Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #569572 > unrolled thread
| Started by | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-04-10 17:20 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-04-14 12:38 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 145 — 15 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Odd, explain equal universal acceleration john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-10 17:20 -0700
Odd, explain equal universal acceleration HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 03:27 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 07:12 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 06:21 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 07:19 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 07:24 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-04-11 08:22 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 08:34 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-11 21:05 +0000
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 16:23 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-11 17:40 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 08:06 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-12 08:08 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 15:31 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-12 14:11 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 16:54 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-12 15:16 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 20:50 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-12 23:16 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 03:38 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 12:45 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-14 01:01 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 01:05 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 04:49 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-14 14:31 +0000
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 13:45 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-14 18:33 +0000
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 03:16 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 04:27 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 05:57 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-14 14:41 +0000
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 07:45 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 08:11 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 08:22 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 13:03 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 12:31 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 04:56 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-14 01:40 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 13:22 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 06:48 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 06:57 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 07:23 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 07:35 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 08:06 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 08:25 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 09:50 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 10:29 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 12:49 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 12:16 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 13:20 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 12:48 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 12:13 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 12:47 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 12:26 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-14 00:52 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 05:03 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 09:23 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 13:18 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 12:27 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-14 01:09 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 04:51 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 12:33 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 12:05 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 14:44 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 15:19 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 15:36 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 02:41 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 17:32 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 16:01 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 05:34 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 08:12 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-12 13:39 +0000
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 08:54 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 07:05 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 07:44 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 12:02 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-04-12 08:44 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 10:49 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 12:37 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 12:10 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 14:58 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-04-13 16:45 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 04:59 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 12:15 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 09:16 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 12:56 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 15:34 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 13:49 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 23:00 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 08:51 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 13:02 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 12:09 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 14:54 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 15:35 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 09:01 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-04-11 09:33 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 09:52 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-04-11 10:33 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 13:47 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 13:11 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 13:09 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 13:05 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 11:12 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-11 14:23 +0000
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 07:44 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-11 15:06 +0000
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-04-11 09:04 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 09:07 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 09:45 -0700
Gravity/eXergy evaporates away, never to return. HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 10:14 -0700
Re: Gravity/eXergy evaporates away, never to return. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 13:49 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-04-11 10:12 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 13:45 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 13:58 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 21:14 -0400
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 08:08 -0500
the box noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 16:07 -0700
Re: Gravity/eXergy evaporates away, never to return. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-11 18:32 +0000
Re: SpaceTime grows as the cosmos evaporates. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-11 21:29 +0000
Re: SpaceTime grows as the cosmos evaporates. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 21:17 -0400
Re: SpaceTime grows as the cosmos evaporates. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2016-04-12 05:49 +0000
Re: I'm confident you'll continue to advertize my ideas. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 03:39 -0400
Re: I'm confident you'll continue to advertize my ideas. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-12 09:53 +0200
Re: I'm confident you'll continue to advertize my ideas. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-12 10:17 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 11:15 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 11:19 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 09:48 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 09:55 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 10:08 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 13:57 -0500
spatial (two p.t's noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 13:54 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 13:54 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 13:52 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-04-13 12:46 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 07:34 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 11:13 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 09:24 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 11:29 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 11:30 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 11:10 -0500
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-04-13 11:46 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 10:57 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-04-14 12:32 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 11:03 -0700
Re: Odd, explain equal universal acceleration "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-04-14 12:38 -0700
Page 6 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 Next page →
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 13:09 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <XSQOy.4$2s3.0@fx04.iad> |
| In reply to | #569722 |
On 04/11/2016 12:01 PM, HVAC wrote:
> Hanson
> hanson wrote:
> Excellent!. Now Harlow, explain to john
> what your 'space itself is expanding' INTO.
> --------------
>
> Space itself is expanding. Period.
>
> Why is that difficult to understand? Please tell me.
>
> And please... Any answer that involves ether. I don't want to hear it
Folks, here is a perfect example of HVAC's training and education in the
scientific method. Even as dumb as Odd is, he at least know what the
scientific method is SUPPOSED To be and at least listens to theories
before rejecting them out of hand. HVAC has no education in science and
knows no science. Yet like Bert he comes here pretending to know "how
everything works". Sure, gay boy, sure.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 13:05 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <aPQOy.15196$iS2.12400@fx34.iad> |
| In reply to | #569695 |
On 04/11/2016 10:24 AM, HVAC wrote:
> john
> Do you see now how "uniform universal expansion"
> is impossible, Odd?
