What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

OK! i have read this whole thread, so who won? i am not trying to stir
it up again. i want to know what is the latest and/or best theory! (i do
think that theory is the term because i have not seen proof either way)
who is in charge of the last word? i previously understood that radio
was a magnetic force, a subatomic energy similar to gravity. and like
gravity, its not yet completely understood. (we dont need to understand
it to detect, measure or use it) magnetic energy has a spectrum from
gravity through radio into light and who knows how far beyond. the
particular qualities of this energy depends upon its frequency or
position relative to the spectrum. now one guy is arguing on the
existence of either, or a medium to propagate the waves. this seems true
at one end of the spectrum. the other guy argues on photons or little
energy packets that transverse distance like particles do. this also
seems true at the OTHER end of the spectrum. where are we on the
spectrum NOW? e l f radio is radio but it works very much like a
magnetic force. e h f is also radio. radio at gigahz frequencies and
above is starting to exhibit properties of light. so where the hell are
we talking about on the e m spectrum and how the hell does my antenna
work? SOMEBODY here HAS to be the one with the highest education! what
are YOUR qualifications and then what is YOUR opinion?

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

"Jim" wrote in message
...
OK! i have read this whole thread, so who won?

Among physicists 'no ether' won.

'ether' is an over extended analogy of
acoustic waves. The role of a medium in acoustic
waves is easily and relatively directly perceivable.
That gets added to one's "common sense" and then the
analogy is made to EM waves. But if one goes beyond
just making the analogy and actually tries to measure
this 'ether' it disappears, is contradictory, and/or is
superfluous.

i am not trying to stir
it up again.

But it may serve to do so. ;)

i want to know what is the latest and/or best theory! (i do

The wiki page is pretty good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether

"today the aether is considered to be a superseded scientific theory"

"... the mechanical qualities
of the aether had become more and more magical: it
had to be a fluid in order to fill space, but one that
was millions of times more rigid than steel in order to
support the high frequencies of light waves. It also
had to be massless and without viscosity, otherwise
it would visibly affect the orbits of planets. Additionally
it appeared it had to be completely transparent,
non-dispersive, incompressible, and continuous at
a very small scale."

"By the early 20th Century, aether theory was in
trouble: A series of increasingly complex experiments
had been carried out in the late 1800s to try to detect
the motion of earth through the aether, and had failed
to do so. A range of proposed aether-dragging
theories could explain the null result but these were
more complex, and tended to use arbitrary-looking
coefficients and physical assumptions. Lorentz and
Fitzgerald offered a more elegant solution to how
the motion of an absolute aether could be undetectable
(length contraction), but if their equations were
correct, the new special theory of relativity (1905)
could generate the same mathematics without referring
to an aether at all. Aether fell to Occam's Razor."

"Today, the majority of physicists hold that there
is no need to imagine that a medium for light
propagation exists. They believe that neither
Einstein's general theory of relativity nor quantum
mechanics have need for it and that there is no
evidence for it. As such, a classical aether is an
unnecessary addition to physics that violates
the principle of Occam's razor."


think that theory is the term because i have not seen proof either way)
who is in charge of the last word? i previously understood that radio
was a magnetic

electromagnetic

force, a subatomic energy similar to gravity. and like
gravity, its not yet completely understood. (we dont need to understand
it to detect, measure or use it) magnetic energy has a spectrum from
gravity

Gravity is something else. Physicists have been
trying to link gravity to the other forces of nature
(electro-weak and strong nuclear) but have not
succeeded.

through radio into light and who knows how far beyond. the
particular qualities of this energy depends upon its frequency or
position relative to the spectrum. now one guy is arguing on the
existence of either, or a medium to propagate the waves. this seems true
at one end of the spectrum. the other guy argues on photons or little
energy packets that transverse distance like particles do.

Photons are photons regardless of which end of the
spectrum one is talking about.
At the low end they have very low energy and one
needs of lots of them in order to detect them.
They are also 'longer'.

this also
seems true at the OTHER end of the spectrum. where are we on the
spectrum NOW? e l f radio is radio but it works very much like a
magnetic force. e h f is also radio. radio at gigahz frequencies and
above is starting to exhibit properties of light. so where the hell are
we talking about on the e m spectrum and how the hell does my antenna
work? SOMEBODY here HAS to be the one with the highest education! what
are YOUR qualifications and then what is YOUR opinion?


