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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #671087 > unrolled thread

Nobody understands relativity

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

Contents

  Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-06 12:59 +0200
    Re: Nobody understands relativity Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-06-06 18:07 +0000
    Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-06 20:19 +0200
      Re: Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-06 21:23 +0200
        Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-06 16:57 -0700
        Re: Nobody understands relativity nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-06-07 10:54 +0200
          Re: Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-07 13:13 +0200
            Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 08:25 -0700
              Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:06 -0700
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:21 -0700
                  Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:50 -0700
                    Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:59 -0700
                      Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-08 08:46 -0700
                        Re: Nobody understands relativity nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-06-09 13:41 +0200
                          Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:15 -0700
                            Re: Nobody understands relativity marika <marika5000@gmail.com> - 2026-06-14 05:01 +0000
        Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-07 13:30 +0200
          Re: Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-07 13:37 +0200
            Re: Nobody understands relativity Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-06-07 11:40 +0000
            Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-07 13:58 +0200
              Re: Nobody understands relativity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-06-08 10:17 +0200
          Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-07 21:43 -0700
          Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-07 21:48 -0700
            Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-08 07:41 +0200
              Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-08 09:50 +0200
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-08 10:46 +0200
                  Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-08 19:16 +0200
                    Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-08 19:42 +0200
                      Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-08 16:54 -0700
                        Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 07:34 +0200
                          Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 10:59 +0200
                            Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 11:06 +0200
                              Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 20:22 +0200
                                Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 20:55 +0200
                                  Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 21:27 +0200
                                    Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 21:37 +0200
                      Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 10:32 +0200
                        Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 11:00 +0200
                          Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 20:56 +0200
                            Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 21:01 +0200
                              Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 21:46 +0200
                                Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 22:03 +0200
                        Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:10 -0700
                          Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:22 -0700
                            Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:31 -0700
                              Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:40 -0700
                                Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 10:41 +0200
                                  Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-07-27 01:45 -0700
                                    Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 (Was: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 11:26 +0200
                                    Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 [Logic Tiling] (Was: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 11:30 +0200
                                      Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon (Re: Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 [Logic Tiling]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 11:37 +0200
                                        Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU (Was: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 02:05 +0200
                                          Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU (Was: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon) Piotr Agamirov <ppp@togit.ru> - 2026-08-03 12:05 +0000
                                          Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 18:18 +0200
                                            But how can you deploy, when its ROM? (Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 18:22 +0200
                                            Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-04 00:45 +0800
                                            Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU) Bayard Djabrailov <yjbob@aodorbv.ru> - 2026-08-03 17:28 +0000
                                            Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU) Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-08-07 08:17 +0200
                                              Norton Commander and Norton Antivirus again? [AI Laptop Memory] (Was: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-07 14:13 +0200
                                  Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-07-27 07:13 -0700
                                    Brova you enjoy made up nonsense? [Einstein tech cult] (Was: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 17:07 +0200
                                      NVIDIA Einstein and Q8.24 RGB Values [Earth and Star Gazers] (Was: Brova you enjoy made up nonsense? [Einstein tech cult]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 17:30 +0200
                                        Just lookup orbital AI and SpaceX (Re: NVIDIA Einstein and Q8.24 RGB Values) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 17:39 +0200
                          Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 21:05 +0200
                            Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-10 08:39 -0700
                              Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-10 14:53 -0700
                                Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-10 18:20 -0700
                                  Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-10 20:48 -0700
                                    Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-12 08:13 -0700
                                      Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-12 08:42 -0700
                                  Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-10 22:54 -0700
                                Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-12 13:39 -0700
                                  Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-14 09:05 -0700
      Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-06 21:24 +0200
        Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-07 13:45 +0200
          Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-07 15:14 +0200
            Re: Nobody understands relativity Auburn Morandi <bia@auuur.it> - 2026-06-07 15:39 +0000
    Re: Nobody understands relativity nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-06-07 10:54 +0200
    Re: Nobody understands relativity marika <marika5000@gmail.com> - 2026-07-02 00:09 +0000

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

#671160

Den 09.06.2026 21:01, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
> On 6/9/2026 8:56 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:

>> 
>> Even you must understand that the adjusted atomic clock
>> must have the SI-definition inbuilt to make the adjusted 'second'
>> be exactly (1 + 4.4647e-10) second.
>> 
>> Or don't you understand it?

> 
> Yeah, poor trash, any unadjusted atomic clock is
> for sure adjusted to your SI idiocy, no doubt.
> 
> It's indeed amazing what The Shit of Einstein
> is making with the brains of its unfortunate
> victims.

Does this mean that you don't understand that any
atomic clock has the SI-definition of second inbuilt?

