Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #567488 > unrolled thread
| Started by | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-04-02 09:27 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-04-04 11:58 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 77 — 9 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Non-composites never seen before john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 09:27 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 13:33 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 10:19 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 09:20 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 11:54 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-04 16:58 +0000
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 13:52 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 21:33 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 06:54 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 05:26 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 09:51 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 05:30 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 05:55 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 06:06 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 09:53 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 09:16 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 10:28 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 17:09 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 10:28 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 10:51 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 11:23 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 15:16 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 15:06 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 15:20 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 15:56 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 17:09 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 09:56 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 17:10 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 15:36 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 16:09 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-06 02:17 +0000
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 07:15 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 22:08 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 07:13 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 05:37 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 05:48 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 07:52 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 06:03 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 06:17 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 06:21 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 08:35 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 08:32 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 06:38 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 09:10 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 07:14 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 08:20 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 08:53 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 11:00 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 13:19 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 22:40 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-06 18:55 +0000
Re: Non-composites never seen before HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 12:20 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 16:08 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 10:28 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 09:47 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 22:14 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 07:27 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 05:47 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 10:20 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 09:45 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 11:10 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 10:56 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 15:17 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 17:10 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 09:42 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 17:10 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 22:11 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 07:25 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 10:11 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 09:41 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 11:07 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 10:55 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 15:15 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 13:46 -0500
Re: Non-composites never seen before benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 23:24 -0400
Re: Non-composites never seen before Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-04-04 12:11 -0700
Re: Non-composites never seen before Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 11:58 -0500
Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 Next page →
| From | Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 11:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d0ab7eb1-12c3-4247-a735-72269f2ca1ec@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #568060 |
On Tuesday, April 5, 2016 at 1:51:31 PM UTC-4, HVAC wrote: > Maple Loops says > - show quoted text - > That galaxies as points on an expanding balloon, spherical of course, > like the way all ideal cows are, always seemed like a magician's tool > to distract attention from what is really going on. It's also funny > weird, the(y)TheThemScientistPhysicists always return to that one > imagery. As it happens to be, magicians do use a lot of balloons too. > Coincidence? Me thinks not... Conspiracy? Me not allowed to thinks that. > > Lecturing Prof Sam Worm Liars (Early Monday and Late Friday Classes): > Hey my pals, just because most galaxies are colliding with eachother, > here see our local galactic crowd, and see our latest fancy time fast > forwarded CGIs, wow what a nice shade of blue that, simulations of > there inevitable collisions... see all that. See The Show! That > doesn't mean that all galactic scale points are not expanding away > from one another like on a hot air balloon. Get real Real REAL! > --------------- > > The utter stupidity shown by Maple Lips, BJ and John on their > failure to understand expansion of the universe is breathtaking. Looky here HeilHVAC has come out of his closest short enough to hand out grades where none are warranted. Btw HVAC... Are Maple Loops and Maple Lips some same one individual in your Universe? Or any Universe? > Why do they find the concept of an expanding universe so difficult > to comprehend? Simple, I comprehend it perfectly. Need enhanced CGI brainScreenShots@#? KookHVAC, still waiting to read where and what you studied in College. > There has to be some underlying kook notion at play here. Is that some sort of underlying expanding inflated notion, KookHVAC? -- Mahipal “IPMM... माहिपाल ७६३८: Teacher teach me Me ME wh(y) The Universe Works?!”
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 15:16 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <EaUMy.3303$ZI.271@fx42.iad> |
| In reply to | #568066 |
On 04/05/2016 02:23 PM, Mahipal wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 5, 2016 at 1:51:31 PM UTC-4, HVAC wrote:
>> Maple Loops says
>> - show quoted text -
>> That galaxies as points on an expanding balloon, spherical of course,
>> like the way all ideal cows are, always seemed like a magician's tool
>> to distract attention from what is really going on. It's also funny
>> weird, the(y)TheThemScientistPhysicists always return to that one
>> imagery. As it happens to be, magicians do use a lot of balloons too.
>> Coincidence? Me thinks not... Conspiracy? Me not allowed to thinks that.
>>
>> Lecturing Prof Sam Worm Liars (Early Monday and Late Friday Classes):
>> Hey my pals, just because most galaxies are colliding with eachother,
>> here see our local galactic crowd, and see our latest fancy time fast
>> forwarded CGIs, wow what a nice shade of blue that, simulations of
>> there inevitable collisions... see all that. See The Show! That
>> doesn't mean that all galactic scale points are not expanding away
>> from one another like on a hot air balloon. Get real Real REAL!