--
rb

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

It is simply this,,, y'alls so called ''Time'' can NOT Exist.
cuhulin

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

OK,go look at your cute clocks and your cute wris****ches and on tv and
everywhere else y'all see ''Time'',,,, keep on believing in
y'allselfs.''Time'' does not exist,NO such thing.
www.devilfinder.com SCTISHLDY

(Crank up the bolume)
cuhulin

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

In article ,
(Jim) wrote:

OK! i have read this whole thread, so who won? i am not trying to
stir it up again.

This isn't a debating forum. People post news, information, and their
opinions.

i want to know what is the latest and/or best theory! (i do think
that theory is the term because i have not seen proof either way)

Quantum mechanics.

who is in charge of the last word?

Me. I own this news group. I bought it used years ago when news groups
were cheap.

i previously understood that radio was a magnetic force, a subatomic
energy similar to gravity. and like gravity, its not yet completely
understood. (we dont need to understand it to detect, measure or use
it) magnetic energy has a spectrum from gravity through radio into
light and who knows how far beyond. the particular qualities of this
energy depends upon its frequency or position relative to the
spectrum. now one guy is arguing on the existence of either, or a
medium to propagate the waves. this seems true at one end of the
spectrum. the other guy argues on photons or little energy packets
that transverse distance like particles do. this also seems true at
the OTHER end of the spectrum. where are we on the spectrum NOW? e l
f radio is radio but it works very much like a magnetic force. e
h f is also radio. radio at gigahz frequencies and above is starting
to exhibit properties of light. so where the hell are we talking
about on the e m spectrum and how the hell does my antenna work?
SOMEBODY here HAS to be the one with the highest education! what are
YOUR qualifications and then what is YOUR opinion?

EM stands for electromagnetic. All electromagnetic wave energy
according to quantum theory are carried by photons. According to this
theory depending on how or what you measure of the electromagnet energy
it will exhibit particle or wave like properties.

Electromagnetic waves are the theoretical construct used to understand
how this energy propagates. EM waves convey energy in the spectrum of
radio waves from 1 Hz to microwave radar. After that radiant heat
energy, then infra red, then the visual light energy colors red through
violet, then ultra violet or UV, then gamma and cosmic waves.

Gravity waves are not a part of the electromagnetic spectrum. There is
no theory connecting gravity and EM waves but people are working on it.

The quantum theory of EM waves does not require an ether. Whether there
is an ether or not does not matter. We know that vacuum is not empty so
their must be something there. In quantum theory it looks like the foam
of virtual particles. In string theory it is other dimensions that are
so small we can't see them but people intuitively understand that
something occupies empty space.

There are two basic classes of materials conductors and insulators.
Conductors like copper have electrons that can travel freely through
them and if you apply a voltage potential across a conductor you will
cause a flow of electrons (current) proportional to the potential
voltage divided by the resistance of the conductor. Most conductors are
metals. By definition this resistance is low for a conductor so a few
volts with drive significant current. Insulators like most plastics are
the opposite of metal conductors in that they don't have mobile
electrons. All the electrons are bound in the chemical structure that
make up these materials so they have very high resistance and it takes
very high voltages to drive a current through them. At normal
everyday voltages in the house wiring or in your electronics voltages
are not high enough to cause the insulators to break down and conduct a
current.

The trick with antennas is that you can get electrons moving through
them at a distance and not just by directly connecting a voltage source
to it. This can be done with EM waves. These waves carry the electric
and magnetic fields that can drive the motion of the free electrons in
a conductor. For this to happen efficiently the conductor needs to be
the right electrical length for the EM wave we are trying to stimulate
it with. The EM wave passing by the antenna element wants to cause the
electrons to move a specific distance in the conductor and so the
conductor needs to be the right length for this movement. When the size
of the EM wave matches up with the right length conductor the passing
wave can then efficiently cause the electrons to move in the conductor
and we have a good antenna. Visualize a sinusoidal wave passing by a
conductor orthogonal to the motion of the wave and you have a graphic
representation of the motion of the electron flow the wave generates in
the antenna element.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

wrote in message
...
OK,go look at your cute clocks and your cute wris****ches and on tv and
everywhere else y'all see ''Time'',,,, keep on believing in
y'allselfs.''Time'' does not exist,NO such thing.