>>> Quoting,
>>> "An SI-clock in GPS orbit must be adjusted down[...]
>>> to make it stay  in sync."
>>> Oh yes, poor trash, if talking about "the synchronisation
>>> of the rate of atomic clocks" - it must be. Greenwich
>>> museum  is  not necessary for that, however.
>>
>> Does that mean that you know that atomic clocks has
>> the SI-definition inbuilt
> 
> Fortunately, even such a disgusting
> piece of lying shit as you are can't lie
> non stop, so sometimes you admit that
> they're [sometimes] adjusted down compared
> to your religious absurd.

Does this mean that you still don't understand that any
atomic clock has the SI-definition of second inbuilt?

Can you name a way to synch an atomic clock without
the "SI-idiocy"?

-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/

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

#671162

On 6/9/2026 9:46 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> Den 09.06.2026 21:01, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
>> On 6/9/2026 8:56 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> 
>>>
>>> Even you must understand that the adjusted atomic clock
>>> must have the SI-definition inbuilt to make the adjusted 'second'
>>> be exactly (1 + 4.4647e-10) second.
>>>
>>> Or don't you understand it?
> 
>>
>> Yeah, poor trash, any unadjusted atomic clock is
>> for sure adjusted to your SI idiocy, no doubt.
>>
>> It's indeed amazing what The Shit of Einstein
>> is making with the brains of its unfortunate
>> victims.
> 
> Does this mean that you don't understand that any
> atomic clock has the SI-definition of second inbuilt?


Fortunately, even such a disgusting
piece of lying shit as you are can't lie
non stop, so sometimes you admit that
they're [sometimes] adjusted down compared
to your religious absurd.

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

#671147

On 06/09/2026 01:32 AM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> Den 08.06.2026 19:42, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
>> On 6/8/2026 7:16 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>
>>> Which definition of second is used in the synchronisation
>>> of the rate of atomic clocks?
>
>> Of course it's not yours. Your idiot guru
>> has forbidden synchronization of clocks
>> as it was violating his moronic symmetry -
>> and  your SI idiocy has been invented
>> to enforce his madness.
>>
>
> Why do you pretend not to know?
>
> Even you must know that the SI-definition of second
> is inbuilt in an atomic clock.
>
> Or do you think that all atomic clocks must be brought
> to the museum at Greenwich to be calibrated to the old
> definition of second ? :-D
>

What about that _length_ and _distance_ have different units,
about the _metric_ and _norm_, about _distance_ being _length_
in _time_, that time (its elapsed duration) could be defined
according to space-contraction instead of the other way around?


According to "references", ....


Otherwise those are going to vary under gravity, under acceleration,
and so on.


While there's often mentioned the GPS reference frequency,
not so much the GPS station operator's and station-keeping guide,
with that receivers >> stations.

So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars"
instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom,
in a museum in France".

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

#671149

On 06/09/2026 07:10 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> On 06/09/2026 01:32 AM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>> Den 08.06.2026 19:42, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
>>> On 6/8/2026 7:16 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>
>>>> Which definition of second is used in the synchronisation
>>>> of the rate of atomic clocks?
>>
>>> Of course it's not yours. Your idiot guru
>>> has forbidden synchronization of clocks
>>> as it was violating his moronic symmetry -
>>> and  your SI idiocy has been invented
>>> to enforce his madness.
>>>
>>
>> Why do you pretend not to know?
>>
>> Even you must know that the SI-definition of second
>> is inbuilt in an atomic clock.
>>
>> Or do you think that all atomic clocks must be brought
>> to the museum at Greenwich to be calibrated to the old
>> definition of second ? :-D
>>
>
> What about that _length_ and _distance_ have different units,
> about the _metric_ and _norm_, about _distance_ being _length_
> in _time_, that time (its elapsed duration) could be defined
> according to space-contraction instead of the other way around?
>
>
> According to "references", ....
>
>
> Otherwise those are going to vary under gravity, under acceleration,
> and so on.
>
>
> While there's often mentioned the GPS reference frequency,
> not so much the GPS station operator's and station-keeping guide,
> with that receivers >> stations.
>
> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars"
> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom,
> in a museum in France".
>
>

The NIST Particle Data Group CODATA releases the measured values
of fundamental physical constants every few years, the small ones
get not only more precise, also _smaller_, helping also inform that
the "running constants" of physics get involved.

So, physics is according to NIST CODATA, with SI: Systeme
Internationale, a reduced second, i.e. not first and quite reduced.


