Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #473779 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-10-02 09:47 +0100 |
| Last post | 2018-10-16 19:13 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 155 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 09:47 +0100
Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-02 04:20 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:21 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-02 06:02 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:12 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-02 12:39 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:08 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-07 08:40 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-07 07:22 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-07 14:42 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-07 17:41 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:19 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-02 06:56 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:00 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-02 07:12 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-02 07:14 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-02 07:12 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:15 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-02 08:49 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-02 13:31 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-03 06:06 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 06:09 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:05 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-03 07:14 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 15:38 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 16:43 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-03 08:51 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 16:06 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 09:17 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-04 07:24 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:25 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-04 08:53 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 19:22 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-04 14:38 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-04 21:47 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 22:03 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 08:30 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-05 04:26 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 15:01 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 08:11 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-06 08:32 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 20:20 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-07 07:19 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 19:19 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 01:00 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 21:40 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 16:45 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 17:10 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-02 09:15 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-02 09:18 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-03 06:41 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 19:06 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-04 07:52 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Hilton Packett <wod@wcotahr.ce> - 2018-10-02 20:28 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-03 03:32 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 05:18 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 05:06 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 10:51 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 09:58 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 03:19 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 12:28 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 12:44 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 05:57 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:05 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 09:16 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 19:36 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 18:59 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 19:53 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 21:56 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 04:45 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 00:06 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 09:58 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 02:46 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 10:03 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 03:31 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 12:21 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 11:49 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 05:42 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 14:46 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:25 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 09:41 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 18:26 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 11:45 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 07:15 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 06:39 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-05 00:31 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 06:53 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 08:51 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-05 00:58 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 12:17 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 14:54 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 08:10 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 19:17 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 20:20 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 05:37 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 09:17 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-07 04:57 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-07 04:59 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-07 05:39 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 20:36 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 22:59 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-04 07:13 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:25 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-04 09:00 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 12:33 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 05:38 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 11:30 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-03 06:18 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 13:41 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-03 20:01 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-03 20:00 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-04 14:28 -0400
