Jim Lux wrote:
wrote:
tom wrote:
On 5/6/2010 8:42 PM, tom wrote:
On 5/6/2010 3:25 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Charged particles can move at any speed from 0 to c and always produce
the
electric field. Why not?
Incorrect. A particle has mass, and cannot attain light speed.

tom
K0TAR

Should have said "charged particle" rather than "particle".

tom
K0TAR

You were correct the first time.

Nothing with mass can attain light speed and it doesn't matter if it is
charged or not.



I think you need to clarify.. zero "rest mass"..

Nope, "mass" unqualified refers to rest mass and qualifiers only become
necessary if talking about other than rest mass.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On May 10, 7:41*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
*"joe" ....

Szczepan Bia³ek wrote:

Do you know even one example where *Acoustic analogy do not work?
S*

A high school experiment using a bell jar, alarm clock and a vacuum pump.
Jim wrote: " Having some similar charactristics does not mean EM and sound

are the
same thing."

They are not the same. Sound propagate in gases, liquids and solids
Electric waves in the "aether".

But the source of sound is an increase of the pressure.
The source of electric waves is an increase of the voltage.

The voltage increases at the ends of a *dipole.

The electric waves and sound propagate in metal wires, but with different
speeds.
Are electric waves in a wire also transversal?
S*

yes.

On May 10, 8:03*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
*"K1TTT" ...
On May 9, 7:00 pm, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:





In textbooks must be all theories.
In one chapter light (and radio waves) is like photons, in the next
chapter
like EM waves and in next like acoustics.

EM is the only example of transversal waves. So it must be in teaching
program.

But we try to help Peter. He wrote: "I begin to appreciate a comment
made
by
a fellow radio amateur and
technician that antenna theory was 15% science and 85% black magic! "

It seems that you are sure that radio waves are transversal. It is
impossible to help you (Maxwell was full of doubts).
May be that somebody consider the Acoustic analogy and the black magic
disappear for him.
S*
maxwell may have been full of doubts, and Einstein wasn't able to see

the experiments that have proven his theories,

Maxwell did EM, Einstein did the photons and somebody else the acoustic
analogy.

but we have seen them

well tested and accepted over the years.

All of that three ( all three are in textbooks) are well tested and
accepted
but only in some extend. May be that after some time only one will be
fully
accepted. Which one do you designate?

if you think that 85% is

black magic then you have lots of learning to do to fill in that 85% gap
in
your knowledge.

I designate the acoustic analogy and do not see any gaps.
They who designate EM or the photons are in constant trouble for more than
100 years.
S*
you may designate away, that doesn't make it any more correct. *the

only things that the acoustic, water, and em radiation has in common
is the sinusoidal characteristics and that superposition works.
because of those two you can get similar interference patterns from
all 3 types of waves. *that doesn't mean the underlying physics are
the same.

Oscillating compressible gas create .the standing waves in the tube with the
closed *end.
The oscillating compressible electron gas create the standing waves in open
circuit (antenna).
Is not the same physics?
S*

no

wrote ...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:


They are not the same. Sound propagate in gases, liquids and solids
Electric waves in the "aether".

There is no "aether".

Years ago Ludvig Lorenz said that in the space is enough mater to propagate
the electric waves.
Now we say "interstellar matter". But Aether is still in use.

"The interstellar gas consists partly of neutral atoms and molecules, as
well as charged particles, such as ions and electrons."
From: http://www-ssg.sr.unh.edu/ism/what1.html
S*

Uzytkownik "K1TTT" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On May 10, 7:41 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:

But the source of sound is an increase of the pressure.
The source of electric waves is an increase of the voltage.

The voltage increases at the ends of a dipole.

The electric waves and sound propagate in metal wires, but with different
speeds.
Are electric waves in a wire also transversal?

yes.

" As the wave propagates along the line, it is accompanied by currents which
flow longitudinally in the conductors".
From: http://www.answers.com/topic/electro...e-transmission

In reality no pure transversal waves. Such are only possible in the math.
S*

"Szczepan Bia?ek" wrote:

wrote ...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:


They are not the same. Sound propagate in gases, liquids and solids
Electric waves in the "aether".

There is no "aether".

Years ago Ludvig Lorenz said that in the space is enough mater to propagate
the electric waves.
Now we say "interstellar matter". But Aether is still in use.