Then most people are also unawares how things like Boltzmann and
Planck constants as physical constants are much mathematical constants
that reflect their placement in terms for algebraic reductions again,
for example the roots of x^2 +-x +-1 like the molar gas constant in
the Boltzmann constant, then as with regards to Planck constant about
what mathematical reductionism is ongoing in the Planckian, why
those aren't exactly "physical" constants.


Anyways that "time" can be defined by "an average field of quasar
measurements" is a thing.

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

#671150

On 06/09/2026 07:22 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> On 06/09/2026 07:10 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
>> On 06/09/2026 01:32 AM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>> Den 08.06.2026 19:42, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
>>>> On 6/8/2026 7:16 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Which definition of second is used in the synchronisation
>>>>> of the rate of atomic clocks?
>>>
>>>> Of course it's not yours. Your idiot guru
>>>> has forbidden synchronization of clocks
>>>> as it was violating his moronic symmetry -
>>>> and  your SI idiocy has been invented
>>>> to enforce his madness.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why do you pretend not to know?
>>>
>>> Even you must know that the SI-definition of second
>>> is inbuilt in an atomic clock.
>>>
>>> Or do you think that all atomic clocks must be brought
>>> to the museum at Greenwich to be calibrated to the old
>>> definition of second ? :-D
>>>
>>
>> What about that _length_ and _distance_ have different units,
>> about the _metric_ and _norm_, about _distance_ being _length_
>> in _time_, that time (its elapsed duration) could be defined
>> according to space-contraction instead of the other way around?
>>
>>
>> According to "references", ....
>>
>>
>> Otherwise those are going to vary under gravity, under acceleration,
>> and so on.
>>
>>
>> While there's often mentioned the GPS reference frequency,
>> not so much the GPS station operator's and station-keeping guide,
>> with that receivers >> stations.
>>
>> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars"
>> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom,
>> in a museum in France".
>>
>>
>
> The NIST Particle Data Group CODATA releases the measured values
> of fundamental physical constants every few years, the small ones
> get not only more precise, also _smaller_, helping also inform that
> the "running constants" of physics get involved.
>
> So, physics is according to NIST CODATA, with SI: Systeme
> Internationale, a reduced second, i.e. not first and quite reduced.
>
>
> Then most people are also unawares how things like Boltzmann and
> Planck constants as physical constants are much mathematical constants
> that reflect their placement in terms for algebraic reductions again,
> for example the roots of x^2 +-x +-1 like the molar gas constant in
> the Boltzmann constant, then as with regards to Planck constant about
> what mathematical reductionism is ongoing in the Planckian, why
> those aren't exactly "physical" constants.
>
>
> Anyways that "time" can be defined by "an average field of quasar
> measurements" is a thing.
>
>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchrotron

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

#671151

On 06/09/2026 07:31 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> On 06/09/2026 07:22 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
>> On 06/09/2026 07:10 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
>>> On 06/09/2026 01:32 AM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>> Den 08.06.2026 19:42, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
>>>>> On 6/8/2026 7:16 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Which definition of second is used in the synchronisation
>>>>>> of the rate of atomic clocks?
>>>>
>>>>> Of course it's not yours. Your idiot guru
>>>>> has forbidden synchronization of clocks
>>>>> as it was violating his moronic symmetry -
>>>>> and  your SI idiocy has been invented
>>>>> to enforce his madness.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why do you pretend not to know?
>>>>
>>>> Even you must know that the SI-definition of second
>>>> is inbuilt in an atomic clock.
>>>>
>>>> Or do you think that all atomic clocks must be brought
>>>> to the museum at Greenwich to be calibrated to the old
>>>> definition of second ? :-D
>>>>
>>>
>>> What about that _length_ and _distance_ have different units,
>>> about the _metric_ and _norm_, about _distance_ being _length_
>>> in _time_, that time (its elapsed duration) could be defined
>>> according to space-contraction instead of the other way around?
>>>
>>>
>>> According to "references", ....
>>>
>>>
>>> Otherwise those are going to vary under gravity, under acceleration,
>>> and so on.
>>>
>>>
>>> While there's often mentioned the GPS reference frequency,
>>> not so much the GPS station operator's and station-keeping guide,
>>> with that receivers >> stations.
>>>
>>> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars"
>>> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom,
>>> in a museum in France".
>>>
>>>
>>
>> The NIST Particle Data Group CODATA releases the measured values
>> of fundamental physical constants every few years, the small ones
>> get not only more precise, also _smaller_, helping also inform that
>> the "running constants" of physics get involved.
>>
>> So, physics is according to NIST CODATA, with SI: Systeme
>> Internationale, a reduced second, i.e. not first and quite reduced.
>>
>>
>> Then most people are also unawares how things like Boltzmann and
>> Planck constants as physical constants are much mathematical constants
>> that reflect their placement in terms for algebraic reductions again,
>> for example the roots of x^2 +-x +-1 like the molar gas constant in
>> the Boltzmann constant, then as with regards to Planck constant about
>> what mathematical reductionism is ongoing in the Planckian, why
>> those aren't exactly "physical" constants.
>>
>>
>> Anyways that "time" can be defined by "an average field of quasar
>> measurements" is a thing.
>>
>>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchrotron
>
>

