|
Antennas led astray
Cecil Moore wrote: But it sure does make your "entirely different" assertion false, doesn't it? :-) Nope. A false statement cannot not 'make' an assertion false. I swear to god you'd argue with St. Peter at the Pearly Gates. jk |
Antennas led astray
|
Antennas/lead ashtray
Jim Kelley wrote:
We have absolutely no reason to expect the Cesium atom to act any differently in another reference frame, ... On the contrary, we have every reason to believe it acted differently before the first super nova. Things that don't exist generally act differently from things that do exist. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Antennas led astray
|
Antennas led astray
Dave Oldridge wrote:
There are other entropic processes that can be calibrated against the cesium. Who did that before cesium existed? -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Antennas led astray
Jim Kelley wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote: No, they are both earth-centric concepts invented by man. That makes them alike, not different. Sort of blurs the line between the plausible and the absurd, Cecil. The fact that two things might share a particular trait does not eliminate their differences. But it sure does make your "entirely different" assertion false, doesn't it? :-) -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Antennas led astray
Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote: Go argue with the standards people. I have no argument with the standards people. My argument is with the people who take present day seconds and lay them end-to-end back to the Big Bang to ascertain the age of the universe. Today's second may be the first time the second has ever had that particular value. The first second was likely many magnitudes longer than the present day second. B as in B, S as in S. tom K0TAR |
Antennas led astray
Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote: No aether. Nobody said anything about aether. The medium through which EM waves flow is space which indeed does have a structure. Space is definitely not nothing. I showed you my references, now you show me yours. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Antennas led astray
Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote: Go argue with the standards people. I have no argument with the standards people. My argument is with the people who take present day seconds and lay them end-to-end back to the Big Bang to ascertain the age of the universe. Today's second may be the first time the second has ever had that particular value. The first second was likely many magnitudes longer than the present day second. Have you ever heard of the fine structure constant? You had best check into it and how it can be verified from a distance, a very very long distance. tom K0TAR |
Antennas led astray
Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote: No aether. Are you saying there's no structure to space? Do you have references that say otherwise? -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Antennas led astray
Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote: Go argue with the standards people. I have no argument with the standards people. My argument is with the people who take present day seconds and lay them end-to-end back to the Big Bang to ascertain the age of the universe. Today's second may be the first time the second has ever had that particular value. The first second was likely many magnitudes longer than the present day second. Do you have any references that indicate that this may be true or are you just pulling it out of your ass? -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Antennas led astray
Cecil Moore wrote:
Jim Kelley wrote: You'd have to be able to demonstrate that relativistic effects single out particular units of measurement to the exclusion of others without having an effect on the observed phenomena and all within the same reference frame before being able to substantiate any claim that the result of a particular measurement is arbitrary. Can you demonstrate that? Relativistic effects certainly single out measurements of time - also length in the direction of velocity. It has been demonstrated numerous times that the velocity of a clock affects the length of its second. What is the velocity of the cesium clock on Earth? Zero by definition. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Antennas led astray
Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote: Where is your proof cesium didn't exist between the time of the big bang and the first supernova. Are you kidding? Iron is the heaviest element possible before the first supernova. References? -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Antennas led astray
Cecil Moore wrote:
... Cecil: You might as well give up. Every year, at probably every college, the entry level physics classes, math classes, CS classes start up full. At the end of the quarter or semester most are only 25%-50% full--those students suddenly decided to follow another course of study and are consulting with their counselors. So, sometimes, it is that way in life ... but you sure got determination! Regards, JS |
Antennas led astray
|
Antennas led astray
Cecil Moore wrote:
Jimmie D wrote: No problem with 0 frequency or 0 energy being released from a particle traveling at the speed of light relative to that partcle.Negative frequency? all our current laws of physics have just been trashed if we can do that. Not at all. Assume two planets are traveling in opposite directions away from a reference point in space. With respect to that reference point, each is traveling at 3/4 the speed of light in opposite directions. Calculate the red shift from one planet to the other and one comes up with a negative frequency. We are likely to discover some day that gravity is a function of the relative velocity of the Earth through the ether. At least that's what my alien buddies say. Cec; Been there, argued that, the mathematicians shot me down. It just don't happen that way. Sorry Man. Dave N |