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 06:32 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 06:44 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 09:03 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-07 08:59 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-07 07:33 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-07 16:37 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-08 12:30 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tc> - 2018-10-08 17:41 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-08 20:00 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-08 22:12 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 23:39 -0400
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-08 20:46 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-09 13:30 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-15 22:21 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-15 21:14 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-15 22:10 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-16 08:50 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-16 18:43 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-17 03:30 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 22:47 -0400
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-15 22:07 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-15 22:14 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-16 08:39 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-16 05:03 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 21:08 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-16 18:50 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-17 03:31 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 06:28 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 13:02 -0400
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 18:47 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-19 19:15 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-22 11:44 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-16 23:11 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-16 18:41 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-22 13:04 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-09 06:06 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-09 08:45 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-09 07:27 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-09 07:40 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-09 07:43 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-10 07:08 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tc> - 2018-10-09 14:04 +0000
Another Reason "Why the *Medium* Matters." Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 19:13 +0100
Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-06 08:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <78989995-902b-4ae8-b36e-1573508157de@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474259 |
On Saturday, October 6, 2018 at 11:01:52 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > > On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 6:03:33 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>> On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 3:22:29 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>>> On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 11:25:20 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>>>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 12:06:15 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 10:05:10 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 10:15:45 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 10:00:04 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 9:19:40 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The 'medium' for any wave is just the matter through which > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the wave travels, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The medium for SOME waves is... > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The medium for sound is the AIR and the medium for light is the “E-Matrix”. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The latter cannot be matter. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes it can. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Experiment says no. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Experiments say yes. > >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015experiment.pdf > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Experimental RESULTS already in hand say no. > >>>>>>>>>> Hypothetical experiments in the future don’t say anything until they are > >>>>>>>>>> actually done. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Radar gun uses variable light speed to detect the speed of moving car as follows: > >>>>>>>>> v=c-c' > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Again, the operation of a radar gun is completely compatible with the model > >>>>>>>> that light has constant speed. Therefore you cannot cite a radar gun as an > >>>>>>>> experimental application that FAVORS a model with variable light speed. And > >>>>>>>> since in your model not one calculation is available because you are unable > >>>>>>>> to produce one, then yours isn’t even a model that scientists would > >>>>>>>> acknowledge. