Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #390955
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity |
| Subject | Re: My instantaneous point of view |
| Date | 2016-08-26 12:40 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <e29ohtFp59dU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (15 earlier) <ffe945da-5d8b-4f15-973b-3b2365f77054@googlegroups.com> <e29lktFogujU1@mid.individual.net> <fd95a63d-4183-40be-8adc-9bb419a3f3ea@googlegroups.com> <e29mfbFomgrU2@mid.individual.net> <4032b327-130a-41fa-ac51-f12adf8197ca@googlegroups.com> |
On 26/08/2016 12:09 PM, John Gogo wrote: > On Thursday, August 25, 2016 at 9:05:34 PM UTC-5, Sylvia Else wrote: >> On 26/08/2016 12:02 PM, John Gogo wrote: >>> On Thursday, August 25, 2016 at 8:51:28 PM UTC-5, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>> On 26/08/2016 8:29 AM, John Gogo wrote: >>>>> On Thursday, August 25, 2016 at 1:02:30 AM UTC-5, Sylvia Else >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> On 25/08/2016 11:52 AM, John Gogo wrote: >>>>>>> On Tuesday, August 23, 2016 at 9:54:26 PM UTC-5, Sylvia Else >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> On 24/08/2016 1:42 AM, John Gogo wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Monday, August 22, 2016 at 12:18:12 AM UTC-5, Sylvia >>>>>>>>> Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 22/08/2016 1:39 PM, John Gogo wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, August 21, 2016 at 10:30:11 PM UTC-5, >>>>>>>>>>> John Gogo wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, August 21, 2016 at 10:22:05 PM UTC-5, >>>>>>>>>>>> John Gogo wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, August 21, 2016 at 10:03:52 PM UTC-5, >>>>>>>>>>>>> John Gogo wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, August 21, 2016 at 9:17:46 PM >>>>>>>>>>>>>> UTC-5, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 22/08/2016 11:42 AM, John Gogo wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, August 21, 2016 at 8:31:12 PM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> UTC-5, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 22/08/2016 9:41 AM, John Gogo wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, August 20, 2016 at 9:40:09 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PM UTC-5, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 21/08/2016 6:17 AM, John Gogo >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It would take about two seconds if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> go/come to Earth, one second if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one-way. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, not instantaneous then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sylvia. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, not any signal. But, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> observation of the "largeness of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> screen"(determined by maximum visual >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> acuity) is instantaneous. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Suppose we had a large screen on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Moon, but it was initially covered up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then, when a laser pulse hits the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> retro-reflector, the large screen was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uncovered. Do you maintain that the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> largeness of the screen could be observed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> before the returning laser pulse reaches >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Earth? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sylvia. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this is what I have been trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> say. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your retina is sensitive to photons. For you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to observe the photons representing the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> largeness of the screen before the photons in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the returning laser pulse, the former would >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to travel faster than the latter. Why >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would they travel faster? How would they know >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that they should travel faster? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sylvia. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are treating "retina" like a machine to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> measure "photons" from which the very nature >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of its' meaning is traveling. Don't think like >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this. Think about why the object is large as it >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is and what makes this possible. Then you go >>>>>>>>>>>>>> right away to the screen of photons. Don't do >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this. Instead, compare the image of the screen- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 1,2,3 in seconds vs. the signal that the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> satellite sends back. >>>>>>>>>>>>> This is the only way you are going to spatially >>>>>>>>>>>>> be able to tell a time difference. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm just giving you the facts here... you can like >>>>>>>>>>>> it or not. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> For instance, the Jupiter moon measure... I refuse >>>>>>>>>>> to believe that the 22 minutes of the six month >>>>>>>>>>> variation of occultation of the Jupiter's two main >>>>>>>>>>> moons have anything to do with the speed of light. I >>>>>>>>>>> believe the 22 minutes means something else. Now, I >>>>>>>>>>> know what the 22 minutes means to you, but do you >>>>>>>>>>> know what the 22 minutes mean to me? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Why would you not believe? It's an elegantly simple >>>>>>>>>> explanation for what's observed, and is entirely >>>>>>>>>> consistent with what we know about light. It seems >>>>>>>>>> bizarre in the extreme for you to want to believe that >>>>>>>>>> the cause is something else when we clearly understand >>>>>>>>>> what's happening. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> You might as well believe in undetectable dragons. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Sylvia. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So, you are like one in the audience during a magicians >>>>>>>>> performance and the magician is like nature. When the >>>>>>>>> woman appears to be sawed in half- you believe the woman >>>>>>>>> is really being sawed in half- right? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I don't know how you get there. The fact that the >>>>>>>> apparently sawn-in-half woman is still alive suggests that >>>>>>>> the women-really-sawn-in-half model is flawed. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As yet, there's nothing to suggest that the model of light >>>>>>>> is flawed. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sylvia. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My point is we can place screens far on Earth- like the one's >>>>>>> in famous toothed-wheel experiments- placed on mountain tops >>>>>>> to derive a measurable quantity which proves that screens can >>>>>>> be observed BEFORE signals. