Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #468129 > unrolled thread
| Started by | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-08-17 07:51 -0700 |
| Last post | 2018-08-20 07:41 -0700 |
| Articles | 6 on this page of 46 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
New explanation for the double slit experiment kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-17 07:51 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-08-17 16:58 +0200
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-17 09:22 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Sushika Imaki <kukih@wkkss.ki> - 2018-08-18 18:08 +0000
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-18 13:28 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Jed Sosebee <eue@eosgps.pn> - 2018-08-21 09:47 +0000
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 15:54 +0000
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-17 09:23 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 16:46 +0000
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 12:41 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-17 21:01 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 21:21 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Jed Sosebee <eue@eosgps.pn> - 2018-08-21 09:50 +0000
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 07:28 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Jed Sosebee <eue@eosgps.pn> - 2018-08-21 16:54 +0000
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 10:24 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-08-18 05:05 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-17 20:55 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 16:09 +0000
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-18 09:34 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 17:09 +0000
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 15:05 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Icano Bologna <ob@woccgn.cc> - 2018-08-19 15:48 +0000
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-19 14:35 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-08-19 19:21 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Jed Sosebee <eue@eosgps.pn> - 2018-08-20 12:07 +0000
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 08:57 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-20 18:00 +0200
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Jed Sosebee <eue@eosgps.pn> - 2018-08-21 09:51 +0000
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Lovu Biftek <ufeli@fupuks.cl> - 2018-08-17 19:19 +0000
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 14:03 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-17 14:18 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-08-17 18:22 -0500
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-17 20:38 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 21:09 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-19 05:22 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Lovu Biftek <ufeli@fupuks.cl> - 2018-08-18 11:29 +0000
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-17 21:06 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 21:12 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-18 22:22 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Icano Bologna <ob@woccgn.cc> - 2018-08-19 11:18 +0000
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-19 05:36 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Lovu Biftek <ufeli@fupuks.cl> - 2018-08-18 11:27 +0000
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 15:27 -0700
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-08-19 00:40 +0200
Re: New explanation for the double slit experiment Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 07:41 -0700
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
| From | Icano Bologna <ob@woccgn.cc> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-19 11:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <plbjn0$1vva$4@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #468313 |
Il giorno martedì JanPB ha scritto: >> What is there too catch up?....all experiments since then are still >> based on non-existing mathematical objects. > > This is complete garbage talk. You have to catch to several decades' > worth of EXPERIMENTAL (not mathematical) RESULTS. Never let a stream of data from an experiment destroy a consistent theory. This is the first thing you have to learn in physics.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-19 05:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ea0e635e-7aae-4a27-976e-e82d25aa3f8e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #468313 |
On Sunday, August 19, 2018 at 12:12:04 AM UTC-4, JanPB wrote: > On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 9:06:45 PM UTC-7, kenseto wrote: > > On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 5:03:04 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote: > > > On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 7:51:21 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote: > > > > The paper in the following link provides a new simple physical explanation for the weird results of the double slit experiment: > > > > http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015experiment.pdf > > > > > > > > This explanation rejects the convoluted and non-physical explanation of the Copenhagen explanation. > > > > > > You are several decades too late. You need to catch up on the experiments > > > performed since then. Also, the Copenhagen interpretation is something > > > you got stuck on. You need to learn MUCH more before attempting to write > > > anything like you're trying. It's a total waste of your time as it stands, > > > from start to finish. TOTAL. > > > > > > -- > > > Jan > > > > What is there too catch up?....all experiments since then are still based on non-existing mathematical objects. > > This is complete garbage talk. You have to catch to several decades' worth of > EXPERIMENTAL (not mathematical) RESULTS. Do you mean that several decades of experiments (not mathematical) results have gotten rid of such mathematical objects as probability waves, virtual particles, force messengers, time dilation, length contraction, constant light speed in all frames, flexible time....etc? I don’t think so. I think that you are bullshitting. > > > Model Mechanics is a real physical theory. It gives rise to a new theory of gravity that is unmatched by any model theory. > > It's garbage and a waste of time. > > -- > Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lovu Biftek <ufeli@fupuks.cl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-18 11:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pl8vqn$1c1$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #468171 |
JanPB wrote: > On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 7:51:21 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote: >> The paper in the following link provides a new simple physical >> explanation for the weird results of the double slit experiment: >> http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015experiment.pdf >> >> This explanation rejects the convoluted and non-physical explanation of >> the Copenhagen explanation. > > You are several decades too late. You need to catch up on the > experiments performed since then. Also, the Copenhagen interpretation is > something you got stuck on. You need to learn MUCH more before > attempting to write anything like you're trying. It's a total waste of > your time as it stands, from start to finish. TOTAL. You are so anti-competitive. The Cph interpretation is never been proved nor disproved. Simply, the setup premises for the test and experiments are antagonist mutual exclusive, absurd and impossible. THink again, stronger.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-18 15:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a6f2e0fb-0d4c-4884-bb10-f7938c1ed896@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #468129 |
On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 10:51:21 AM UTC-4, kenseto wrote: > The paper in the following link provides a new s NEW? you paper is 3 years old and still not published in any respectable journal. Please, Mr. Seto, stop deluding yourself. Ed.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-19 00:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <pla785$1k0$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #468304 |
Op 19-aug-2018 om 00:27 schreef Edward Prochak: > On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 10:51:21 AM UTC-4, kenseto wrote: >> The paper in the following link provides a new s > > NEW? you paper is 3 years old and still not published > in any respectable journal. Please, > Mr. Seto, stop deluding yourself. > > Ed. > On the contrary, please do NOT stop! Without you, apart from Ed Lake, who tends to take some time off once in a while, we wouldn't have anything worthwhile to laugh about on a regular basis. Please don't die upon us already! Dirk Vdm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-20 07:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7a30815a-28ef-49ed-aa59-6067ec78956c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #468306 |
On Saturday, August 18, 2018 at 6:40:08 PM UTC-4, Dirk Van de moortel wrote: > > On the contrary, please do NOT stop! > Without you, apart from Ed Lake, who tends to take > some time off once in a while, we wouldn't have > anything worthwhile to laugh about on a regular > basis. > Please don't die upon us already! > > Dirk Vdm Don't worry Dirk. There seems to be a steady stream of relativity deniers and ToE claimants. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web