So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of
time", in the micro, meso, and macro.

Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory
in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with
regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time.

About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's
similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has
about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli
Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis,
measuring time.


So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time,
and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space.


Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that,
it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that.


Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those
on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.

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

#671686 — Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity)

Hi,

Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration,
reached a significant milestone this summer.

The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners
to measure time, so forget Colorado.

Bye

Ross Finlayson schrieb:
> 
> So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of
> time", in the micro, meso, and macro.
> 
> Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory
> in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with
> regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time.
> 
> About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's
> similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has
> about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli
> Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis,
> measuring time.
> 
> 
> So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time,
> and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space.
> 
> 
> Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that,
> it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that.
> 
> 
> Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those
> on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.
> 
> 

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

#671688 — Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity)

On 07/27/2026 01:41 AM, Mild Shock wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration,
> reached a significant milestone this summer.
>
> The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners
> to measure time, so forget Colorado.
>
> Bye
>
> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>>
>> So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of
>> time", in the micro, meso, and macro.
>>
>> Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory
>> in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with
>> regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time.
>>
>> About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's
>> similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has
>> about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli
>> Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis,
>> measuring time.
>>
>>
>> So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time,
>> and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space.
>>
>>
>> Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that,
>> it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that.
>>
>>
>> Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those
>> on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.
>>
>>
>

"Hyper [....]"  Hyper-active.

Tweakers aren't reliable.

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

#671692 — Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 (Was: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration)

Hi,

The nature of time has puzzled people -- from the ancient
Greeks to the present day -- Especially the nosomatic
perception of tie is a hot topic now.

How does time evolve inside a GPU with multiple units
or a CPU with multiple cores. GPUs even having multiple
logical threads inside a group.

Forget the von Neumann model of computing. You need
a total new thinking of shared memory and more
message passing, and have a grip of vector and

matrix tiling of problems. pi-WAM already deploys
logic tiling in its Seven Eleven demonstrator. So forget
everything you have learned in your BASIC computer

course for your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088.

Bye

Ross Finlayson schrieb:
> On 07/27/2026 01:41 AM, Mild Shock wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration,
>> reached a significant milestone this summer.
>>
>> The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners
>> to measure time, so forget Colorado.
>>
>> Bye
>>
>> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>>>
>>> So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of
>>> time", in the micro, meso, and macro.
>>>
>>> Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory
>>> in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with
>>> regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time.
>>>
>>> About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's
>>> similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has
>>> about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli
>>> Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis,
>>> measuring time.
>>>
>>>
>>> So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time,
>>> and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space.
>>>
>>>
>>> Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that,
>>> it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those
>>> on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.
>>>
>>>
>>
> 
> "Hyper [....]"  Hyper-active.
> 
> Tweakers aren't reliable.
> 
> 

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

#671693 — Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 [Logic Tiling] (Was: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration)

Hi,

The nature of time has puzzled people -- from the ancient
Greeks to the present day -- Especially the nosomatic
perception of time is a hot topic now.

How does time evolve inside a GPU with multiple units
or a CPU with multiple cores. GPUs even having multiple
logical threads inside a group.

Forget the von Neumann model of computing. You need
a total new thinking of shared memory and more
message passing, and have a grip of vector and

matrix tiling of problems. π-WAM already deploys
logic tiling in its Seven Eleven demonstrator. So forget
everything you have learned in your BASIC computer

course for your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088.