>> ---------------
>>
>> The utter stupidity shown by Maple Lips, BJ and John on their
>> failure to understand expansion of the universe is breathtaking.
>
> Looky here HeilHVAC has come out of his closest short enough to hand
> out grades where none are warranted. Btw HVAC... Are Maple Loops and
> Maple Lips some same one individual in your Universe? Or any Universe?
>
>> Why do they find the concept of an expanding universe so difficult
>> to comprehend?
>
> Simple, I comprehend it perfectly. Need enhanced CGI brainScreenShots@#?
> KookHVAC, still waiting to read where and what you studied in College.
There is no college, maple loops. It's all fantasy like everything else
he says. HVAC just forgot to take the Krell brain boost is all.
>> There has to be some underlying kook notion at play here.
>
> Is that some sort of underlying expanding inflated notion, KookHVAC?
>
> -- Mahipal “IPMM... माहिपाल ७६३८: Teacher teach me Me ME wh(y) The Universe Works?!”
>
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 15:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <21UMy.2581$ja4.439@fx11.iad> |
| In reply to | #568060 |
On 04/05/2016 01:51 PM, HVAC wrote:
> Maple Loops says
> - show quoted text -
> That galaxies as points on an expanding balloon, spherical of course,
> like the way all ideal cows are, always seemed like a magician's tool
> to distract attention from what is really going on. It's also funny
> weird, the(y)TheThemScientistPhysicists always return to that one
> imagery. As it happens to be, magicians do use a lot of balloons too.
> Coincidence? Me thinks not... Conspiracy? Me not allowed to thinks that.
>
> Lecturing Prof Sam Worm Liars (Early Monday and Late Friday Classes):
> Hey my pals, just because most galaxies are colliding with eachother,
> here see our local galactic crowd, and see our latest fancy time fast
> forwarded CGIs, wow what a nice shade of blue that, simulations of
> there inevitable collisions... see all that. See The Show! That
> doesn't mean that all galactic scale points are not expanding away
> from one another like on a hot air balloon. Get real Real REAL!
> ---------------
>
> The utter stupidity shown by Maple Lips, BJ and John on their failure to understand expansion of the universe is breathtaking.
>
> Why do they find the concept of an expanding universe so difficult to comprehend?
>
> There has to be some underlying kook notion at play here.
HVAC knows no math. HVAC knows no science. All he knows is wrestling and
TV. He's a "wordsmith" embarrassed because he was fired for having Gay
sex on the job. Why are you listening to him. Neither he nor Wormley are
willing to discuss physics here because they know nothing. Cripes! As
dumb as Odd is, he's at least still willing to debate!
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 15:20 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <feUMy.3356$ZI.1795@fx42.iad> |
| In reply to | #568049 |
On 04/05/2016 12:16 PM, john wrote:
> Odd's "uniform expansion" is only
> possible for a spherical wavefront,
> And only at one particular radius-
> smaller expand less, larger expand
> more.
> Yes, it works for dots on a balloon-
> kind of- if you don't measure through
> the curvature too far, and if you only
> consider the surface, and only
> neighbouring dots.
> It's amazing what some people will hold
> out as evidence/explanation!
> And it can't work for more than one
> Center. Blow up another balloon and
> record where your dots go, mr scientist
>
Odd says he never mentioned balloons, John. That means he can't even
understand this half-baked explanation let alone the implications of it.
