simply nothing you can do about it. Newtonian > > > mechanics doesn't work in accelerators. Don't bother talking to me, > > > talk to the bankers and business groups that fund those devices. They cost > > > a lot of money and I'm sure they'll be eternally grateful to you for your > > > advice. > > > > > > -- > > > Jan > > > > It's works. > > There is action = reaction, evidently. > > Even in classical (19th century) electrodynamics this is not true. Consider this standard > example: imagine two point charges (equal charges), one of them moving along the positive > (say) x-axis, the other one along the positive (say) y-axis, both moving with the same speed, > both towards the origin. To make it as symmetric as possible, assume the charges at every instant are equal distance away from the origin (so the segment connecting them is angled at 45 degrees). > Exercise: determine the electromagnetic force each charge exerts on the other. Don't > agonise over the exact formulas, just determine the directions of both forces. > > Note: these two forces will be equal but NOT opposite each other. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | alsor@interia.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-19 10:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5af664ad-bd65-4fcb-95aa-a0c11690a7a0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #379491 |
W dniu sobota, 19 marca 2016 04:28:43 UTC+1 użytkownik JanPB napisał: > To make it as symmetric as possible, assume the charges at every instant are equal distance away from the origin (so the segment connecting them is angled at 45 degrees). In what frame do you try to set the 45 degs? :) And that is just the key of the great incompetence in the math.. for every relativist.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-19 13:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b5c2b6a5-f905-465d-8eb7-af561c1e1a71@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #379540 |
On Saturday, March 19, 2016 at 10:53:20 AM UTC-7, al...@interia.pl wrote: > W dniu sobota, 19 marca 2016 04:28:43 UTC+1 użytkownik JanPB napisał: > > > To make it as symmetric as possible, assume the charges at every instant are equal distance away from the origin (so the segment connecting them is angled at 45 degrees). > > In what frame do you try to set the 45 degs? :) > > And that is just the key of the great incompetence in the math.. > for every relativist. In your frame. We are talking classical electrodynamics here so you can even assume that you are in the aether's rest frame if you want. The origin of the coordinates is likewise at rest and you have those two charges moving as I've described. You'll see the two forces violate Newton's 3rd law. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 6 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web