- Re: Pascal's Wager: who takes that action? was: Re: BY Faith and Faith Alone (was - Plant do not . . .)
Which is equally illogical.
It is a argument that one is better off believing in God. I'm not
convinced that is the same thing as an argument for believing in God.
(I'm also not convinced that Pascal's Wager is a sound argument that
one is better off believing in God, but that's not my major issue with
- Re: Light has no electric charge or magnetic poles
In sci.physics.relativity, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson)
wrote
on Thu, 21 Aug 2008 00:38:00 GMT
<1qdpa4t84qjqgct13ghho3pt08mk9 j2...@4ax.com>:
Not with each other, generally. The photons, AIUI,
interact with a nearby charged particle or nucleus.
gamma(0.99999c) = 223.6
Not fast enough. You'll need a v of
- Re: Light has no electric charge or magnetic poles
In sci.physics.relativity, The TimeLord
wrote
on Wed, 20 Aug 2008 20:30:41 -0500
:
Interesting...though I do wonder how one can get two 511
keV photons to collide in precisely the right place with
the nucleus of an atom (I'm assuming that's what's needed
- What is the evidence that electrons attract protons?
If they attract each other they ought to come together. But they do
not. If they do not it is not valid to say that they attract.
Mitch Raemsch
- Re: The surface of the 4th dimension
But an egg has a changing curve.
- Re: remembering the future
Why can we only remember the past but not the future?
Because the future hasn't happened yet?
- Re: remembering the future
I've just found a paper by Wolpert in 1991 (Memory systems,
Computation, and the Second Law of Thermodynamics) whose abstract and
intro promise exactly what I asked for in this post. I understand that
many authors (like Hawking) provide 2 liner answers to this question
but the aforementioned paper promises the rigorous proof that I need.
- Re: remembering the future
In this case we remembered the future and entropy increased so the two
arrows were not correlated.
I like the line of thought, the element of choice seems like an added
complication which i have to justify specially when "good/bad" choices
add some subjectivity.
- Re: The Ultimate formula
sorry , could you rephrase the question to be a little more exact?
also it is apparent you have not defined "steel" or "alloy", are these
materials made of specific elements?
holog
- Re: Pascal's Wager: who takes that action? was: Re: BY Faith and Faith Alone (was - Plant do not . . .)
I'll concede that the Wager is not a philosophical
argument for God's existence. And while it's not a
huge difference in perspective, i feel i should point
out that it's a proposition that is *also* based on
whether disbelief is to one's personal detriment as
well.
I get that it is true that one just might be better off
- Re: The surface of the 4th dimension
I've always considered a egg to be round. It has a
continuous surface with no angularity anywhere.
Woe the poor bird that has to lay an egg with
angularity on the surface. Evolution is kind
sometimes.
- Re: Where atomic shells orginate
BURT wrote:
No.
- Re: The surface of the 4th dimension
BURT wrote:
No, seriously. Can you define "round"? I mean with a mathematical test
which we can apply to some geometric figure and get an answer: "is" or
"is not" round?
- Re: The measurement of the absolute speed of the earth through space
If you read the title of this thread it is obvious we need to know the
exact time at the remote locations in order to determine the one way
speed of light in various directions. Assuming a constant speed would
be foolish since that is what you are trying to measure. Assume that
it is constant and that is what you will measure. Assume that it is
- Re: Light has no electric charge or magnetic poles
Am Thu, 21 Aug 2008 00:38:00 +0000 schrieb HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) in
1qdpa4t84qjqgct13ghho3pt08mk9j 2...@4ax.com in sci.physics.relativity:
I'm not sure who you mean by "you people". At any rate, I've never heard
of an actual photon-photon interaction. However, QM doesn't rule out
photon-photon interaction provided that some very unlikely events happen.
- Re: Light has no electric charge or magnetic poles
Am Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:51:12 -0700 schrieb The Ghost In The Machine
in gvnsn5-nvi....@sirius.tg00suus 7038.net
in sci.physics.relativity:
It's two photons at 511 keV. The 511 keV emission line (soft X-rays) has
been observed around black holes and in some cases as part of Gamma Ray
- Re: The relativity of simultaneity
[snip]
No assertion involved. Assertion means there is no proof. In the
track frame there is proof that M' does not see the flashes at the
same time, and it doesn't even require the statments about closing
speeds. Just the relative positions of M, M' and the flashes tells
you everything you need to know. Do you agree that in the track frame
- Re: Special Relativity in the 21st century
Hmm?