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> v of a moving car= Lambda(frequency of source at rest wrt the > >>>>>>> observer)-Lambda( measured frequency of a source in a moving car) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> That is not a calculation. That is typing an equation. Do you know the > >>>>>> difference? > >>>>> > >>>>> It is a calculation....that’s how the radar gun works > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> A calculation involves taking real world numbers (that you look up) that > >>>> are appropriate for the case at hand, and you crunch the numbers. All > >>>> physicists do this. Einstein did this for relativity. He produced the > >>>> number for the precession of the perihelion of Mercury, for example. > >>>> Writing down an equation is not doing a calculation. Calculations produce > >>>> NUMBERS that can be compared to measured NUMBERS. > >>> > >>> What’s wrong with my calculations for the speed of of a moving car using the radar? > >>> > >> > >> You typed an equation. You did not take real world numbers (that you look > >> up) and you didn’t crunch the numbers to predict a VALUE that can be > >> measured. I honestly think you simply don’t know how to do this. > > > > I did take real number: > > c=Lambda(frequency of the source at rest with the observer) > > c’=Lambda(return frequency from the car) > > v_car=c-c’ > > All these are real measurable numbers. > > > > Those are variables. 25.3 m/s is a number. 2.239E-15 kg is a number. 43 > arcseconds per century is a number. Moron, you measure the variables and get a number. Gee you are stupid.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-06 20:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ppb5du$1cdc$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #474270 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > On Saturday, October 6, 2018 at 11:01:52 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>> On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 6:03:33 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>> On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 3:22:29 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>> On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 11:25:20 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 12:06:15 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 10:05:10 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 10:15:45 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 10:00:04 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 9:19:40 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The 'medium' for any wave is just the matter through which >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the wave travels, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The medium for SOME waves is... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The medium for sound is the AIR and the medium for light is the “E-Matrix”. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The latter cannot be matter. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes it can. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Experiment says no. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Experiments say yes. >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015experiment.pdf >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Experimental RESULTS already in hand say no. >>>>>>>>>>>> Hypothetical experiments in the future don’t say anything until they are >>>>>>>>>>>> actually done. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Radar gun uses variable light speed to detect the speed of moving car as follows: >>>>>>>>>>> v=c-c' >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Again, the operation of a radar gun is completely compatible with the model >>>>>>>>>> that light has constant speed. Therefore you cannot cite a radar gun as an >>>>>>>>>> experimental application that FAVORS a model with variable light speed. And >>>>>>>>>> since in your model not one calculation is available because you are unable >>>>>>>>>> to produce one, then yours isn’t even a model that scientists would >>>>>>>>>> acknowledge. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> v of a moving car= Lambda(frequency of source at rest wrt the >>>>>>>>> observer)-Lambda( measured frequency of a source in a moving car) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That is not a calculation. That is typing an equation. Do you know the >>>>>>>> difference? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is a calculation....that’s how the radar gun works >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> A calculation involves taking real world numbers (that you look up) that >>>>>> are appropriate for the case at hand, and you crunch the numbers. All >>>>>> physicists do this. Einstein did this for relativity. He produced the >>>>>> number for the precession of the perihelion of Mercury, for example. >>>>>> Writing down an equation is not doing a calculation. Calculations produce >>>>>> NUMBERS that can be compared to measured NUMBERS. >>>>> >>>>> What’s wrong with my calculations for the speed of of a moving car using the radar? >>>>> >>>> >>>> You typed an equation. You did not take real world numbers (that you look >>>> up) and you didn’t crunch the numbers to predict a VALUE that can be >>>> measured. I honestly think you simply don’t know how to do this. >>> >>> I did take real number: >>> c=Lambda(frequency of the source at rest with the observer) >>> c’=Lambda(return frequency from the car) >>> v_car=c-c’ >>> All these are real measurable numbers. >>> >> >> Those are variables. 25.3 m/s is a number. 2.239E-15 kg is a number. 43 >> arcseconds per century is a number. > > Moron, you measure the variables and get a number. Gee you are stupid. > No, Ken. It’s your equation, YOU put the numbers in for the variables and you get a number. That’s what Einstein did. That’s what all physicists do. For example, Einstein had a relativistic equation for the precession of the perihelion of Mercury. This formula involved the semi major axis, the period, and the eccentricity of Mercury’s orbit. So Einstein looked up those numbers and calculated with his equation. He got a number of 43 arc seconds per century. You see what real physicists do? The find a formula that involves some numbers already known, and the predict another number that can be measured. Just like Einstein did with relativity. Notice that you have not done that. Anywhere. -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-07 07:19 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3bb1cfef-3167-4cd7-bec9-5a1ec7ddf3f5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474306 |