> This is why snails and many other
> things spiral as they grow.
> ----------------
>
> John what part of 'space itself is expanding' do you have trouble with?
>
> It isn't that difficult a concept
>
Yes it is. Only you are too ignorant to know that.
How can space "expand" without extra dimensions where your ESP occurs?
This is like your Bert-like theories that building 7 came down because
of the planes which didn't hit it. Are you sure you are not living in a
van in a Walmart parking lot somewhere?
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 11:12 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <negicc$1ric$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #569694 |
On 4/11/2016 9:19 AM, john wrote: > Do you see now how "uniform universal expansion" Uniform universal expansion means [distance increase] per [original distance] per [time interval]. It does NOT mean [distance increase] per [time interval]. Get it now, John? > is impossible, Odd? > This is why snails and many other > things spiral as they grow. > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 14:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <negc1s$hu8$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #569682 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >When I double the. size of >unitary box ABCD, >which is just 4 points at one unit distance >A and B separate at ONE, >while A and C separate at ONE POINT FOUR. >WHERE's the "equal expansion"? Odd has explained it several times to you. The expansion is proportional to the original distance. Doubling the distance (1.0) from A to B results in 2.0. Doubling the distance (1.414) from A to C results in 2.828. Are you STOOOOPID???? >WTF do you mean by "adjacent"? Odd has also answered this several times as well. >ALL the points in the AC line are separating >at the same rate, which is 1.4 times >the AB rate. As stated, expansion is proportional to the original distance. If you pick a point E on the A-C diagonal such that the original distance A-E was 1.0 and measured the distance after the expansion, you'd find the A-E distance to be 2.0, exactly as how Odd stated. >But, I know you don't want to >talk about it anymore- do you? >That's okay I can easily see Odd getting frustrated with your STOOOOOPIDITY and giving up...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 07:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d514271e-8ec9-4d0b-aaa1-2ea8cf876e51@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #569696 |
Michael Michael You double the size of your box in a certain time and some parts of it MUST accelerate at different rates. All I'm saying, is, how come WE see the same rate in every direction? Explain it VERY simply
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 15:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <negei2$tqs$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #569705 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >Michael >Michael >You double the size of your box >in a certain time >and some parts of it >MUST accelerate at different rates. >All I'm saying, is, how come WE see >the same rate in every direction? >Explain it VERY simply OK, I'll type REALLY REALLY SLOWLY so that you can keep up. The box doubles in size. The distance along an edge, A-B, doubles from 1.0 to 2.0. The distance along another edge, A-D, doubles from 1.0 to 2.0. The distance along a diagonal, A-C, doubles from 1.414 to 2.828. The distance along a diagonal, from A to another point E on that diagonal that was originally 1.0 from A, doubles to being 2.0 from A. (And the distance from E to C doubles from 0.414 to 0.828) The distance from A to another point originally only 0.001 from A, doubles to being 0.002 from A. Did I type too fast for you?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 09:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <negho3$fgt$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #569713 |
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote > john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >>Michael >>You double the size of your box >>in a certain time >>and some parts of it >>MUST accelerate at different rates. > >>All I'm saying, is, how come WE see >>the same rate in every direction? >>Explain it VERY simply > > . "Michael Moroney" wrote: > > The box doubles in size. > > The distance along an edge, A-B, doubles from 1.0 to 2.0. > The distance along another edge, A-D, doubles from 1.0 to 2.0. > The distance along a diagonal, A-C, doubles from 1.414 to 2.828. > > The distance along a diagonal, from A to another point E on that > diagonal that was originally 1.0 from A, doubles to being 2.0 from A. > (And the distance from E to C doubles from 0.414 to 0.828) > > The distance from A to another point originally only 0.001 from A, doubles > to being 0.002 from A. > hanson wrote: Forget the time rate or speed of expansion for the moment, but consider that there is NO center of/in the universe, unless your box is the size of the entire universe. > In that case then the entire universe expands... .... with convenient exceptions of course.... like the loaf (box) of baking bread wherein the raisons do not but the dough only expands. > So, what do you call then that oven in which your universe sized loaf is baked.. and where does the heat for that baking come from? > If your box is not the size of the entire universe and many of your expanding boxes do exist then the expansion happens in ordinary 3D space. Ergo your expanding boxes will bump into each other and that causes "friction" and Heat. > So where doe that heat/energy for your expanding boxes come from?... etc, etc.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 09:07 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2034abc8-2c5d-421d-b43f-d48c6ae040ff@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #569723 |