Antennas led astray
wrote:
I showed you my references, now you show me yours. Simply Google "zero-point energy". Here's a quote from "Alpha and Omega", by Seife. "In the 1930's, though, quantum physicists discovered, much to their surprise, that the vacuum isn't ever truly empty. It is seething with activity, filled to the brim with particles and energy. ... Empty space is an incredibly complex substance, and scientists are just beginning to understand its properties." Here's another: http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/L...ers/Setter.pdf -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Antennas led astray
wrote:
Do you have any references that indicate that this may be true or are you just pulling it out of your ass? The Big Bang was most likely the biggest black hole ever. Know what happens to time around a black hole? The velocities after the Big Bang must have been close to the speed of light. Know what happens to time under those circumstances? -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Antennas led astray
|
Antennas led astray
|
Antennas led astray
Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote: Do you have any references that indicate that this may be true or are you just pulling it out of your ass? The Big Bang was most likely the biggest black hole ever. Know what happens to time around a black hole? The velocities after the Big Bang must have been close to the speed of light. Know what happens to time under those circumstances? I do ... It gets "Shot to H*LL!" Regards, JS |
Antennas led astray
Cecil Moore wrote:
... Just as the Earth was the center of the universe by definition. Let's ask NASA how they keep the atomic clock on board the space station in sync with those on earth? Even in synchronous orbit, that space station has to "race" (travel faster) to keep up ... Regards, JS |
Antennas led astray
David G. Nagel wrote:
... Cec; Been there, argued that, the mathematicians shot me down. It just don't happen that way. Sorry Man. Dave N David: If there is one thing you will have to learn, DON'T TRUST MATHEMATICIANS! Think about it man, what would they have told you before the "Quantum Effects" were discovered, if you had suggested such a phenomenon? ... I bet they would have told you, you were nuts, and gone on to prove it mathematically! In some situations, mathematicians are barely better than tea leave readers. Regards, JS |
Antennas/lead ashtray
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 15:56:01 -0800, John Smith I
wrote: Have you read about the quantum phenomenon(s) which begin when you even start getting close to absolute zero? An example of the conflict between show and tell. Surprisingly you offer to neither show, nor tell what happens... which leaves us with your statement: I can just imagine attempting logical measurements ... Luckily, those who practice the trade have skipped the part of imagining and just accomplish it instead. This gives a "glimpse" of what I mean, the above was vague ... http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasc...9/phy99194.htm Given the reference (a painfully pretentious website with as much armchair theory offered as in this thread), you must have misspelled vogue. The forced argument (a strawman at that) of motion ceasing went out with fringe topped surries. Now THAT (motion? what motion?) is vague in the extreme given there are a considerable number of dynamics that occur at the 0°K atomic scale. Are we suppose that electrons in their orbits at 1°µK will collapse into the nucleus (permenantly frozen into inaction) with the final chilling tweak? What a larf! These akademik arguments only need the added stipulation that you have to exhibit an absolute zero beer cooler that will hold the temperature throughout the Super Bowl. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Antennas/lead ashtray
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:00:07 -0800, Jim Kelley
quoting Brett: Name me one instance where anyone has achieved taking a cesium atom to absolute zero ... Two Nobel prizes were won for doing this with Rubidium. Some may recall that I already cited that as the other frequency standard element (although rarely used as it is inferior to Cesium). 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Antennas/lead ashtray
On Sat, 27 Jan 2007 01:04:43 GMT, Cecil Moore not
un-misexpurgated: Things that don't exist generally act differently from things that do exist. The solution to the missing Weapons of Mass Destruction that failed making it into another Texan's speech this week. I suppose it got transliterated into a proposal: The dead need a better health care system. |
Antennas led astray
David G. Nagel wrote:
Been there, argued that, the mathematicians shot me down. It just don't happen that way. Sorry Man. Ever looked at what non-locality does to mathematics? -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Antennas/lead ashtray
Richard Clark wrote:
Are we suppose that electrons in their orbits at 1°µK will collapse into the nucleus (permenantly frozen into inaction) with the final chilling tweak? From: http://www.calphysics.org/zpe.html "Zero-point energy is the energy that remains when all other energy is removed from a system. This behaviour is demonstrated by, for example, liquid helium. As the temperature is lowered to absolute zero, helium remains a liquid, rather than freezing to a solid, owing to the irremovable zero-point energy of its atomic motions." -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Antennas led astray