Odd is into infinitely long rods which he is sure exist.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 15:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ne18q5$1e7j$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #568099 |
On 4/5/2016 2:20 PM, benj wrote: > On 04/05/2016 12:16 PM, john wrote: >> Odd's "uniform expansion" is only >> possible for a spherical wavefront, >> And only at one particular radius- >> smaller expand less, larger expand >> more. >> Yes, it works for dots on a balloon- >> kind of- if you don't measure through >> the curvature too far, and if you only >> consider the surface, and only >> neighbouring dots. >> It's amazing what some people will hold >> out as evidence/explanation! >> And it can't work for more than one >> Center. Blow up another balloon and >> record where your dots go, mr scientist >> > Odd says he never mentioned balloons, John. That's right. > That means he can't even > understand this half-baked explanation let alone the implications of it. Bullshit. It means I don't choose to use it as an explanation because people like you get hung up on embedding in higher dimensions, when this has nothing to do with uniform expansion. > Odd is into infinitely long rods which he is sure exist. Read my last explanation to John where I talked about a long, long rod, a plate and a lattice. Not a whisper about infinite there. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 17:09 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ne1d3h$1m6v$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #568049 |
On 4/5/2016 11:16 AM, john wrote: > Odd's "uniform expansion" is only > possible for a spherical wavefront, There's no wavefront. It is a UNIFORM expansion. > And only at one particular radius- > smaller expand less, larger expand > more. Pay attention, John. Uniform expansion rate means that the rate between ADJACENT markers is the same, regardless which pair of ADJACENT markers you choose. Choose two ADJACENT markers over here and they rate at which they recede from each other will be the same as the rate at which two other ADJACENT markers over there recede from each other. This just shows that it is perfectly logically consistent to have anything 1-D, 2-D, 3-D undergoing uniform expansion. > Yes, it works for dots on a balloon- > kind of- if you don't measure through > the curvature too far, and if you only > consider the surface, and only > neighbouring dots. > It's amazing what some people will hold > out as evidence/explanation! > And it can't work for more than one > Center. Blow up another balloon and > record where your dots go, mr scientist > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 09:56 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <luPMy.667$JM6.231@fx44.iad> |
| In reply to | #568022 |
On 04/05/2016 08:30 AM, john wrote:
> Ben was getting down to it, OdD;
>
> Equal Universal expansion is an impossibility.
> Think about it.
> Your spots on the balloon's surface
> retreat equally from each other. One
> layer down, not so much.
> Near the center, they barely move.
> So.
> How does EVERYTHING retreat equally
> from each other?
> I suggest that you actually try to model
> this concept, Odd.
> Logically.
> This "universal expansion" concept.
> It can be shown to be logically impossible.
"Logically impossible" is no problem for Odd or HVAC. In their world if
they can imagine it, it is therefore true in the real world.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 17:10 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ne1d56$1m6v$9@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #568034 |
On 4/5/2016 8:56 AM, benj wrote: > On 04/05/2016 08:30 AM, john wrote: >> Ben was getting down to it, OdD; >> >> Equal Universal expansion is an impossibility. >> Think about it. >> Your spots on the balloon's surface >> retreat equally from each other. One >> layer down, not so much. >> Near the center, they barely move. >> So. >> How does EVERYTHING retreat equally >> from each other? >> I suggest that you actually try to model >> this concept, Odd. >> Logically. >> This "universal expansion" concept. >> It can be shown to be logically impossible. > > "Logically impossible" is no problem for Odd or HVAC. In their world if > they can imagine it, it is therefore true in the real world. If it is imaginable, it is not logically impossible, is it? Being logically possible does not mean that it exists in the true world. Lots of things are LOGICALLY POSSIBLE even if experiment shows it does not happen. I'll give you an example: Magnetic monopoles. Nothing logically impossible about them. It appears they don't exist anyway. So does that mean they're suddenly logically impossible? Let's take another example. Hitler's grandchildren. Logically impossible? Of course not. Do they exist? No. How about a rod that happens to be EXACTLY 2 meters long? Logically impossible? No. Does it exist? Probably not. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 15:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8183c0b3-377b-4bb9-9be3-e52cb18ad10b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #568130 |
Odd You poor guy! It can be done in one dimension, yes. But not two. And not three. However hard you imagine. And even in one dimension, a value x marks from where you start keeping track must move it's own change plus the change of all the other marks each time- not just its own. You're lucky to see it the next day- you must be moving with it- at perhaps many times the speed of light compared to other marks not that far away.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-05 16:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <dcd879ff-7690-487c-84ab-088110195c0d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #568135 |
Now, Odd. Let's look at two dimensions. The X-Y coordinates. Simplest possible case:three markers- one at (0,0) one at (1,0) one at (0,1) Now cause them to all double their distance from each other: for simplicity, keep one at (0,0) one goes to (2,0) one goes to (0,2) Fine. Except. Oh oh! Their distances started at 1, 1, and root 2 apart, but they didn't all double!! Now they're 2, 2, and root 8!! Root 8 is not 2 root 2, Odd!! What happened??