Bye

Ross Finlayson schrieb:
> On 07/27/2026 01:41 AM, Mild Shock wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration,
>> reached a significant milestone this summer.
>>
>> The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners
>> to measure time, so forget Colorado.
>>
>> Bye
>>
>> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>>>
>>> So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of
>>> time", in the micro, meso, and macro.
>>>
>>> Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory
>>> in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with
>>> regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time.
>>>
>>> About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's
>>> similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has
>>> about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli
>>> Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis,
>>> measuring time.
>>>
>>>
>>> So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time,
>>> and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space.
>>>
>>>
>>> Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that,
>>> it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those
>>> on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.
>>>
>>>
>>
> 
> "Hyper [....]"  Hyper-active.
> 
> Tweakers aren't reliable.
> 
> 

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

#671694 — Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon (Re: Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 [Logic Tiling])

Hi,

A nosomatic AI chirurgeon is a halfling student
of sickness, and a master of the ebb and flow of
the energies of life and death of data packets.

He is a air bender, water bender and earth bender
in one person, using OpenVINO to juggle with
CPU, GPU and NPU.

Last but not least he can freely switch between
symbolic and neural representation of knowledge
forms, there is no abyss for him.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> The nature of time has puzzled people -- from the ancient
> Greeks to the present day -- Especially the nosomatic
> perception of time is a hot topic now.
> 
> How does time evolve inside a GPU with multiple units
> or a CPU with multiple cores. GPUs even having multiple
> logical threads inside a group.
> 
> Forget the von Neumann model of computing. You need
> a total new thinking of shared memory and more
> message passing, and have a grip of vector and
> 
> matrix tiling of problems. π-WAM already deploys
> logic tiling in its Seven Eleven demonstrator. So forget
> everything you have learned in your BASIC computer
> 
> course for your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088.
> 
> Bye

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

#671810 — Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU (Was: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon)

Hi,

Now that the debate with Chris M. Thomasson
has culminated in questions of elasticity,
I suggest this homework:

- Game Engine in WebGPU
   It will support the life cycle of sprites,
   like sprites comming out of nowhere,
   and being destroyed by arms,
   just like in Space invader.

This would be surely a fantastic exercise,
to see what a GPU can do and cannot do,
in respect of life cycle of threads, especially

modern GPUs that sell the CUDA dream.

Have Fun!

Become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> A nosomatic AI chirurgeon is a halfling student
> of sickness, and a master of the ebb and flow of
> the energies of life and death of data packets.
> 
> He is a air bender, water bender and earth bender
> in one person, using OpenVINO to juggle with
> CPU, GPU and NPU.
> 
> Last but not least he can freely switch between
> symbolic and neural representation of knowledge
> forms, there is no abyss for him.
> 
> Bye
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The nature of time has puzzled people -- from the ancient
>> Greeks to the present day -- Especially the nosomatic
>> perception of time is a hot topic now.
>>
>> How does time evolve inside a GPU with multiple units
>> or a CPU with multiple cores. GPUs even having multiple
>> logical threads inside a group.
>>
>> Forget the von Neumann model of computing. You need
>> a total new thinking of shared memory and more
>> message passing, and have a grip of vector and
>>
>> matrix tiling of problems. π-WAM already deploys
>> logic tiling in its Seven Eleven demonstrator. So forget
>> everything you have learned in your BASIC computer
>>
>> course for your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088.
>>
>> Bye
> 

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

#671815 — Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU (Was: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon)

Mild Shock wrote:

> Now that the debate with Chris M. Thomasson has culminated in questions
> of elasticity, I suggest this homework:
> 
> - Game Engine in WebGPU
>    It will support the life cycle of sprites,
>    like sprites comming out of nowhere,
>    and being destroyed by arms,
>    just like in Space invader.

Mandelbrot fractal, imaged on a complex plane

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

#671816 — Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU)

Hi,

 > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.

 > that has different
 > *  sizeof ( void * ), and
 > *  sizeof ( void (*)( void ) ),

Could indicate a data RAM and code ROM model.
Which has then the advantage of:

Modern operating systems like Windows 11
enforce strict Data Execution Prevention (DEP)
(or NX/XD bit security features) to prevent
malicious programs from injecting and executing
code inside data-only memory regions.
https://root-nation.com/en/soft-en/lifehacks/en-dep-windows-all-about/

I adopted data RAM and code ROM model for
pi-WAM from Hack, which has the same separation:

Slide 58, Hack Computer
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Z_fxYmmRNXTkAzmZ6YMoX9NXZIRVCKiw/view

But my motivation was not Johnny Depp prevention.
Rather the caching of GPUs. Because WGSL
allows storage annotations read_write and

read. I use read_write for the data RAM
of my Hack VM variant, and read for the
code ROM of my Hack VM variant. You can

see that here, its open source:

@group(0) @binding(0) var<storage, read> code: array<i32>;
@group(0) @binding(1) var<storage, read_write> state: array<i32>;

11.4 Giga Lips with a Budget Laptop
https://github.com/Jean-Luc-Picard-2021/gigabudget

Hope this Helps!