So FEL's don't "throw with a twist and wiggle" free electrons?
It has has no "shooting" going on at all?
Your interested is science?
Then how come you use multiple standards for time and distance?
- Re: EXPERIMENTAL ARGUMENTS AGAINST SPECIAL RELATIVITY?
Sorry, didn't mean to interrupt the tea party. Please go ahead and
continue your conversation. No need to Phtttbbbt passers-by.
PD
- Re: Light has no electric charge or magnetic poles
On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:51:12 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine
You people claim that photons don't interact.
OK, here's a question for you.
If I approach a yellow light source at 0.99999c, will its output become 'gamma'
EM and have enough energy to break into a positron and an electron?
If so, how can it do that in my frame but not in the rest frame?
- Re: Theory of Space cannot afford Time.
And what happens if Mass dose not exist? And a summing that energy is
all that exist.
And the movement of the universe cause the energy to expand to such a
way it looks like mass.
P
- Re: Special Relativity in the 21st century
So explain FELs using ballistic theory.
It is not _I_ who must live with your anti-scientific foibles. I am
interested in science, not whatever it is you are trying to do. So I
won't "live with it". Goodbye.
Tom Roberts
- Re: Light has no electric charge or magnetic poles
In sci.physics.relativity, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson)
wrote
on Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:56:52 GMT
:
The minimum energy required is about 1.022 MeV (the sum of
the particle masses, basically), though it is unclear to
me whether one photon is required at that energy, or two
- Re: remembering the future
Dear babalu...:
...
Not so difficult...
Past:
We remember there was a predator that tried to eat us when we went to
a certain location to pick fruit. Result: more time is spent finding
a new area, and the predator (if still alive) is forced to search out
a new place to hunt. More intermediate states are created, and
- remembering the future
In his popular book Hawking poses the problem of the psychological
arrow of time as: why can we only remember the past but not the
future? I am a physicist, not a philosepher, but I have come to
believe in the past year or so that questions about the arrow of time
are central to physics. Hawking's clever answer is, as he admits, a
- Re: the purpose of argument is to uncover errors and find the truth.
What's this then?
[link]
Dead from the neck up, aren't you, ignorant useless fuckhead?
- Re: EXPERIMENTAL ARGUMENTS AGAINST SPECIAL RELATIVITY?
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:00:12 -0700 (PDT), NoEinstein
wrote:
Diaper is a paid member of the Einsteinian papal guard. He knows nothing about
physics. His sole aim is to disrupt constructive scientific discussion and try
to postpone the inevitable day when the truth about relativity is exposed and
- Re: Time Flow
I had the same idea of a three dimensional spacetime. I think it's a good
model, but nobody seems to understand it. Maybe you.
It goes like this:
Think of the Euler equation e^ipi =-1. Then imagine a light cone with an
observer P at the tip,
Now I want to define a multiplicative space with three imaginary axes. Best
- Re: test
Well,
Flux (if I am thinking the same flux term)
would also be a part of the "wheel" system especially
when (like I do) the wheels can be considered to be high
pressure fronts and low pressure fronts. (like clouds almost)
and the "gearing" of the clouds would also have to account
for "energy transfer" between the clouds for any "touching"
- Re: Time Flow
What a wonderful scientific argument, I suggest you all vote for it.
A parrot repeats the same thing a lot, without any understanding of the
subject.
A straight line is defined by two points. Why should you use three points ?
The problem is : you conclude nothing from the words of Minkowski.
You do not have a clue what he is talking about.
- Re: Why did Einstein
xxein: That is our only option until we guess better and survey the
resultant.ouggene
- Re: the purpose of argument is to uncover errors and find the truth.
There is no such equation in E's paper.
That is a copy of Einstein's paper. There is no equation in it
corresponding to shitmouth's "x |-> (x-vt)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)' in
which he mistakenly believes that x |-> x' |-> xi.
The equations on that location ARE the LTE; and are perfectly
accurately
stated there.
- Re: "The Limitations of Mathematics in Physics"
wrote in message
news:94116f28-ec26-4276-8d1e-586fa69315fd@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
" If x, x', and t are coordinates of K,"
whereas Einstein said
"it is clear that a point at rest in the system k must have a system of
values x', y, z, independent of time"
It is clear you really are completely stupid, glird the tord.