On Saturday, October 6, 2018 at 4:20:19 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > > On Saturday, October 6, 2018 at 11:01:52 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>> On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 6:03:33 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>>> On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 3:22:29 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>>>>> On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 11:25:20 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 12:06:15 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 10:05:10 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 10:15:45 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 10:00:04 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 9:19:40 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The 'medium' for any wave is just the matter through which > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the wave travels, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The medium for SOME waves is... > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The medium for sound is the AIR and the medium for light is the “E-Matrix”. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The latter cannot be matter. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes it can. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Experiment says no. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Experiments say yes. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015experiment.pdf > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Experimental RESULTS already in hand say no. > >>>>>>>>>>>> Hypothetical experiments in the future don’t say anything until they are > >>>>>>>>>>>> actually done. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Radar gun uses variable light speed to detect the speed of moving car as follows: > >>>>>>>>>>> v=c-c' > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Again, the operation of a radar gun is completely compatible with the model > >>>>>>>>>> that light has constant speed. Therefore you cannot cite a radar gun as an > >>>>>>>>>> experimental application that FAVORS a model with variable light speed. And > >>>>>>>>>> since in your model not one calculation is available because you are unable > >>>>>>>>>> to produce one, then yours isn’t even a model that scientists would > >>>>>>>>>> acknowledge. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> v of a moving car= Lambda(frequency of source at rest wrt the > >>>>>>>>> observer)-Lambda( measured frequency of a source in a moving car) > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> That is not a calculation. That is typing an equation. Do you know the > >>>>>>>> difference? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> It is a calculation....that’s how the radar gun works > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> A calculation involves taking real world numbers (that you look up) that > >>>>>> are appropriate for the case at hand, and you crunch the numbers. All > >>>>>> physicists do this. Einstein did this for relativity. He produced the > >>>>>> number for the precession of the perihelion of Mercury, for example. > >>>>>> Writing down an equation is not doing a calculation. Calculations produce > >>>>>> NUMBERS that can be compared to measured NUMBERS. > >>>>> > >>>>> What’s wrong with my calculations for the speed of of a moving car using the radar? > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> You typed an equation. You did not take real world numbers (that you look > >>>> up) and you didn’t crunch the numbers to predict a VALUE that can be > >>>> measured. I honestly think you simply don’t know how to do this. > >>> > >>> I did take real number: > >>> c=Lambda(frequency of the source at rest with the observer) > >>> c’=Lambda(return frequency from the car) > >>> v_car=c-c’ > >>> All these are real measurable numbers. > >>> > >> > >> Those are variables. 25.3 m/s is a number. 2.239E-15 kg is a number. 43 > >> arcseconds per century is a number. > > > > Moron, you measure the variables and get a number. Gee you are stupid. > > > > No, Ken. It’s your equation, YOU put the numbers in for the variables and > you get a number. That’s what Einstein did. That’s what all physicists do. Idiot....so I look up the frequency and the wavelength of the source of the radar gun to get a number. What is your problem? > > For example, Einstein had a relativistic equation for the precession of the > perihelion of Mercury. This formula involved the semi major axis, the > period, and the eccentricity of Mercury’s orbit. So Einstein looked up > those numbers and calculated with his equation. He got a number of 43 arc > seconds per century. > > You see what real physicists do? The find a formula that involves some > numbers already known, and the predict another number that can be measured. > Just like Einstein did with relativity. > > Notice that you have not done that. Anywhere. > > -- > Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-07 19:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ppdm8g$1j56$4@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #474358 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > On Saturday, October 6, 2018 at 4:20:19 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>> On Saturday, October 6, 2018 at 11:01:52 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>> On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 6:03:33 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>> On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 3:22:29 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 11:25:20 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 12:06:15 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 10:05:10 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 10:15:45 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 10:00:04 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 9:19:40 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The 'medium' for any wave is just the matter through which >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the wave travels, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The medium for SOME waves is... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The medium for sound is the AIR and the medium for light is the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “E-Matrix”. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The latter cannot be matter. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes it can. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Experiment says no. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Experiments say yes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015experiment.pdf >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Experimental RESULTS already in hand say no. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hypothetical experiments in the future don’t say anything until they are >>>>>>>>>>>>>> actually done. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Radar gun uses variable light speed to detect the speed of moving car as >>>>>>>>>>>>> follows: >>>>>>>>>>>>> v=c-c' >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Again, the operation of a radar gun is completely compatible with the model >>>>>>>>>>>> that light has constant speed. Therefore you cannot cite a radar gun as an >>>>>>>>>>>> experimental application that FAVORS a model with variable light speed. And >>>>>>>>>>>> since in your model not one calculation is available because you are unable >>>>>>>>>>>> to produce one, then yours isn’t even a model that scientists would >>>>>>>>>>>> acknowledge. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> v of a moving car= Lambda(frequency of source at rest wrt the >>>>>>>>>>> observer)-Lambda( measured frequency of a source in a moving car) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> That is not a calculation. That is typing an equation. Do you know the >>>>>>>>>> difference? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It is a calculation....that’s how the radar gun works >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> A calculation involves taking real world numbers (that you look up) that >>>>>>>> are appropriate for the case at hand, and you crunch the numbers. All >>>>>>>> physicists do this. Einstein did this for relativity. He produced the >>>>>>>> number for the precession of the perihelion of Mercury, for example. >>>>>>>> Writing down an equation is not doing a calculation. Calculations produce >>>>>>>> NUMBERS that can be compared to measured NUMBERS. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What’s wrong with my calculations for the speed of of a moving car using the radar? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> You typed an equation. You did not take real world numbers (that you look >>>>>> up) and you didn’t crunch the numbers to predict a VALUE that can be >>>>>> measured. I honestly think you simply don’t know how to do this. >>>>> >>>>> I did take real number: >>>>> c=Lambda(frequency of the source at rest with the observer) >>>>> c’=Lambda(return frequency from the car) >>>>> v_car=c-c’ >>>>> All these are real measurable numbers. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Those are variables. 25.3 m/s is a number. 2.239E-15 kg is a number. 43 >>>> arcseconds per century is a number. >>> >>> Moron, you measure the variables and get a number. Gee you are stupid. >>> >> >> No, Ken. It’s your equation, YOU put the numbers in for the variables and >> you get a number. That’s what Einstein did. That’s what all physicists do. > > Idiot....so I look up the frequency and the wavelength of the source of > the radar gun to get a number. What is your problem? So do that. > >> >> For example, Einstein had a relativistic equation for the precession of the >> perihelion of Mercury. This formula involved the semi major axis, the >> period, and the eccentricity of Mercury’s orbit. So Einstein looked up >> those numbers and calculated with his equation. He got a number of 43 arc >> seconds per century. >> >> You see what real physicists do? The find a formula that involves some >> numbers already known, and the predict another number that can be measured. >> Just like Einstein did with relativity. >> >> Notice that you have not done that. Anywhere. >> >> -- >> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-05 01:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp6d3o$ghb$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #474115 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 3:22:29 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >> >> That is not a calculation. That is typing an equation. Do you know the >> >> difference? >> > It is a calculation....that'ss how the radar gun works >> A calculation involves taking real world numbers (that you look up) that >> are appropriate for the case at hand, and you crunch the numbers. All >> physicists do this. Einstein did this for relativity. He produced the >> number for the precession of the perihelion of Mercury, for example. >> Writing down an equation is not doing a calculation. Calculations produce >> NUMBERS that can be compared to measured NUMBERS. >What's wrong with my calculations for the speed of of a moving car using >the radar? There aren't any calculations, that's what's wrong. You provided an EQUATION for the speed of of a moving car. You did not provide any numbers, nor did you calculate any speed from the numbers you didn't provide. Here, here's an equation: z = y/x Here are some values to plug in the equation: x = -2 y = -6 Can you calculate z from the equation and the provided values of x and y?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 21:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <33b0ba60-6850-4008-9159-c59b69b90b7e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474101 |