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, it's your theory. You need to do the experiment. Given >>>>>> its conflict with the well established existing theory, no one >>>>>> else is going to do it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sylvia. >>>>> >>>>> The phenomenon occurs naturally. There is evidence out there like >>>>> the 1950's naval experiments where sight triangulation occurred >>>>> instantly and the radar "fell short". The main problem is how >>>>> science interprets the results. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Instead of providing vague references, which people cannot check, >>>> why not provide links to official documents? >>>> >>>> Sylvia. >>> Well, when you write the great story of physics- there tends to be >>> predominate form of thought process. For instance, this is the so and >>> so main theory- but it does not exist without its' paradoxes. If >>> mankind will exist for another million or billion years, our science >>> it bound to change. I know this sounds unconvincing and abstract... >>> but maybe, it is the abstract that we must painfully adventure. >>> >> >> It's very unconvincing. The mere fact that science will progress in the >> future doesn't mean that any theory that emerges from a bodily orifice >> has merit. >> >> Sylvia. > So, let's talk about the meaning and limit of maximum visual acuity- do you have a problem with that, or does it seem too boring and unmeaningful? > I suspect you think it's mysterious. It's not. It's a result in optics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_resolution It can also be viewed as a quantum mechanical effect - the narrower the lens aperture, the greater is the determination of a photon's lateral position. This in turns implies a greater uncertainty in its lateral momentum, and thus a greater uncertainty in the direction it came from. In the context of looking at a star, this means that for the human eye, each photon could have come from anywhere on the star's surface (or indeed, quite a lot of the space around it), which makes forming an image of the star impossible. Sylvia.
Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-15 19:19 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-15 19:22 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-15 19:25 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-19 18:45 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-20 13:34 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-20 13:17 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-21 12:40 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-21 16:41 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-22 11:31 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-21 18:42 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-21 18:45 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-22 12:17 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-21 19:48 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-21 20:03 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-22 13:21 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-21 20:26 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-22 14:29 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-21 20:22 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-21 20:30 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-21 20:39 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-22 15:18 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-23 08:42 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-24 12:54 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-24 18:52 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-25 16:02 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-25 15:29 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-26 11:51 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-25 19:02 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-26 12:05 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-25 19:09 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-26 12:40 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-25 19:45 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-26 13:43 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-25 19:50 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-25 19:58 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-25 19:06 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-26 13:45 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-27 19:46 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-27 19:47 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-28 12:59 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-27 21:11 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-28 15:19 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-29 20:21 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-30 14:18 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-29 20:23 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-29 21:32 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-30 15:11 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-30 18:08 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-31 11:28 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-30 19:36 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-30 19:41 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-31 12:57 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-30 20:07 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-08-31 13:45 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-31 17:37 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-09-01 11:49 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-31 18:59 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-09-01 13:54 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-31 21:26 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-31 19:08 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-09-01 14:00 +1000
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-31 21:14 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-31 21:18 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-09-01 11:33 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-01 17:37 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-01 08:53 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-30 20:09 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-31 18:53 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-01 18:29 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-01 18:42 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-01 18:50 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Jonathan Doolin <good4usoul@gmail.com> - 2016-09-04 04:57 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-04 17:25 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-04 20:59 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-04 21:05 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-04 21:12 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-04 20:56 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-04 21:03 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-05 20:55 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-05 21:07 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-06 21:21 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-06 22:23 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view Jonathan Doolin <good4usoul@gmail.com> - 2016-09-07 06:45 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-08-21 23:21 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-23 16:12 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-23 16:14 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-23 16:17 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-23 16:19 -0700
Re: My instantaneous point of view John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-23 16:22 -0700
csiph-web