Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity

From	Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	sci.physics, sci.physics.relativity
Subject	Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity
Date	2015-10-05 14:20 -0500
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<muuiid$th8$1@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(4 earlier) <3i0u0bljhldo5l9ot3qhduo49t3js9ecus@4ax.com> <7vednXLhGJkGlJLLnZ2dnUU7-I0AAAAA@giganews.com> <qro21bdh42m82fj245n89566883mhb0b9a@4ax.com> <mutr2q$12k$1@speranza.aioe.org> <1ge51b576fbg1bqlogtrnmmjoptk1q9us3@4ax.com>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 10/5/2015 1:03 PM, Henry Wilson wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 07:39:55 -0500, Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 10/4/2015 12:47 PM, Henry Wilson wrote:
>
>>>>> 'Wavelength' only exists in the frame of the wave itself.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     Where did you come up this horseshit, Henry?
>>>
>>> Wormey, you should always have confidence that you are not too old to learn
>>> something new. Imagine you are out in the ocean somewhere and there is a big
>>> swell. How would you measure the (absolute) distance between wavecrests?
>>>
>>> Of course that length DOES exist in all frames and remains consant, which is
>>> why I used parentheis around the word wavelength.
>>>
>>
>> Henry, the word you attempted to type is "parentheses", not to mention
>> "constant". You didn't use parentheses around the word wavelength, you
>> used single quotes. And I see no connection between the statement that
>> that length DOES exist in all frames and the motivation to put single
>> quotes around it.
>
> Bodkin, the fact is, the wavelength of any traveling wave is defined as the
> distance between points of equal phase AS MEASURED IN THE FRAME OF THE
> DISTURBANCE.

Defined where, other than from your mouth?

I mean, you can define anything to be whatever you want to. You can 
declare that mass is DEFINED to be color of water when it is poured from 
a jar at -12 C, if you like. But nobody else will care about your 
definition, will they?

>
>> Maybe you shouldn't try to post when you're that drunk.
>
> Bodkin you seem particularly difficult today. Does the fact that you mentioned
> the word 'drunk' have anything to do with this?
>

Oh, I do think that when you are drunk, you perceive me to be 
particularly difficult, yes.


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Thread

Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-09-21 18:05 +0000
  Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-09-22 03:04 +0000
  Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-09-22 04:42 +0000
  Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-09-21 23:54 -0500
    Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-09-22 05:28 +0000
  Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-09-22 05:02 +0000
  Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-09-28 12:24 +0200
    Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-09-29 07:47 +1000
      Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-09-28 22:06 -0500
        Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 11:31 -0700
          Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 19:52 -0700
        Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-03 08:26 +1000
          Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 17:47 -0500
            Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Henry Wilson <HW@.....> - 2015-10-05 04:47 +1100
              Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-04 18:00 -0500
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-05 09:46 +0200
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-05 11:48 -0500
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-05 20:19 +0200
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-05 13:28 -0500
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-10-05 21:16 +0200
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Henry Wilson <HW@.....> - 2015-10-05 20:01 +1100
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-05 11:52 -0500
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Henry Wilson <HW@.....> - 2015-10-06 04:55 +1100
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 07:59 -0500
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 11:34 -0700
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-10-06 20:55 +0200
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-07 07:50 +1100
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-10-07 11:15 +0200
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-06 14:52 +1100
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 19:15 -0500
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-09 07:36 +1100
              Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-05 07:39 -0500
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Henry Wilson <HW@.....> - 2015-10-06 05:03 +1100
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-05 14:20 -0500
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-06 15:02 +1100
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 07:48 -0500
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-07 07:40 +1100
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 17:59 -0500
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-10-06 19:17 -0500
                Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-09 07:34 +1100
                transitive property noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-10-08 12:33 -0700
          Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-10-08 10:42 -0500
            Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity HGW <xxx@....> - 2015-10-09 08:14 +1100
      Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-09-29 11:00 +0200
  Re: Problem with Dipole Radiation and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-10-24 00:03 +1100

csiph-web