On Thursday, 4 October 2018 21:22:29 UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: > kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > > On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 11:25:20 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 12:06:15 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 10:05:10 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>>>>> On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 10:15:45 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 10:00:04 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 9:19:40 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> The 'medium' for any wave is just the matter through which > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the wave travels, > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> The medium for SOME waves is... > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> The medium for sound is the AIR and the medium for light is the “E-Matrix”. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> The latter cannot be matter. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Yes it can. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Experiment says no. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Experiments say yes. > >>>>>>> http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015experiment.pdf > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Experimental RESULTS already in hand say no. > >>>>>> Hypothetical experiments in the future don’t say anything until they are > >>>>>> actually done. > >>>>> > >>>>> Radar gun uses variable light speed to detect the speed of moving car as follows: > >>>>> v=c-c' > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Again, the operation of a radar gun is completely compatible with the model > >>>> that light has constant speed. Therefore you cannot cite a radar gun as an > >>>> experimental application that FAVORS a model with variable light speed. And > >>>> since in your model not one calculation is available because you are unable > >>>> to produce one, then yours isn’t even a model that scientists would > >>>> acknowledge. > >>> > >>> v of a moving car= Lambda(frequency of source at rest wrt the > >>> observer)-Lambda( measured frequency of a source in a moving car) > >>> > >> > >> That is not a calculation. That is typing an equation. Do you know the > >> difference? > > > > It is a calculation....that’s how the radar gun works > > > > A calculation involves taking real world numbers (that you look up) that > are appropriate for the case at hand, and you crunch the numbers. All > physicists do this. Einstein did this for relativity. He produced the > number for the precession of the perihelion of Mercury, for example. > Writing down an equation is not doing a calculation. Calculations produce > NUMBERS that can be compared to measured NUMBERS. You're too stupid however to notice that these measured NUMBERS are also human-made.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 16:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp2rna$f2b$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #473954 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 10:05:10 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Experimental RESULTS already in hand say no. >> Hypothetical experiments in the future don't say anything until they are >> actually done. >Radar gun uses variable light speed to detect the speed of moving car as >follows: >v=c-c' No, it doesn't. Police radar uses the Doppler Effect to determine the speed of the target.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-02 17:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <pLMsD.356346$4w.154336@fx44.am4> |
| In reply to | #473807 |
>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> The 'medium' for any wave is just the matter through which >>>>> the wave travels, >>> The medium for sound is the AIR and the medium for light is the “E-Matrix”. Funny you should mention 'AIR' Ken. Did you know that 'AIR' was Maxwell primary example of a medium for electromagnetic waves ? >>>>> and in all cases the wave velocity is >>>>> relative to the medium. >>>>> Relativists ignore the medium, which is why they can't >>>>> unambiguously synchronize two clocks. keith stein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-02 09:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <120c718f-30ee-4d88-b738-51b3461cb868@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473822 |
On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 11:09:59 AM UTC-5, Keith Stein wrote: > >> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>> The 'medium' for any wave is just the matter through which > >>>>> the wave travels, > >>> The medium for sound is the AIR and the medium for light is the “E-Matrix”. > > Funny you should mention 'AIR' Ken. > Did you know that 'AIR' was Maxwell primary example of a medium for > electromagnetic waves ? > > >>>>> and in all cases the wave velocity is > >>>>> relative to the medium. > > >>>>> Relativists ignore the medium, which is why they can't > >>>>> unambiguously synchronize two clocks. > > keith stein https://arxiv.org/pdf/1807.08771.pdf The mass of sound Angelo Esposito, Rafael Krichevsky, and Alberto Nicolis Department of Physics, Center for Theoretical Physics, Columbia University, 538W 120th Street, New York, NY, 10027, USA We show that the commonly accepted statement that sound waves do not transport mass is only true at linear order. Using effective field theory techniques, we confirm the result found in [1] for zero-temperature superfluids, and extend it to the case of solids and ordinary fluids. We show that, in fact, sound waves do carry mass—in particular, gravitational mass. This implies that a sound wave not only is affected by gravity but also generates a tiny gravitational field. Our findings are valid for non-relativistic media as well, and could have intriguing experimental implications. PACS numbers: 46.40.Cd, 47.10.-g, 47.35.Rs, 47.37.+q Keywords: Phonons, Sound Waves, Superfluids, Fluids, Solids I. INTRODUCTION It is usually said that sound waves do not transport mass. They carry momentum and energy, and lead to temporary oscillations of the local mass density of any region they happen to pass through, but it is an accepted fact that the net mass transported by a sound wave vanishes. Here, we want to question this “fact”. A first indication that sound waves can in fact carry a nonzero net mass is contained in the results of [1]: there, using an effective point-particle theory, it was shown that phonons in zero-temperature superfluids have an effective coupling to gravity, which depends solely on their energy (or momentum) and on the superfluid’s equation of state. For ordinary equations of state, such a coupling corresponds to a negative effective gravitational mass: in the presence of an external gravitational field, such as that of Earth, a phonon’s trajectory bends upwards. Now, this effect is completely equivalent to standard refraction in the form of Snell’s law: in the presence of gravity, the pressure of the superfluid depends on depth, and so does the speed of sound. As a result, in the geometric acoustics limit sound waves do not propagate along straight lines. Because of this, one might be tempted to dismiss any interpretation of this phenomenon in terms of “gravitational mass”. However, since in the formalism of [1] the effect is due to a coupling with gravity in the effective Lagrangian or Hamiltonian of the phonon, the same coupling must affect the field equation for gravity. That is, the (tiny) effective gravitational mass of the phonon generates a (tiny) gravitational field. And the source of this gravitational field travels with the phonon. Thus, in a very physical sense, the phonon carries (negative) mass. Moreover, this is not due to the usual equivalence of mass and energy in relativity: the effect survives in the non-relativistic limit. And, finally, it is not a quantum effect, because the formalism of [1] applies unaltered to classical wave packets.