Recognition of the Aether presence or not
 

On Sep 11, 4:18*pm, John Smith wrote:
On 9/11/2010 9:11 AM, K1TTT wrote:

...
no, you must have me confused with someone else. *i quote well
accepted engineering texts and journals. *its art and mr.b that put
together rube goldberg theories to fit their latest whim.

Yeah, you are like richard clark, you base beliefs and claim facts
depending on who states them, and proudly so, it is not the context of
the statement, it is who said it, the above is an excellent example, in
your own words. *A million men can be wrong, just as easily as one ...
especially using the your method, above ... an echo chamber is not a
place to seek truth.

You probably think 9/11 wasn't an inside job too ...:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...ineers-for-911...

There are your experts, engineers architects ...

Regards,
JS

ah, a conspiracy lover... i always ask the question: If the
government were involved in any given conspiracy how long do you think
they could really keep it secret?

Recognition of the Aether presence or not
 

On 9/11/2010 9:27 AM, K1TTT wrote:

...
ah, a conspiracy lover... i always ask the question: If the
government were involved in any given conspiracy how long do you think
they could really keep it secret?

Yes, well, as I first stated as my premise, when beginning all of this
with you, I am dealing with an idiot ... that is all the time I have for
that ...

Regards,
JS

Recognition of the Aether presence or not
 

On Sep 11, 4:31*pm, John Smith wrote:
On 9/11/2010 9:27 AM, K1TTT wrote:

...
ah, a conspiracy lover... i always ask the question: *If the
government were involved in any given conspiracy how long do you think
they could really keep it secret?

Yes, well, as I first stated as my premise, when beginning all of this
with you, I am dealing with an idiot ... that is all the time I have for
that ...

Regards,
JS

i'm just glad you admitted what you are and i didn't have to say it.

Recognition of the Aether presence or not
 

On Sep 11, 9:28*am, K1TTT wrote:
has anyone linked zpe or 'quantum soup' or dark energy to
electromagnetic waves in a way that preserves the constancy of the
speed of light in all reference frames? *or related those phenomena to
epsilon or mu of free space?

The speed of light is measured in length/time, e.g. 186,000 miles/
second. Given that relativity affects both length and time in
different ways, wouldn't you say that the choice of the speed of light
as a universal constant was somewhat arbitrary? Why should a universal
constant involve 0.416667% of one rotation of the earth? What did the
universe use for a second-of-time reference during the 8? billion
years before the earth was formed and started dictating the length of
a second? IMO, the universal speed-of-light constant is just an
arbitrary reference point that had to be cast in stone before the math
would work.

If we stretched a physical cable between our galaxy and a receding
galaxy and found that the cable didn't break even though the galaxies
were receding, what could we conclude? I have concluded that the red
shift is not because the galaxies are receding faster and faster but
because the velocity of recession is actually slowing due to gravity.
What we perceive as recession contains relativity effects due to
decreasing velocity which causes space to expand and seconds to become
shorter. 186,000 miles gets longer and one second get shorter The
resulting length/time calculation is a double whammy red-shift error,
IMO. The universal speed-of-light constant only applies to a lone
observer capable of immense rationalization.
--
73, Cecil, w5dxp.com

Recognition of the Aether presence or not
 

Szczepan Bialek wrote:

The space is not a dielectric. Electric waves travel in metal transmissing
lines where no epsilon or mu.
S*

Babbling nonsense.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Recognition of the Aether presence or not
 

On 9/11/2010 11:27 AM, K1TTT wrote:
On Sep 11, 4:18 pm, John wrote:
no, you must have me confused with someone else. i quote well
accepted engineering texts and journals. its art and mr.b that put
together rube goldberg theories to fit their latest whim.

Yeah, you are like richard clark, you base beliefs and claim facts
depending on who states them, and proudly so, it is not the context of
the statement, it is who said it, the above is an excellent example, in
your own words. A million men can be wrong, just as easily as one ...
especially using the your method, above ... an echo chamber is not a
place to seek truth.

You probably think 9/11 wasn't an inside job too ...:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...ineers-for-911...

There are your experts, engineers architects ...

Regards,
JS

ah, a conspiracy lover... i always ask the question: If the
government were involved in any given conspiracy how long do you think
they could really keep it secret?

I have always wondered which of the 2 groups debating here are more
successful. Like who gets paid for their stand on what's real.

Ok, I don't actually wonder.

tom
K0TAR

Recognition of the Aether presence or not
 

On 9/11/2010 1:27 PM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
wrote
...

has anyone linked zpe or 'quantum soup' or dark energy to
electromagnetic waves in a way that preserves the constancy of the
speed of light in all reference frames?

You do not know that the reference frames are dragged:

""Frame Dragging
One of the strangest predictions of the general theory of relativity
concerning black holes is called frame dragging. For a rotating black hole,
the theory predicts that space and time itself can be dragged by the
rotating black hole. The adjacent figure shows an artist's conception of
this idea (J. Bergeron, Sky& Telescope: get permission; Ref). Some recent
data has been interpreted as supporting evidence for frame dragging around a
black hole (Ref). "
From: http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr162/l...blackhole.html

If you do not like the Sun's ether drag you can use the Sun's reference
frame drag. Which one do you prefer.

or related those phenomena to epsilon or mu of free space?

The space is not a dielectric. Electric waves travel in metal transmissing
lines where no epsilon or mu.
S*



He sure can use Google.

To bad he doesn't read to learn.

tom
K0TAR

Recognition of the Aether presence or not
 

On 9/11/2010 7:21 PM, tom wrote:

...
I have always wondered which of the 2 groups debating here are more
successful. Like who gets paid for their stand on what's real.

Ok, I don't actually wonder.

tom
K0TAR

Yeah. I guess some stare at their belly buttons for hours, and wonder;
And, I guess some hold them in high respect as gurus ... I don't.
Good to hear you ain't wonderin'.

Regards,
JS

Recognition of the Aether presence or not
 

On Sep 11, 9:34*pm, John Smith wrote:
On 9/11/2010 7:21 PM, tom wrote:

...
I have always wondered which of the 2 groups debating here are more
successful. Like who gets paid for their stand on what's real.

Ok, I don't actually wonder.

tom
K0TAR

Yeah. *I guess some stare at their belly buttons for hours, and wonder;
* And, I guess some hold them in high respect as gurus ... I don't.
Good to hear you ain't wonderin'.

Regards,
JS

John
Look at his last 100 posts and check to see if you find one of them
informative and then question why you even respond to him? I mean it.
He sends nothing but trash all the time. Anybody can say "babbling
nonsense" but not anybody can explain
babbling nonsense unless he himself is well practiced in the art!

Recognition of the Aether presence or not
 

On Sep 11, 9:56*pm, Art Unwin wrote:
On Sep 11, 9:34*pm, John Smith wrote:



On 9/11/2010 7:21 PM, tom wrote:

...
I have always wondered which of the 2 groups debating here are more
successful. Like who gets paid for their stand on what's real.

Ok, I don't actually wonder.

tom
K0TAR

Yeah. *I guess some stare at their belly buttons for hours, and wonder;
* And, I guess some hold them in high respect as gurus ... I don't.
Good to hear you ain't wonderin'.

Regards,
JS

John
Look at his last 100 posts and check to see if you find one of them
informative and then question why you even respond to him? I mean it.
He sends nothing but trash all the time. Anybody can say "babbling
nonsense" but not anybody can explain
babbling nonsense unless *he himself is well practiced in the art!

John
After you read his last 100 posts you can now look ahead and predict
what his next 100 posts are going to look like. Do you really need
such a discorse for the next month or so?