Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 17, 7:34*am, Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith wrote: And, obviously, IMHO, he is referring to a space truly "composed of nothing" and absent of anything even resembling an ether. *And, I did accept that as the crux of his ponder-ings/point(s.) Maybe "absence of anything even resembling a structure" would be a better way to put it. It's pretty clear that if there is no structure for space, then space cannot exist. Absolute nothing would necessarily be the absence of any and every *thing* including space. -- 73, Cecil *http://www.w5dxp.com Cecil Why not say what one call nothing is a reaction to the pressure of gravity to zero but only on the earths surface Vacuum is a datum pressure on earth only whereas there are different datums thruout the universe. If one could determin the datum of the many datums there still is no reason that pressure positive or negative has an overpowing force on every posible content. A case in point is a particle that is projected within the Earths boundary that exceeds the force of gravity but still exists in terms of matter un affected by negative gravitational forces. When the datum for perfect nothingness is determined in terms of the four forces only then can we equate nothing with energy contained by particles with no affinity to gravity. All nonsence probably since no problem can be solved with missing entities such as particles of resistive particles that have yet to be detected or what can affect them. A vacuum is just a measure of pressure nothing more and nothing less with the assumption that all has mass and zero resistance to datum pressure of our Earth. Lookng at things in a totally different manner if there was a volume of nothing in our Universe would it not implode to zero dimension with the understanding that external forces are in existance to every point in the Universe I supply this post purely to be part of the discussion that this thread now represents without ever being present to conditions of outer space and thus unable to respond in detail to those who have intimate knoweledge of such via their interrestial travels where they had the opportunity to touch to lift and touch with the toungue to determine the characteristics of all. If I knew some shakesphere I would enter the first act in detail and then compare that act with something that would then be comparible to the three stuges which has nothing to do with this thread if you get my gist. No names mentioned ofcours but keep a watch to the rear! I have arrived in Rome Best Regards Art |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Supporting theory that Antennas "Match" to 377 Ohms (Free space) | Antenna | |||
Equilibrium | Antenna | |||
Gaussian equilibrium | Antenna | |||
Question about free space loss ... | Antenna | |||
Free space pathloss calcs and factor K | Antenna |