Bye

Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson schrieb:
 > On 03/08/2026 6:28 PM, David Brown wrote:
 >> On 03/08/2026 11:41, Richard Harnden wrote:
 >>> On 03/08/2026 09:16, David Brown wrote:
 >>
 >>>> On most targets, function pointers are the same size as void* 
pointers. But there are exceptions, with some small microcontrollers and 
DSPs having different kinds of pointers with different sizes, depending 
on the memory space involved.  I have yet to see a situation where there 
was any reason for storing a function address in a "void*" rather than a 
more appropriate typedef, such as :
 >>>>
 >>>>      typedef void (*FVoid)(void);
 >>>
 >>> dlsym requires that pointer-to-function is compatible with a void*
 >>>
 >>
 >> As I say, I have yet to see a situation where using void* for 
function pointers was more appropriate than using a function pointer 
type.  If the OS system calls or standard OS libraries makes it a 
requirement that function pointers are converted to or from void* for 
some calls, then of course you need to follow those requirements - it's 
the people who designed the interfaces that made questionable design 
choices.
 >>
 >
 > Nope, you're wrong.  You're dead wrong.  The world isn't built on C,
 > even though here in comp.lang.c we like to pretend it is.
 >
 > Several language environments allow function generation on the fly,
 > these functions need to be garbage collected.  Common Lisp is an
 > example, therefore comp.lang.lisp is added to this discussion.
 >
 > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.
 >
 > You will have to go out of your way to make a computer architecture
 > incompatible with garbage collected and heap allocated binary code,
 > something I've been told SBCL does internally [1] to create an archi-
 > tecture that has different
 >
 > *  sizeof ( void * ), and
 > *  sizeof ( void (*)( void ) ),
 >
 > and when you do that, I'll just claim you're making a /malicious
 > computer architecture/ and refuse to use it.
 >
 >
 > [1] I've not looked at the code, but told the garbage collector can
 > and will at least move the code around, if not collect it.

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

#671817 — But how can you deploy, when its ROM? (Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...])

Hi,

Well there are two viewpoint, the "client"
of the GPU, which is the CPU, and the "server"
of the GPU, which is the command processor

queue of the GPU device. So basically as
a CPU client I can write the memory area,
that is later mapped to my GPU code storage.

And this way have a compiler, even written
in Prolog, that compiles pi-WAM to my Hack VM,
that can then be then deployed to GPU.

You could also try the same with a Tiny
LISP VM. And a grown up LISP to act as
the compiler. Would be a similar exercise.

Have Fun!