Of course it exists. It is the 4th dimension.

Example: when you make plans to meet someone - say for lunch - how many
coordinates do you give? You say "meet me at Harry's diner at main and
3rd, at 1:00 o'clock". You give 4 coordinates - 3 physical and one of
time.

Length, width, height, duration. There are (at least) 4 dimensions. Saying
WHERE something exists is meaningless without saying WHEN it exists. Did
Harry's diner exist at 3rd and Main 1 year ago? A million years ago?

Clocks are just the measuring stick. Just as physical dimensions exist
independently of feet, meters, and light-years, time exists independently of
what we use to measure it.

Clocks, inches, sundials, kilometers, decaying atoms, light-years, quartz
vibrations, the movement of Earth around the Sun etc. are all just
convenient measuring tools. They all give reference points, so we can say
things like "The restaurant is a mile north of here" or "I'll be at the
restaurant in an hour". The "mile" has no real existence, it's just an
agreed upon definition of a length of distance. Similarly, the "hour" has
no real existence, it's just an agreed upon definition of a length of time.

All of the measuring tools and terms we use to define the 4 dimensions are
purely arbitrary. What they are measuring, however, is very real. The
concepts of before, now and after are as real and universal as up, down,
left, right, forward and backward.

Mike

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

Ron Baker, Pluralitas! wrote:
...


All seems to almost make sense, until you consider the fact that under
relativity the photon must be WITHOUT mass (weightless at rest) ...
right, then it all becomes just as senseless as believing in the ether!

JS

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

I bought this news group at Lucky Moran's used car lot a few years
ago.And I found my ex galfriends red dress in the back seat of a 1957
Ford car at Lucky Moran's.
(Only jokin)
cuhulin

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

Telamon wrote:
...

So now you claim dc motors, ac motors, generators, alternators all
depend on shooting photons at the "other winding" to induce power there?
And, it is these photons which actually created the magnetic lines of
force which drive them ...

And, my magnet is shooting photons from one end to another, interesting ...

JS

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

And my little doggy,she has a sixth dimesion/sense too.She hears sounds
outside that are impossible for me to hear and she hits the front
door,barkin her arse off,running back and forth and jumpin on me.There
is NO such ''dimesion'' as ''Time''

Doggy,she doesn't know anything about ''Time''.Dogs are much,much
smarter than us humans can ever pretend to be.She sure does know when
she wants (''Time'') to hump my right leg though.
cuhulin

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

Mike wrote:
...
Mike


Our watches and clocks all measure the spinning of the earth, one spin =
24 hours. Now that is all very nice and everything, and it does get me
to appointments on time, but it is NOT "real."

Imagine just before the big bang, when all the matter in the universe
sprang forth from some sub-atomic particle sized piece into all "our
matter" now. And, imagine four old bearded men sitting there and
observing the big bang--what do the wrist watches on their arms measure?
There is no "earth spinning" to measure time by, indeed, there is no
matter.

If time exists, it exists on a "Universal Time Frame." And, no one has
"viewed" it yet--just like the ether.

When we finally do know the answers, we will see how it was stupid to
try to use "earth spinning" in our mathematics!

JS

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Mike wrote:
...
Mike


Our watches and clocks all measure the spinning of the earth, one spin =
24 hours. Now that is all very nice and everything, and it does get me to
appointments on time, but it is NOT "real."

Of course it is real. The clock gets you to appointments "on time" for the
same reason that directions and maps get you to appointments "on spot".

Imagine just before the big bang, when all the matter in the universe
sprang forth from some sub-atomic particle sized piece into all "our
matter" now. And, imagine four old bearded men sitting there and
observing the big bang--what do the wrist watches on their arms measure?

Who knows? It doesn't really matter *what* they measure! But they
clearly are measuring *something*, or they wouldn't be wearing them, right?
That they have no concept of Earthly hours is irrelevent. Just like the
lengths of their beards are measuring *something*, even though they don't
know about inches or meters or any of our Earthly measurements of length.

As I said earlier, all of the measuring tools and terms we use to define the
4 dimensions are
purely arbitrary. What they are measuring, however, is very real. The
concepts of before, now and after are as real and universal as up, down,
left, right, forward and backward.