"The interstellar gas consists partly of neutral atoms and molecules, as
well as charged particles, such as ions and electrons."
From: http://www-ssg.sr.unh.edu/ism/what1.html
S*

Babbling nonsense.


http://arXiv.org/abs/0706.2031
Physics Today 57(7) 40 (2004)
Phys. Rev. D8, pg 3321 (1973)
Phys. Rev. D9 pg 2489 (1974)
http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/Walsworth/pdf/PT_Romalis0704.pdf

No aether

http://arxiv.org/abs/0905.1929
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2005-5/index.html
Phys. Rev. D 81 022003 (2010)
http://arxiv.org/abs/0801.0287

No Lorentz violation


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

wrote ...
"Szczepan Bia?ek" wrote:

wrote ...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:


They are not the same. Sound propagate in gases, liquids and solids
Electric waves in the "aether".

There is no "aether".

Years ago Ludvig Lorenz said that in the space is enough mater to
propagate
the electric waves.
Now we say "interstellar matter". But Aether is still in use.

"The interstellar gas consists partly of neutral atoms and molecules, as
well as charged particles, such as ions and electrons."
From: http://www-ssg.sr.unh.edu/ism/what1.html
S*

Babbling nonsense.


http://arXiv.org/abs/0706.2031
Physics Today 57(7) 40 (2004)
Phys. Rev. D8, pg 3321 (1973)
Phys. Rev. D9 pg 2489 (1974)
http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/Walsworth/pdf/PT_Romalis0704.pdf

No aether

http://arxiv.org/abs/0905.1929
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2005-5/index.html
Phys. Rev. D 81 022003 (2010)
http://arxiv.org/abs/0801.0287

No Lorentz violation

"Not to be confused with Hendrik Lorentz or Edward Norton Lorenz" From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludvig_Lorenz

Behaviour of light is in our time quite clear:
http://www.worldnpa.org/pdf/ebooks/K...%20Light .pdf
S*

"Szczepan Bia?ek" wrote:

wrote ...
"Szczepan Bia?ek" wrote:

wrote ...
Szczepan Bialek wrote:


They are not the same. Sound propagate in gases, liquids and solids
Electric waves in the "aether".

There is no "aether".

Years ago Ludvig Lorenz said that in the space is enough mater to
propagate
the electric waves.
Now we say "interstellar matter". But Aether is still in use.

"The interstellar gas consists partly of neutral atoms and molecules, as
well as charged particles, such as ions and electrons."
From: http://www-ssg.sr.unh.edu/ism/what1.html
S*

Babbling nonsense.


http://arXiv.org/abs/0706.2031
Physics Today 57(7) 40 (2004)
Phys. Rev. D8, pg 3321 (1973)
Phys. Rev. D9 pg 2489 (1974)
http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/Walsworth/pdf/PT_Romalis0704.pdf

No aether

http://arxiv.org/abs/0905.1929
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2005-5/index.html
Phys. Rev. D 81 022003 (2010)
http://arxiv.org/abs/0801.0287

No Lorentz violation

"Not to be confused with Hendrik Lorentz or Edward Norton Lorenz" From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludvig_Lorenz

Behaviour of light is in our time quite clear:

To most people, but obiously not you.




--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

wrote ...
"Szczepan Bia?ek" wrote:


Behaviour of light is in our time quite clear:

To most people, but obiously not you.

" Ions and electrons in space are usually intimately mixed, in a "soup"
containing equal amounts of positive and negative charges. Such a mixture is
known as a plasma ". From:
http://www-spof.gsfc.nasa.gov/Education/Ielect.html

This "soup" rotate with the Sun. Each planetary systems are the vortex (or
planetary disc).
Light (and radio waves) travel in this rotating soup. For this reason the
MMX result is "null" in the orbital direction. But it is not null in the
direction of Earth rotating (Michelson-Gale experiment). The evidences on
that was collected by Kelly:
http://www.worldnpa.org/pdf/ebooks/K...%20Light .pdf

S*

"Szczepan Bia?ek" wrote:

wrote ...
"Szczepan Bia?ek" wrote:


Behaviour of light is in our time quite clear:

To most people, but obiously not you.

" Ions and electrons in space are usually intimately mixed, in a "soup"
containing equal amounts of positive and negative charges. Such a mixture is
known as a plasma ". From:
http://www-spof.gsfc.nasa.gov/Education/Ielect.html

This "soup" rotate with the Sun. Each planetary systems are the vortex (or
planetary disc).
Light (and radio waves) travel in this rotating soup. For this reason the
MMX result is "null" in the orbital direction. But it is not null in the
direction of Earth rotating (Michelson-Gale experiment). The evidences on
that was collected by Kelly:
http://www.worldnpa.org/pdf/ebooks/K...%20Light .pdf

S*

Babbling, irrelevant gibberish complete with references to a kook web site.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.