David G. Nagel wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote: We are likely to discover some day that gravity is a function of the relative velocity of the Earth through the ether. At least that's what my alien buddies say. Been there, argued that, the mathematicians shot me down. It just don't happen that way. Sorry Man. From: http://www.calphysics.org/zpe.html "SED studies published in the 1990s showed that a massless point-charge oscillator accelerating through the zero-point field will experience a Lorentz force (from the magnetic components of the zero-point fluctuations) that turns out to be directly proportional to acceleration, ... This points to the *electromagnetic quantum vacuum as the origin* of forces which appear as *inertial mass*." -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Antennas led astray
|
Antennas led astray
Dave wrote:
... This medium supports EM radiation from deep space to the local earth. What do you choose to call it? Dave: You have arrived! Is not a rose by any other name ... ? Warmest regards, JS |
Antennas led astray
Cecil Moore wrote in news:SIxuh.76115$wP1.56143
@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net: Dave Oldridge wrote: There are other entropic processes that can be calibrated against the cesium. Who did that before cesium existed? Nobody that I know of, but we're getting to the point where we can see almost that far back. -- Dave Oldridge+ ICQ 1800667 |
Antennas led astray
Dave Oldridge wrote:
Nobody that I know of, but we're getting to the point where we can see almost that far back. Seems to me all we can see is back to the point where things are moving away from our relative position at less than the speed of light. Did you know that the red shift is quantitized, i.e. not continuous, even within the same galaxy? -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Antennas led astray
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 23:22:38 GMT, Dave Oldridge
wrote: The same problem still exists. The cesium atom didn't exist before the first super nova. How can the time be calculated between the Big Bang and the first super nova if cesium didn't exist? There are other entropic processes that can be calibrated against the cesium. Hi Dave, You have been snookered into answering a complaint manufactured (as usual) from the misapplication of relationships. The resonance of Cesium is not a function of time. Time is not a function of Cesium's resonance (the incorrect correlation drawn, to which you are responding). There is no dependency between the two. It is our dependency in our usage of one to measure the other. The sophism above is much like saying sound did not exist before someone was close enough to hear the falling tree. The excitation of gas molecules we call sound existed long before the appearance of the first amoeba, much less apes in falling trees. Both sound and time are phenomenological terms for simple and rational physical processes that exist without dependence on us. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Antennas led astray
Richard Clark wrote:
The resonance of Cesium is not a function of time. Maybe not, but the frequency of the resonance of Cesium is a function of time, e.g. cycles/second. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
Antennas led astray
Cecil Moore wrote:
Richard Clark wrote: The resonance of Cesium is not a function of time. Maybe not, but the frequency of the resonance of Cesium is a function of time, e.g. cycles/second. Cecil: I for one think it has already been shown, we simply do not understand time. Given that is correct, how can we possibly know if the "vibration" of cesium is a function of it--heck, maybe if we ever achieve in stopping the vibs of cesium, time will stop? grin The problem here is in construction of a "true ruler" to measure with .... of course, we always have our "units" ... Regards, JS |
Antennas led astray
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007 10:45:19 -0800, John Smith I
wrote: we simply do not understand we possibly know we ever achieve we always have Brett, For someone with faux anonymity, you certainly work to drape yourself in marginal pluralism. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Antennas led astray
Richard Clark wrote:
... Brett, For someone with faux anonymity, you certainly work to drape yourself in marginal pluralism. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Richard: It is safe to call me John, I can guarantee you--that is my REAL first name (well, Johnathan)--Smith is my "pen name." I have used other "pen names" in the past ... (appears as if you have been "one of my fans in the past"--though I don't remember you using your correct name there, perhaps IRC?) As to the latter, I have been "draped" in worse ... Regards, JS |
Antennas led astray
John Smith I wrote:
I for one think it has already been shown, we simply do not understand time. Given that is correct, how can we possibly know if the "vibration" of cesium is a function of it--heck, maybe if we ever achieve in stopping the vibs of cesium, time will stop? grin It's pretty obvious that frequency is a function of time. Velocity is a function of time. Time is also a function of velocity. Velocity is a function of length. Length is also a function of velocity. Go figger. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:19 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com