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>  > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.
> 
>  > that has different
>  > *  sizeof ( void * ), and
>  > *  sizeof ( void (*)( void ) ),
> 
> Could indicate a data RAM and code ROM model.
> Which has then the advantage of:
> 
> Modern operating systems like Windows 11
> enforce strict Data Execution Prevention (DEP)
> (or NX/XD bit security features) to prevent
> malicious programs from injecting and executing
> code inside data-only memory regions.
> https://root-nation.com/en/soft-en/lifehacks/en-dep-windows-all-about/
> 
> I adopted data RAM and code ROM model for
> pi-WAM from Hack, which has the same separation:
> 
> Slide 58, Hack Computer
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Z_fxYmmRNXTkAzmZ6YMoX9NXZIRVCKiw/view
> 
> But my motivation was not Johnny Depp prevention.
> Rather the caching of GPUs. Because WGSL
> allows storage annotations read_write and
> 
> read. I use read_write for the data RAM
> of my Hack VM variant, and read for the
> code ROM of my Hack VM variant. You can
> 
> see that here, its open source:
> 
> @group(0) @binding(0) var<storage, read> code: array<i32>;
> @group(0) @binding(1) var<storage, read_write> state: array<i32>;
> 
> 11.4 Giga Lips with a Budget Laptop
> https://github.com/Jean-Luc-Picard-2021/gigabudget
> 
> Hope this Helps!
> 
> Bye
> 
> Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson schrieb:
>  > On 03/08/2026 6:28 PM, David Brown wrote:
>  >> On 03/08/2026 11:41, Richard Harnden wrote:
>  >>> On 03/08/2026 09:16, David Brown wrote:
>  >>
>  >>>> On most targets, function pointers are the same size as void* 
> pointers. But there are exceptions, with some small microcontrollers and 
> DSPs having different kinds of pointers with different sizes, depending 
> on the memory space involved.  I have yet to see a situation where there 
> was any reason for storing a function address in a "void*" rather than a 
> more appropriate typedef, such as :
>  >>>>
>  >>>>      typedef void (*FVoid)(void);
>  >>>
>  >>> dlsym requires that pointer-to-function is compatible with a void*
>  >>>
>  >>
>  >> As I say, I have yet to see a situation where using void* for 
> function pointers was more appropriate than using a function pointer 
> type.  If the OS system calls or standard OS libraries makes it a 
> requirement that function pointers are converted to or from void* for 
> some calls, then of course you need to follow those requirements - it's 
> the people who designed the interfaces that made questionable design 
> choices.
>  >>
>  >
>  > Nope, you're wrong.  You're dead wrong.  The world isn't built on C,
>  > even though here in comp.lang.c we like to pretend it is.
>  >
>  > Several language environments allow function generation on the fly,
>  > these functions need to be garbage collected.  Common Lisp is an
>  > example, therefore comp.lang.lisp is added to this discussion.
>  >
>  > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.
>  >
>  > You will have to go out of your way to make a computer architecture
>  > incompatible with garbage collected and heap allocated binary code,
>  > something I've been told SBCL does internally [1] to create an archi-
>  > tecture that has different
>  >
>  > *  sizeof ( void * ), and
>  > *  sizeof ( void (*)( void ) ),
>  >
>  > and when you do that, I'll just claim you're making a /malicious
>  > computer architecture/ and refuse to use it.
>  >
>  >
>  > [1] I've not looked at the code, but told the garbage collector can
>  > and will at least move the code around, if not collect it.

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

#671818 — Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU)

On 04/08/2026 12:18 AM, Mild Shock wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>  > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.
> 
>  > that has different
>  > *  sizeof ( void * ), and
>  > *  sizeof ( void (*)( void ) ),
> 
> Could indicate a data RAM and code ROM model.
> Which has then the advantage of:
> 
> Modern operating systems like Windows 11
> enforce strict Data Execution Prevention (DEP)
> (or NX/XD bit security features) to prevent
> malicious programs from injecting and executing
> code inside data-only memory regions.
> https://root-nation.com/en/soft-en/lifehacks/en-dep-windows-all-about/

I'm not looking up the specific API, but Win32 has interfaces to ask
the operating system for heap allocation with and without execution
permissions.

               This means, whatever your intentions, the operating still
gives you a void * that you're then supposed to turn into void(*)(void)
on your own.

               I don't know why we're discussing this in sci.physics.rel-
ativity, nor sci.math, but I'll just go with the flow for now.

> 
> I adopted data RAM and code ROM model for
> pi-WAM from Hack, which has the same separation:
> 
> Slide 58, Hack Computer
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Z_fxYmmRNXTkAzmZ6YMoX9NXZIRVCKiw/view
> 
> But my motivation was not Johnny Depp prevention.
> Rather the caching of GPUs. Because WGSL
> allows storage annotations read_write and
> 
> read. I use read_write for the data RAM
> of my Hack VM variant, and read for the
> code ROM of my Hack VM variant. You can
> 
> see that here, its open source:
> 
> @group(0) @binding(0) var<storage, read> code: array<i32>;
> @group(0) @binding(1) var<storage, read_write> state: array<i32>;
> 
> 11.4 Giga Lips with a Budget Laptop
> https://github.com/Jean-Luc-Picard-2021/gigabudget


Well, I only use my GPU for OpenGL 4.6, so I'll lot you do all the
work in CUDA.  Please enjoy!

-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social

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

#671819 — Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU)

Mild Shock wrote:

>  > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.
> 
>  > that has different *  sizeof ( void * ), and *  sizeof ( void (*)(
>  > void ) ),
> 
> Could indicate a data RAM and code ROM model.
> Which has then the advantage of:
> 
> Modern operating systems like Windows 11

you are insignificant, you dont know what this world maanifold is all 
about. Kiss my ass. I shit on swtzerland, a fictitious country of inbreed 
gays.