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-02 09:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a2f042a3-6a5d-4a1e-8e3b-f35a2bbe783f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473822 |
On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 11:09:59 AM UTC-5, Keith Stein wrote: > >> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>> The 'medium' for any wave is just the matter through which > >>>>> the wave travels, > >>> The medium for sound is the AIR and the medium for light is the “E-Matrix”. > > Funny you should mention 'AIR' Ken. > Did you know that 'AIR' was Maxwell primary example of a medium for > electromagnetic waves ? > https://docs.google.com/document/d/13PJme9FAyVj-7VIRHvctd41w449BLr-IGwiokfUuD7g Negative Sonic Mass & The Big Bang & Gravity Waves https://arxiv.org/pdf/1807.08771.pdf The mass of sound Angelo Esposito, Rafael Krichevsky, and Alberto Nicolis Department of Physics, Center for Theoretical Physics, Columbia University, 538W 120th Street, New York, NY, 10027, USA M = −(ρm/cs)*(dcs/dP)*E -((((c^5) / (hbar * (G^2))) / c) * (c / ((c^7) / (hbar * (G^2)))) * ((6.5248925 ((kg m) / s)) * c)) = -2.17646986e-8 kg 1 planck length / (2.17647019e-8 kg * ((1 kg * G) / (c^2))) = 1 kg^-1 (0.5 planck length) / (3.71295774e-28 kg) = 2.1764702e-8 m / kg ((0.5 / (5^0.5)) * atomic mass units) / kg = 3.71307817e-28 ((6.6742965e-11 * pascals) / (((1 / (5^0.5)) * atomic mass unit) / (m^3))) / (c^2) = 1 6.6742965e-11 / gravitational constant = 1.00003244 Mass of Sound https://arxiv.org/pdf/1807.08771.pdf Bjerknes forces & inversion of sign http://cds.cern.ch/record/516564/files/0109005.pdf https://docs.google.com/document/d/14dGOjOuRXXIBSg-0N-vBovhwDCnrMbBioONasYH9FG0 https://docs.google.com/document/d/13PJme9FAyVj-7VIRHvctd41w449BLr-IGwiokfUuD7g https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedmann_equations#Density_parameter From: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1807.08771.pdf > >>>>> and in all cases the wave velocity is > >>>>> relative to the medium. > > >>>>> Relativists ignore the medium, which is why they can't > >>>>> unambiguously synchronize two clocks. > > keith stein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 06:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d3a2075a-c044-41f9-8dc0-2e8167a039a9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473822 |
On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 12:09:59 PM UTC-4, Keith Stein wrote: > >> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>> The 'medium' for any wave is just the matter through which > >>>>> the wave travels, > >>> The medium for sound is the AIR and the medium for light is the “E-Matrix”. > > Funny you should mention 'AIR' Ken. > Did you know that 'AIR' was Maxwell primary example of a medium for > electromagnetic waves ? He lumped AIR as the aether. It is not. There is no AIR in the vacuum of space and light from the sun and the stars still manage to reach the earth. The Doppler shift along with the assumption of universal wavelength of the source give variable light speeds. BTW that’s how the radar gun works. > > >>>>> and in all cases the wave velocity is > >>>>> relative to the medium. > > >>>>> Relativists ignore the medium, which is why they can't > >>>>> unambiguously synchronize two clocks. > > keith stein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 19:06 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <jy7tD.10177$PI.7017@fx25.am4> |
| In reply to | #473930 |
On 03/10/2018 14:41, kenseto wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 12:09:59 PM UTC-4, Keith Stein wrote:
>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> The 'medium' for any wave is just the matter through which
>>>>>>> the wave travels,
>>>>> The medium for sound is the AIR and the medium for light is the “E-Matrix”.
Thank you for that suggestion, Mr.Seto, but i myself will continue
firmly in my current belief when light passes through AIR
THE MEDIUM IS AIR.
>> Funny you should mention 'AIR' Ken.
>> Did you know that 'AIR' was Maxwell primary example of a medium for
>> electromagnetic waves ?
>
> He lumped AIR as the aether.
Maxwell just used the word "air",
he makes not one mention of "aether"
in his very long "Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism" eh!
> It is not. There is no AIR in the vacuum of space
BUT there is still HYDROGEN Ken, and when light passes through HYDROGEN
THE MEDIUM IS HYDROGEN
Do hope that is clear to you now Mr.Seto,
When you understand that
you will understand
how clocks CAN BE SYNCHRONIZED exactly.
So Mr.Seto,
What i am really saying here
is that you can take your "E-Matrix"
and stick it ...............
where the Sun don't shine eh!
keith stein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 07:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <61559f6c-6100-4ea1-af97-22c4da29c2d2@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473981 |
