| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
February 9th 07, 04:19 AM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
|
|||
|
|||
Antennas led astray
Jim Kelley wrote:
How about this: If the length of the unit time changed by a factor of two then the age of the universe, using the new metric, would differ from the old by a factor of two. Same amount of time, but a different number of units of time. Because of the effects of gravity and velocity upon time, the first "second" was probably many magnitudes longer than our reference second of today. And not only does the length of a time unit change over time, it also changes with position. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
|
#2
February 9th 07, 07:29 PM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
|
|||
|
|||
|
Antennas led astray
Cecil Moore wrote:
Because of the effects of gravity and velocity upon time, the first "second" was probably many magnitudes longer than our reference second of today. Such effects would likely have been significant during the first microsecond or so after the big bang. It was a very big bang, apparently. 73, ac6xg |
|
#3
February 10th 07, 12:38 AM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
|
|||
|
|||
|
Antennas led astray
On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 10:29:28 -0800, Jim Kelley
wrote: Because of the effects of gravity and velocity upon time, the first "second" was probably many magnitudes longer than our reference second of today. Such effects would likely have been significant during the first microsecond or so after the big bang. It was a very big bang, apparently. This discussion of "time" (something a human observer could only appreciate in a current inertial frame) conjures up the conundrum an amoeba might have in puzzling out whether to stir or shake a martini. Bartender to the one-cell protoplasm: "Vodka or Gin?" Amoeba: "Can you inform me as to the relativistic implications?" Bartender: "You can't bruise Vodka." 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
|
#4
February 10th 07, 12:41 AM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
|
|||
|
|||
|
Antennas led astray
Richard Clark wrote: This discussion of "time" (something a human observer could only appreciate in a current inertial frame) conjures up the conundrum an amoeba might have in puzzling out whether to stir or shake a martini. Bartender to the one-cell protoplasm: "Vodka or Gin?" Amoeba: "Can you inform me as to the relativistic implications?" Bartender: "You can't bruise Vodka." 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC Personally, I liken it to debating whether or not the fairies on the head of the pin are actually dancing. 73 (singular), ac6xg |
|
#5
February 10th 07, 02:39 AM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
|
|||
|
|||
|
Antennas led astray
On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 15:41:06 -0800, Jim Kelley
wrote: Personally, I liken it to debating whether or not the fairies on the head of the pin are actually dancing. That could only lead to debates of: 4-4 time, or in a triple minor? 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
