Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #391098
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity |
| Subject | Re: My instantaneous point of view |
| Date | 2016-08-28 15:19 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <e2faiqF4fgvU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (15 earlier) <137c47bf-ae45-4f1b-8d3b-ddfec5c59687@googlegroups.com> <e29sa9Fpsv9U2@mid.individual.net> <c4e9324f-3936-43db-96ac-8bd58e2386c0@googlegroups.com> <e2f2cvF2r0rU1@mid.individual.net> <15be525b-f53b-4829-927d-b088a3af4d84@googlegroups.com> |
On 28/08/2016 2:11 PM, John Gogo wrote: > On Saturday, August 27, 2016 at 9:59:47 PM UTC-5, Sylvia Else wrote: >> On 28/08/2016 12:46 PM, John Gogo wrote: >>> On Thursday, August 25, 2016 at 10:45:16 PM UTC-5, Sylvia Else >>> wrote: >>>> On 26/08/2016 12:06 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. >>>>> >>>>> Official documents... maybe, I'm ahead of my time and I'm >>>>> just waiting for people to wake up. It's very difficult to >>>>> talk about a subject that nobody wants to talk about. >>>>> >>>> >>>> If there were 1950's naval experiments, you'd have to have >>>> become aware of them somehow. If there are no official >>>> documents to refer to, how do you know that it's not just >>>> something someone overheard in a pub? >>>> >>>> Sylvia. >>> >>> Free space velocity was their explanation. Sylvia, you are a >>> person of this Earth- you have as much right to this reality as I >>> do. Why don't you prove it- if you think it must be proved? >>> >> >> Prove what? The non-existence of these experiments? Clearly I can't >> do that, since proving non-existence of anything is impossible. >> >> You are saying things about these experiments. Unless you were >> personally involved, and not just imagining it, you must have come >> across information about them somehow. Why not provide details to >> facilitate some independent verification, as well as allowing an >> opportunity to check your interpretation of the results. >> >> Sylvia. > > This is what I have been trying to do- I just thought you would do a > better job considering that you think highly of yourself and you live > in the 21 century. Why can't you do this considering my only asset is > my mind and its' investigative powers. I do not have millions or > influence to perform this experiment. You really can't access the > info concerning the 1950's US Naval experiments about free space > velocity, and how sight triangulations on the water gave faster > results than the radar? > No, I can't find it. You say it exists - point to it. 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