Exactly, hanson. They read. They memorize. They don't think. Duh!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 09:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e5691d89-a85a-4a17-a524-1034e26cd605@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #569723 |
Hanson says > So where doe that heat/energy for your expanding boxes come from?... etc, etc. ----------- One of the properties of space is that it expands. And for the nonsense question of what it expands into... Well, what happened before time began is a similar question. Along with, what is beyond up
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 10:14 -0700 |
| Subject | Gravity/eXergy evaporates away, never to return. |
| Message-ID | <032b1d9a-ffc2-4661-bea5-36b59d8351be@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #569739 |
Jeff Ralph says After a (notional) black hole evaporates, there's a shitTon more spaceTime, as measured by standard yardSticks/Clocks. Same goes for the cosmos as a whole. Once the thing is gone, it's gravity is gone too; i.e. gravity/eXergy evaporates away, never to return ------------- No
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 13:49 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Gravity/eXergy evaporates away, never to return. |
| Message-ID | <nsROy.8$2s3.5@fx04.iad> |
| In reply to | #569755 |
On 04/11/2016 01:14 PM, HVAC wrote:
> Jeff Ralph says
> After a (notional) black hole evaporates,
> there's a shitTon more spaceTime,
> as measured by standard yardSticks/Clocks.
>
> Same goes for the cosmos as a whole.
>
> Once the thing is gone, it's gravity is gone too;
> i.e. gravity/eXergy evaporates away, never to return
> -------------
>
> No
IT's OK HVAC. Rolf doesn't have your ESP and superpowers so he just
can't "know" how the universe works and what is beyond reality.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 10:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <neglt2$gi$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #569739 |
"HVAC" <mr.hvac@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hanson says > So where doe that heat/energy for your > expanding boxes come from?... etc, etc. > ----------- > Harlow wrote: > One of the properties of space is that it expands. > > And for the nonsense question of what it expands into... > Well, what happened before time began is a similar question. > Along with, what is beyond up > hanson wrote: ROTFLMAO... ahahahaha... Harlow, you just said that "expanding space is nonsense" > For you though, that "property" you call "expansion" remains a miracle to you for which you have no straight answer.. Pity, but that is cool too. Different strokes for and by different folks, just like in Sunday school, long ago, where you were told: "Believe & have Faith" ..."The Load moves in mysterious ways." LOL
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 13:45 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ipROy.6$2s3.3@fx04.iad> |
| In reply to | #569739 |
On 04/11/2016 12:45 PM, HVAC wrote:
> Hanson says
>>
> So where doe that heat/energy for your
> expanding boxes come from?... etc, etc.
> -----------
>
> One of the properties of space is that it expands.
>
> And for the nonsense question of what it expands into... Well, what happened before time began is a similar question. Along with, what is beyond up
>
"empty" space has properties? Wow! That sure sounds like "ether" to me!
HVAC believes in ether, folks!
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 13:58 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <negs3m$dch$4@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #569758 |
On 4/11/2016 12:45 PM, benj wrote: > "empty" space has properties? Wow! That sure sounds like "ether" to me! Or just space. Or spacetime, rather. If you want to call spacetime ether, that's fine by me. Nobody else will care, though. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 21:14 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <zZXOy.7$iY2.5@fx15.iad> |
| In reply to | #569779 |
On 04/11/2016 02:58 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 4/11/2016 12:45 PM, benj wrote:
>> "empty" space has properties? Wow! That sure sounds like "ether" to me!
>
> Or just space. Or spacetime, rather.
> If you want to call spacetime ether, that's fine by me. Nobody else will
> care, though.
And the reason we should care what anybody else thinks is? I'm just
glad that YOU care Boinker! As least you have enough sense to know that
a name is only important to people like HVAC who think that science is
all about belief. Obviously if something has properties, is is not
"nothing". And that now makes you smart as Einstein!