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

#671862 — Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU)

Am Montag000003, 03.08.2026 um 18:18 schrieb Mild Shock:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>  > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.
> 
>  > that has different
>  > *  sizeof ( void * ), and
>  > *  sizeof ( void (*)( void ) ),
> 
> Could indicate a data RAM and code ROM model.
> Which has then the advantage of:
> 
> Modern operating systems like Windows 11
> enforce strict Data Execution Prevention (DEP)
> (or NX/XD bit security features) to prevent
> malicious programs from injecting and executing
> code inside data-only memory regions.
> https://root-nation.com/en/soft-en/lifehacks/en-dep-windows-all-about/

That's imho not that 'modern', because already in the eighties Unix 
systems had 'Execution prevention' (of data), simply by putting 
programms in one part of the memory and data into a different one.

Data could not be executed, because the flag 'executable' was not set 
for their memory.

It was actually a 'bug', that earlier versions of current systems 
allowed execution of data.

...

TH

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

#671868 — Norton Commander and Norton Antivirus again? [AI Laptop Memory] (Was: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...])

Hi,

There is a relationship to recent AI Laptops
and how much memory they can access and/or
share with the GPU in accelerator mode.

A fine grained machanism did not exist for
budget laptops. Its a feature which a) needs
modern ( not older than ca. 20 years ) OS

and b) needs modern (not older than ca.
20 years) hardware.

Check for yourself:

NX bit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NX_bit

Executable-space protection
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executable-space_protection

So if you use an older PC not only use Norton
Commander, but better also Norton Antivirus. LoL
But the architecture of the OS and hardware

can be more complex, than to have a bit on the
physical memory page level. You might also organize
it via logical views, and combine it with

virtualization i.e. swapping to hard disks. Hard
and OS support varies as well there, how far
translation tables can manage such a bit effeciently.

See also:

3 GB barrier
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3_GB_barrier

Physical Address Extension (PAE),
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension

In as far the relationship to recent AI Laptops
is that for example Windows 10 32-bit editions
could only adress 4 GB. What surely helps are

64-bit editions. My Windows 11 AI Laptop has
32 GB total memory, and can share 16 GB with the
GPU. I didn't check yet how programming languages

such as JavaScript, Python and Java behave. Their
runtimes have usually an overlayed memory model.
And tagged pointers or compressed points can reduce

the available memory space. But LLM software when
used for local AI, usually tries to tap into
very large portions of memory, and recent trends

are virtualization of local LLMs:

Maximize throughput with PagedAttention. Advanced
scheduling and continuous batching ensure peak
GPU utilization.
https://vllm.ai/

Brain food on how to evolve pi-WAM and what
does the concept of GPUBuffer mean in WebGPU?
Mostlikely the logical model here is coprocessor

device bound memory, and the physical can
realize it via system memory sharing. But I wrote
about that already in my post:

But how can you deploy. when its ROM?

Bye

Thomas Heger schrieb:
> Am Montag000003, 03.08.2026 um 18:18 schrieb Mild Shock:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>  > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.
>>
>>  > that has different
>>  > *  sizeof ( void * ), and
>>  > *  sizeof ( void (*)( void ) ),
>>
>> Could indicate a data RAM and code ROM model.
>> Which has then the advantage of:
>>
>> Modern operating systems like Windows 11
>> enforce strict Data Execution Prevention (DEP)
>> (or NX/XD bit security features) to prevent
>> malicious programs from injecting and executing
>> code inside data-only memory regions.
>> https://root-nation.com/en/soft-en/lifehacks/en-dep-windows-all-about/
> 
> That's imho not that 'modern', because already in the eighties Unix 
> systems had 'Execution prevention' (of data), simply by putting 
> programms in one part of the memory and data into a different one.
> 
> Data could not be executed, because the flag 'executable' was not set 
> for their memory.
> 
> It was actually a 'bug', that earlier versions of current systems 
> allowed execution of data.
> 
> ...
> 
> TH

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

#671698 — Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity)

On 07/27/2026 01:41 AM, Mild Shock wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration,
> reached a significant milestone this summer.
>
> The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners
> to measure time, so forget Colorado.
>
> Bye
>
> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>>
>> So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of
>> time", in the micro, meso, and macro.
>>
>> Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory
>> in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with
>> regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time.
>>
>> About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's
>> similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has
>> about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli
>> Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis,
>> measuring time.
>>
>>
>> So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time,
>> and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space.
>>
>>
>> Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that,
>> it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that.
>>
>>
>> Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those
>> on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.
>>
>>
>


Well, like Einstein says, relativity is defined
by at least two different clocks -
might as well be three.



That's a good quote, I quote me on that.

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

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

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

csiph-web