Perhaps the Big Bang happens in cycles, every 24 "hours" on their "watches".
As Einstein showed, time is relative to the velocity of the observer.

Mike

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

In article , "Mike"
wrote:

wrote in message
...
OK,go look at your cute clocks and your cute wris****ches and on tv and
everywhere else y'all see ''Time'',,,, keep on believing in
y'allselfs.''Time'' does not exist,NO such thing.

Of course it exists. It is the 4th dimension.

Example: when you make plans to meet someone - say for lunch - how many
coordinates do you give? You say "meet me at Harry's diner at main and
3rd, at 1:00 o'clock". You give 4 coordinates - 3 physical and one of
time.

Length, width, height, duration. There are (at least) 4 dimensions. Saying
WHERE something exists is meaningless without saying WHEN it exists. Did
Harry's diner exist at 3rd and Main 1 year ago? A million years ago?

Clocks are just the measuring stick. Just as physical dimensions exist
independently of feet, meters, and light-years, time exists independently of
what we use to measure it.

Clocks, inches, sundials, kilometers, decaying atoms, light-years, quartz
vibrations, the movement of Earth around the Sun etc. are all just
convenient measuring tools. They all give reference points, so we can say
things like "The restaurant is a mile north of here" or "I'll be at the
restaurant in an hour". The "mile" has no real existence, it's just an
agreed upon definition of a length of distance. Similarly, the "hour" has
no real existence, it's just an agreed upon definition of a length of time.

All of the measuring tools and terms we use to define the 4 dimensions are
purely arbitrary. What they are measuring, however, is very real. The
concepts of before, now and after are as real and universal as up, down,
left, right, forward and backward.

I don't think it a dimension like the ones you write about but there is
also spin. Spin has several qualities of its own.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
I don't think it a dimension like the ones you write about but there is
also spin. Spin has several qualities of its own.

Time is not a *physical* dimension like the others, but it is equally real
and measurable.

Does something that has 0 duration physically exist? Not in this universe.

Does something that has 0 length physically exist? Not in this universe.

Mike

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

Mike wrote:
...

Our watches and clocks all measure the spinning of the earth, one spin
= 24 hours. Now that is all very nice and everything, and it does get
me to appointments on time, but it is NOT "real."

Of course it is real. The clock gets you to appointments "on time" for
the same reason that directions and maps get you to appointments "on spot".

Imagine just before the big bang, when all the matter in the universe
sprang forth from some sub-atomic particle sized piece into all "our
matter" now. And, imagine four old bearded men sitting there and
observing the big bang--what do the wrist watches on their arms measure?

Who knows? It doesn't really matter *what* they measure! But they
clearly are measuring *something*, or they wouldn't be wearing them,
right? That they have no concept of Earthly hours is irrelevent. Just
like the lengths of their beards are measuring *something*, even though
they don't know about inches or meters or any of our Earthly
measurements of length.

...
Mike




What our watches measure is "something", it could just be some
undiscovered quality/law of matter, and that is useful--my appointment
keeping stands.

However, when you start plugging these things into mathematical "laws"
and NOT caring EXACTLY what they are about, it is insane, now it is
useful--and one is best using such 'til better comes along ... BUT, you
NEVER forget you really DON'T KNOW or DON'T UNDERSTAND what is really
happening and are only substituting "magic numbers" so as to get some
type of usable results ...

Today there are many things we use without understanding them, this is
good, but only a fool says, "Don't worry about what is really going on,
this will get us where we are going." Because, without always searching
the truths, we will fail to make the new discoveries and start accepting
our "made up formulas" as reality.

There are many examples we need to look further, only the fools stand
saying we know it all, we cannot even state we absolutely know photons
exist! (however, allowing that they do gives us usable theory, for the
moment ...)

JS

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
What our watches measure is "something", it could just be some
undiscovered quality/law of matter, and that is useful--my appointment
keeping stands.

However, when you start plugging these things into mathematical "laws" and
NOT caring EXACTLY what they are about, it is insane, now it is
useful--and one is best using such 'til better comes along ... BUT, you
NEVER forget you really DON'T KNOW or DON'T UNDERSTAND what is really
happening and are only substituting "magic numbers" so as to get some type
of usable results ...