- Re: Time Flow
On Aug 18, 11:25 pm, Y top-posted:
< gives the well known law of conservation of energy >>
[link]
<< In the mass spectrum, the heaviest ion (the one with the
greatest m/z value) is likely to be the molecular ion. A
- Re: test
Hi Mr. Driscoll.
Thank for the input.
I'm still partial to neutrino flux.
Ken
On Aug 20, 7:06 am, "Spaceman"
wrote:
- Re: Special Relativity in the 21st century
On Aug 20, 12:38 pm, "zzbun...@netscape.net"
wrote:
That's the contradistinction to the Generalizable Gibberish
Quantum Mechanics
interpretation of S.R. though.
Which is:
Since "randomness" is so simple to teach, teach Randomness!!!
Then get a perfect night's sleep. And while you're sleeping,
- Re: "The Limitations of Mathematics in Physics"
In Einstein's 1905 paper, which the android obviously doesn't
understand,
system K' with co-ordinates x', y', z', t', was AT REST relative to
system K (x, y, z' t'). it is totally obvious, therefore, that the
answer
to his question is v = 0.
Wait another day or so, Android, and I will help you understand
- Re: Where atomic shells orginate
Sub shells indicate that shells have a width or depth.
Mitch Raemsch
- Re: The surface of the 4th dimension
Round is an unchanging curve.
Mitch Raemsch
- Re: Special Relativity in the 21st century
So true
- Re: CERN Black Hole Generator Online Soon
yeah that was pretty funny/typical, though not for the soundman at the
time...
not a doc though; a little super8 feature called "sleep always" -
[link]
the female lead went on to be the live action model for "madame tutli-
putli", an nfb short that was nominated for an oscar -
[link]
- Re: Special Relativity in the 21st century
The *nicest* distance between two points *is* a curve ;o)
- Re: CERN Black Hole Generator Online Soon
news:zlZqk.354$Ro1.262@trnddc04...
A meets B at a different time to when B meets A if you are a relativist.
[link]
Get Wabbie to teach me how a bat and ball works.
Remind him that:
"the same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all
- Re: CERN Black Hole Generator Online Soon
-------- ahahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahahaha... ---------
Hey, Mitch, good to hear from you. Long time no see.
Your advent reminds me every time of the kid who was
banging the garbage can tin cover right next to where
you filmed a documentary... ... Life's great, isn't it... ...
ahahahaha... Good to have you back!ahahahaha....
- Re: Time Flow
48ac5bf8$0$182$e4fe5...@news.x s4all.nl
Me, and every physicist, and every engineer, and every man in
the street see time on their clocks. Onze Hayek The Armchair
Philosopher sees nothing at all.
Onze Hayek The Armchair Philosopher learned as early as
high school that one cannot define an event with 4 numbers.
- Re: Einstein: Get Rid of Fields and Just Have Particles
Excuse me?
Yes Source motion or observer motion,
One or the other must be relative speed to produce a doppler effect.
I am the one saying the "relative" motion is the cause of doppler.
If you do not have relative motion such as c not being constant to all,
You simply can not get any doppler effect without c having a relative
- Re: SR Makes Contradictory Claims
Sorry, I can’t see the video for local technical reasons.
In the gedanken only one space dimension is involved, we have a single
straight line. Any mention to light spheres is totally out of place.
We have simply two light rays, one starting at the point A and another
starting at the point B, running one against the other. Both have
- Re: Time Flow
That would be you, since you see time on a clock.
I see an inertiameter, by the way the clock is constructed.
Your Dork claims he is such a wiz in mathematics.
But even as early as high school I learned that when you could write an
axis in terms of the other axes, then it is NOT an independent dimension.
- Re: Einstein: Get Rid of Fields and Just Have Particles
On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:51:08 -0400, "Spaceman"
snip
Source motion? Forget my trivial remark about the receiver motion.
It is clear from myequations that the doppler effect is solely due to
a changing time delay (T = X/c), which is symmetrically attributable
to source or sink motion.
It's the relative velocity that makes doppler. Please point out any
- Re: CERN Black Hole Generator Online Soon
Dear luke.s...:
...
[link]
[link]
[link]
[link]
Well...
Just consider the capital of any country in the world, if you want to
|
Newsgroups