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

Groups > sci.physics > #555934 > unrolled thread

For meteorology author James McGill | Index of Refraction

Started bySam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com>
First post2016-02-23 13:02 -0600
Last post2016-02-23 17:37 -0800
Articles 7 — 5 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  For meteorology author James McGill | Index of Refraction Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 13:02 -0600
    Re: For meteorology author James McGill | Index of Refraction James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 11:30 -0800
      Re: For meteorology author James McGill | Index of Refraction Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 15:16 -0600
        Re: For meteorology author James McGill | Index of Refraction Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-23 16:53 -0600
          Re: For meteorology author James McGill | Index of Refraction jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-24 00:54 +0000
    waves refract; refraction does not effect zero-dimensional rocktons (Newtonian b.s noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 17:05 -0800
      mister R. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-02-23 17:37 -0800

#555934 — For meteorology author James McGill | Index of Refraction

FromSam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-23 13:02 -0600
SubjectFor meteorology author James McGill | Index of Refraction
Message-ID<c7qdncLnLO1NMVHLnZ2dnUU7-cednZ2d@giganews.com>
   For meteorology author James McGill | Index of Refraction

   Water vapor (gas)  1.000261
   Water (liquid)     1.333
   Water Ice (solid)  1.31

   James, if you are unsure of the physical state, just measure the
   index of refraction. You should take a class in meteorology.



-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#555945

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-23 11:30 -0800
Message-ID<d429e2d6-118d-4d31-ac2d-5d5f71d33606@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#555934
On Tuesday, February 23, 2016 at 11:02:44 AM UTC-8, Sam Wormley wrote:
> For meteorology author James McGill | Index of Refraction
> 
>    Water vapor (gas)  1.000261
>    Water (liquid)     1.333
>    Water Ice (solid)  1.31

I'm not saying these are wrong, IDK.  But, if you assume without verification you are a fool.  

The world is full of fools who produce scales without knowing that water is tricky.

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

#556007

FromSam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-23 15:16 -0600
Message-ID<QsedndTmz4eCUVHLnZ2dnUU7-X-dnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#555945
On 2/23/16 1:30 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 23, 2016 at 11:02:44 AM UTC-8, Sam Wormley wrote:
>> For meteorology author James McGill | Index of Refraction
>>
>>     Water vapor (gas)  1.000261
>>     Water (liquid)     1.333
>>     Water Ice (solid)  1.31
>
> I'm not saying these are wrong, IDK.  But, if you assume without verification you are a fool.
>
> The world is full of fools who produce scales without knowing that water is tricky.
>

   Hmmm -- "water is tricky" sounds like TreBerT.

-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

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

#556033

FromSergio <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-02-23 16:53 -0600
Message-ID<naintu$mo7$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#556007
On 2/23/2016 3:16 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 2/23/16 1:30 PM, James McGinn wrote:
>> On Tuesday, February 23, 2016 at 11:02:44 AM UTC-8, Sam Wormley wrote:
>>> For meteorology author James McGill | Index of Refraction
>>>
>>>     Water vapor (gas)  1.000261
>>>     Water (liquid)     1.333
>>>     Water Ice (solid)  1.31
>>
>> I'm not saying these are wrong, IDK.  But, if you assume without
>> verification you are a fool.
>>
>> The world is full of fools who produce scales without knowing that
>> water is tricky.
>>
>
>    Hmmm -- "water is tricky" sounds like TreBerT.
>

laundry dryers magically disappear liquid water out of clothes !

very tricky stuff indeed !

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

#556074

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2016-02-24 00:54 +0000
Message-ID<8ibvpc-v3e.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#556033
Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> wrote:
> On 2/23/2016 3:16 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
>> On 2/23/16 1:30 PM, James McGinn wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, February 23, 2016 at 11:02:44 AM UTC-8, Sam Wormley wrote:
>>>> For meteorology author James McGill | Index of Refraction
>>>>
>>>>     Water vapor (gas)  1.000261
>>>>     Water (liquid)     1.333
>>>>     Water Ice (solid)  1.31
>>>
>>> I'm not saying these are wrong, IDK.  But, if you assume without
>>> verification you are a fool.
>>>
>>> The world is full of fools who produce scales without knowing that
>>> water is tricky.
>>>
>>
>>    Hmmm -- "water is tricky" sounds like TreBerT.
>>
> 
> laundry dryers magically disappear liquid water out of clothes !
> 
> very tricky stuff indeed !

Why do ice cubes left in the freezer slowly disappear?

It must be magic...

-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#556076 — waves refract; refraction does not effect zero-dimensional rocktons (Newtonian b.s

FromnoTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-23 17:05 -0800
Subjectwaves refract; refraction does not effect zero-dimensional rocktons (Newtonian b.s
Message-ID<446d57ab-a091-4210-8ca1-36ef14a63d4d@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#555934
1.3 for water & ice,
1.0 for vapor, just like air's; but,
1.0003 is gOOd for what ales you (hic

> 
>    Water vapor (gas)  1.000261
>    Water (liquid)     1.333
>    Water Ice (solid)  1.31
> 
>    James, if you are unsure of the physical state, just measure the
>    index of refraction. You should take a class in meteorology.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
> to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
> community, and physics-related social issues.

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

#556085 — mister R.

FromnoTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-23 17:37 -0800
Subjectmister R.
Message-ID<c09264d6-1d27-4059-a347-c3ca219bb6ba@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#556076
or, ten-thousand-and-three ten-thousandths (or,
a hundred-hundred-and-three hundred-hundredths;
there are a hundred times as many nines, as elevens,
on the scale of that guy

> 1.3 for water & ice,
> 1.0 for vapor, just like air's; but,
> 1.0003 is gOOd for what ales you (hic

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web