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-12 08:08 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <neirvf$1et9$4@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #569838 |
On 4/11/2016 8:14 PM, benj wrote: > On 04/11/2016 02:58 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 4/11/2016 12:45 PM, benj wrote: >>> "empty" space has properties? Wow! That sure sounds like "ether" to me! >> >> Or just space. Or spacetime, rather. >> If you want to call spacetime ether, that's fine by me. Nobody else will >> care, though. > > And the reason we should care what anybody else thinks is? I'm just > glad that YOU care Boinker! As least you have enough sense to know that > a name is only important to people like HVAC who think that science is > all about belief. Obviously if something has properties, is is not > "nothing". And that now makes you smart as Einstein! > And obviously, empty spacetime is not nothing. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-12 16:07 -0700 |
| Subject | the box |
| Message-ID | <206ecbfd-1e94-4cbd-ad3a-28dd34318498@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #569897 |
Minkowski did a lot of real stuff, except for the mere phase-space of teimennspacenn. for instance, the velocity of a gas molecule is inversely proportioned to the secondroot of its density ... nothing to do with the regular tetragon > And obviously, empty spacetime is not nothing. > > -- > Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 18:32 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Gravity/eXergy evaporates away, never to return. |
| Message-ID | <negqjt$j4j$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #569739 |
Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes: >After a (notional) black hole evaporates, >there's a shitTon more spaceTime, >as measured by standard yardSticks/Clocks. WTF is that babble supposed to mean? Spacetime isn't a quantity. >Once the thing is gone, it's gravity is gone too; >i.e. gravity/eXergy evaporates away, never to return. Except the material of the black hole isn't "gone". It radiated away as Hawking radiation. It's still there, adding to the cosmic background radiation. That's the heat death of the universe, it all becomes low level radiation, getting weaker (colder) as the universe expands. Its gravitational potential is there, although unrecoverable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 21:29 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: SpaceTime grows as the cosmos evaporates. |
| Message-ID | <neh50g$1cj$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #569739 |
Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes: >SpaceTime, as measured by standard yardSticks/Clocks, >grows as a (notional) black hole evaporates; >likewise, SpaceTime grows as the cosmos evaporates. You need to learn what spacetime is. >Once a thing is gone, evaporated away, its gravity is gone too; >so "gravity" ( "eXergy", energy that can do work ) >evaporates away, never to return. You are just repeating your claims with no evidence, and without even commenting on my reply, as if your k00ky claims were handed to you on stone tablets by God. Typical kook behavior. <snip usual Relf spam> More repeating the same old claims, over and over again. More kook behavior.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-11 21:17 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: SpaceTime grows as the cosmos evaporates. |
| Message-ID | <g0YOy.8$iY2.1@fx15.iad> |
| In reply to | #569739 |
On 04/11/2016 03:16 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
>
>
> SpaceTime, as measured by standard yardSticks/Clocks,
> grows as a (notional) black hole evaporates;
> likewise, SpaceTime grows as the cosmos evaporates.
>
> Once a thing is gone, evaporated away, its gravity is gone too;
> so "gravity" ( "eXergy", energy that can do work )
> evaporates away, never to return.
>
> Randomness is just ignorance, nothing more.
> The future is just as immutable as the past.
> The TimeScape is static.
>
> For any given location, only its "now" is real.
>
> Subjectively, we define "Life" as that program,
> running in our heads, telling us to breathe, drink, etc.
>
> SemiRandom breeding leads to SemiRandom killing;
> that's how nature/evolution works.
>
> Google "Heat Death of the Universe" and Google says: ＜＜
>
> The heat death of the universe is a historically
> suggested theory of the ultimate fate of the universe
> in which the universe has diminished to a state of no
> thermodynamic free energy and therefore can no longer
> sustain processes that consume energy (including
> computation and life). ＞＞
>
> Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington wrote: ＜＜
>
> If someone points out to you that
> your pet theory of the universe is
> in disagreement with Maxwell's equations --
> then, so much the worse for Maxwell's equations.
>
> If it is found to be contradicted by observers --
> well, these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes.
>
> But, if your theory is found to be
> against the second law of thermodynamics,
> I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but
> to collapse in deepest humiliation. ＞＞
>
> -- From "The Nature of the Physical World", 1915, chapter 4.
Sure Rolf, Steam engines trump radios! You really have no clue, do you?
Things have happened in physics since 1915 believe it or not.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web