On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 2:06:09 PM UTC-4, Keith Stein wrote: > On 03/10/2018 14:41, kenseto wrote: > > On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 12:09:59 PM UTC-4, Keith Stein wrote: > >>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>>>>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>>>> The 'medium' for any wave is just the matter through which > >>>>>>> the wave travels, > > >>>>> The medium for sound is the AIR and the medium for light is the “E-Matrix”. > > Thank you for that suggestion, Mr.Seto, but i myself will continue > firmly in my current belief when light passes through AIR > THE MEDIUM IS AIR. > > >> Funny you should mention 'AIR' Ken. > >> Did you know that 'AIR' was Maxwell primary example of a medium for > >> electromagnetic waves ? > > > > He lumped AIR as the aether. > > Maxwell just used the word "air", > he makes not one mention of "aether" > in his very long “Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism" eh! He did not exclude the aether. > > > > It is not. There is no AIR in the vacuum of space > > BUT there is still HYDROGEN Ken, and when light passes through HYDROGEN > THE MEDIUM IS HYDROGEN Maxwell did not say that the medium for light in the interstellar space is HYDROGEN....you make this up. > > Do hope that is clear to you now Mr.Seto, > When you understand that > you will understand > how clocks CAN BE SYNCHRONIZED exactly. Clocks in relative motion cannot be synchronized. Why? Because they accumulate clock seconds at different rates. > > > So Mr.Seto, > What i am really saying here > is that you can take your "E-Matrix" > and stick it ............... You can take your rantings and stick it......eh!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Hilton Packett <wod@wcotahr.ce> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-02 20:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp0kdq$s6$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #473803 |
kenseto wrote: > On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 9:19:40 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: >> > The 'medium' for any wave is just the matter through which the wave >> > travels, >> >> The medium for SOME waves is... > > The medium for sound is the AIR and the medium for light is the > “E-Matrix”. Both incorrect. The medium for sound can be anything. The latter as a subset, may appear correct. It depends on the mechanism presented.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 03:32 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <pp167r$83e$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #473844 |
Hilton Packett <wod@wcotahr.ce> Wrote in message: > kenseto wrote: > >> >> The medium for sound is the AIR and the medium for light is the >> “E-Matrix”. > > Both incorrect. The medium for sound can be anything. The latter as a > subset, may appear correct. It depends on the mechanism presented. > The idea of medium for light was coined in ancient time when matter and light were thought to be continuous. Now, the idea is as obsolete as the continuity idea. -- Libor Striz aka Poutnik ( a pilgrim/wanderer/wayfarer) "Humour is the only effective weapon against stupidity." Miloš Forman ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 05:18 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <RqXsD.462708$1x.448515@fx22.am4> |
| In reply to | #473873 |
On 03/10/2018 02:32, Libor Striz wrote: > The idea of medium for light was coined in ancient time when > matter and light were thought to be continuous. > > Now, the idea is as obsolete as the continuity idea. Do you consider all of classical physics to be obsolete Mr.Striz? Maxwell's electromagnetic theory is indeed a macroscopic theory in which the medium is treated as continuous,but it is just as relevant today as the day that he firstnwrote it. Electromagnetic waves travel with a speed which is appropriate to, and relative to, the macroscopic medium that they pass through. I rather think all waves behave like that in fact. I mean it would be silly to talk of the speed of a water waves between water molecules, but no one has given up on the concept of water waves eh! keith stein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 05:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp1ioh$vhm$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #473882 |
Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> writes: >Do you consider all of classical physics to be obsolete Mr.Striz? Of course it isn't. Fizeau stumbled across an effect of special relativity way back in 1851 when he discovered the speed of light is not c/n relative to moving water. I'm sure that caused Maxwell to scratch his head.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 10:51 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vi0tD.633349$zc1.585247@fx10.am4> |
| In reply to | #473883 |
On 03/10/2018 06:06, Michael Moroney wrote: > Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> writes: > >> Do you consider all of classical physics to be obsolete Mr.Striz? > > Of course it isn't. Fizeau stumbled across an effect of special relativity > way back in 1851 when he discovered the speed of light is not c/n relative > to moving water. I'm sure that caused Maxwell to scratch his head. So you choose to accept Fizeau's bullshit and reject Maxwell's theory. I can't really blame you Michael, because that is indeed what the whole physic's establishment has been doing for the last 100 years. It would be laughable, if it wasn't so tragic eh! keith stein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 09:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp23r8$7ps$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #473912 |
Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: > On 03/10/2018 06:06, Michael Moroney wrote: >> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> Do you consider all of classical physics to be obsolete Mr.Striz? >> >> Of course it isn't. Fizeau stumbled across an effect of special relativity >> way back in 1851 when he discovered the speed of light is not c/n relative >> to moving water. I'm sure that caused Maxwell to scratch his head. > > So you choose to accept Fizeau's bullshit and reject Maxwell's theory. > I can't really blame you Michael, because that is indeed what the whole > physic's establishment has been doing for the last 100 years. It would > be laughable, if it wasn't so tragic eh! > > keith stein > Experiments trump theoretical hypotheses every single time. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 03:19 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9cf3a1bf-10f5-44b9-89ee-2cda0bbe0768@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473913 |
On Wednesday, 3 October 2018 11:58:02 UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Experiments trump theoretical hypotheses every single time. If the theoretical hypothesis above was true experiments would trump it. But it's not, so idiots like you continue to spread it against obvious facts.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web