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-06 02:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ne1ris$bf1$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #568141 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >Now, Odd. >Let's look at two dimensions. >The X-Y coordinates. >Simplest possible case:three markers- >one at (0,0) >one at (1,0) >one at (0,1) >Now cause them to all double their >distance from each other: >for simplicity, keep one at (0,0) >one goes to (2,0) >one goes to (0,2) >Fine. >Except. >Oh oh! >Their distances started at 1, 1, and root 2 >apart, but they didn't all double!! >Now they're 2, 2, and root 8!! >Root 8 is not 2 root 2, Odd!! Yes it is. (2*sqrt(2))^2 = 2^2 * sqrt(2)^2 = 2^2 * 2 = 4*2 = 8. (sqrt(8))^2 = 8.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-06 07:15 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ne2ul2$70h$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #568141 |
On 4/5/2016 6:09 PM, john wrote: > Now, Odd. > Let's look at two dimensions. > The X-Y coordinates. > Simplest possible case:three markers- > one at (0,0) > one at (1,0) > one at (0,1) > Now cause them to all double their > distance from each other: > for simplicity, keep one at (0,0) > one goes to (2,0) > one goes to (0,2) > Fine. > > Except. > > Oh oh! > > Their distances started at 1, 1, and root 2 > apart, but they didn't all double!! > Now they're 2, 2, and root 8!! > Root 8 is not 2 root 2, Odd!! Oh dear, John, yes it is. Root 8 is Root (2 * 2 * 2) = Root (2^2 * 2) = Root 2^2 * Root 2 = 2 * Root(2). So now I understand a little why you don't like math in physics books. > What happened?? > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-09 22:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b84160a2-4680-4c48-b8bf-7f652bc7b6c7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #568230 |
one over the secondroot of two, is the secondroot of one half (about 0.71 > Oh dear, John, yes it is. Root 8 is Root (2 * 2 * 2) > = Root (2^2 * 2) = Root 2^2 * Root 2 = 2 * Root(2). > > So now I understand a little why you don't like math in physics books. > > > What happened?? > > > > > -- > Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-06 07:13 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ne2ugc$70h$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #568135 |
On 4/5/2016 5:36 PM, john wrote: > Odd > You poor guy! > It can be done in one dimension, yes. > But not two. Oh yes, it can. I showed you how! > And not three. Oh yes, it can. I showed you how! > However hard you imagine. > > And even in one dimension, a value x marks from > where you start keeping track must move > it's own change plus the change of all the > other marks each time- not just its own. > You're lucky to see it the next day- you must > be moving with it Yes, of course you're moving with it. What makes some other point the "magic" point that stays at rest relative to you?? > - at perhaps many times > the speed of light compared to other marks > not that far away. > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-06 05:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6b61dc96-b584-4487-8aa3-d7a6e0061c5c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #568229 |
Odd wrote "Yes, of course you're moving with it. What makes some other point the "magic" point that stays at rest relative to you?? " Okay Odd. So space is expanding. Universally. Which direction is it going?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-06 05:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <af8fb390-3423-42eb-9ab3-4146d1d82af4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #568235 |
john Odd wrote "Yes, of course you're moving with it. What makes some other point the "magic" point that stays at rest relative to you?? " Okay Odd. So space is expanding. Universally. Which direction is it going? ------------ Lol! John, you are a hoot
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-06 07:52 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ne30qe$c6l$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #568235 |
On 4/6/2016 7:37 AM, john wrote: > Odd wrote > > "Yes, of course you're moving with it. What makes some other point the > "magic" point that stays at rest relative to you??" > > Okay Odd. > So space is expanding. > Universally. > Which direction is it going? > Outward. From every point. That's what UNIFORM EXPANSION means. You believe in an infinite universe. This means there is no boundary to the universe. Therefore if you try to ask in which direction the boundary is moving, it's a nonsense question, because there IS NO boundary. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-06 06:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2637bf09-dc76-4eb2-94ba-9c1f8ab8497c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #568240 |
Which direction is "outward", Odd?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-06 06:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <547f77b9-5905-4f4d-9aa7-29853fe7fe2f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #568248 |
Odd Which direction is "outward"?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-06 06:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8c3fc595-da93-469c-b71a-310be038cd0a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #568250 |
John says Which direction is "outward"? ------------ The opposite of 'inward'
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web