Well, that's the current state of physics, isn't it? We don't know what
electricity "really is" either, but that doesn't stop us from producing
"mathematical laws" that describe it's behavior. Electricity is "real"
even though we don't know what it "really is".

The same applies to gravity, and to spacetime.

Mike

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

Mike wrote:
...

Well, that's the current state of physics, isn't it? We don't know
what electricity "really is" either, but that doesn't stop us from
producing "mathematical laws" that describe it's behavior.
Electricity is "real" even though we don't know what it "really is".

The same applies to gravity, and to spacetime.

Mike


Yes Mike, that is pretty much the state of things, let us not leave it
there ...

Let's advance some theories, attempt some experiments (even if they are
DAMN WRONG!), some answers are bound to fall out of the tree.

But, let's not be afraid to question all which is.

JS

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

In article ,
John Smith wrote:

Telamon wrote:
...

So now you claim dc motors, ac motors, generators, alternators all
depend on shooting photons at the "other winding" to induce power there?
And, it is these photons which actually created the magnetic lines of
force which drive them ...

And, my magnet is shooting photons from one end to another, interesting ...

No, I did not claim that. Local induction fields are a different thing.
Local phenomena depend on electron movement. Far field effects are
carried by photons in EM waves.

Electrons are a particle responsible for the electric field. When
electrons move they also generate a magnetic field.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

In article , "Mike"
wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
I don't think it a dimension like the ones you write about but there is
also spin. Spin has several qualities of its own.

Time is not a *physical* dimension like the others, but it is equally real
and measurable.

Does something that has 0 duration physically exist? Not in this universe.

Does something that has 0 length physically exist? Not in this universe.

Yeah, I agree about time. I was mentioning spin, which is not a
dimension like the three spatial and time.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

In article , "Mike"
wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in
message
...


I don't think it a dimension like the ones you write about but
there is also spin. Spin has several qualities of its own.
Time is not a *physical* dimension like the others, but it is
equally real and measurable.

Does something that has 0 duration physically exist? Not in this
universe.

Does something that has 0 length physically exist? Not in this
universe.

Telamon wrote:

Yeah, I agree about time. I was mentioning spin, which is not a
dimension like the three spatial and time.

So here you are, YET AGAIN aiding and abetting a post that has
*nothing* to do with short wave. (maybe rec.physics, rec.quantum
mechanics???)

Oh, sorry. I forgot. It's OK for you, just not anyone else.

Happy Holidays anyway!

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

Tell-A-Troll wrote:
...
So here you are, YET AGAIN aiding and abetting a post that has
*nothing* to do with short wave. (maybe rec.physics, rec.quantum
mechanics???)

Oh, sorry. I forgot. It's OK for you, just not anyone else.

Happy Holidays anyway!


Hmmm, radio waves, their propagation methods, abilities, solar flares,
magnetic storms, antenna construction, etc. have "NOTHING TO DO WITH
THIS GROUP?"

Huh, guess you get your broadcasts via the internet! Perhaps DSL hookup
would be more suited for discussion for you ...

JS

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

John Smith wrote:
Tell-A-Troll wrote:
...
So here you are, YET AGAIN aiding and abetting a post that has
*nothing* to do with short wave. (maybe rec.physics, rec.quantum
mechanics???)

Oh, sorry. I forgot. It's OK for you, just not anyone else.

Happy Holidays anyway!


Hmmm, radio waves, their propagation methods, abilities, solar flares,
magnetic storms, antenna construction, etc. have "NOTHING TO DO WITH
THIS GROUP?"

Huh, guess you get your broadcasts via the internet! Perhaps DSL hookup
would be more suited for discussion for you ...

JS

Uh, JS, you're being a little selective aren't you? His total response
(which I included but you so conveniently snipped) was about "spin,
dimensions and time". Funny, but his response didn't say *anything*
about flares, storms or antenna construction.

Happy Holidays!

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

Is there such a thingy as a rec.wimmins thingy?
cuhulin

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

I have Bell South DSL for my computer and I am on the MSNTV One Plan.My
Webtv subscription doesn't cost me nuttin.It's FREE.
cuhulin
.......................................
And y'all think I am dumb.
.................................

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

In article ,
Tell-A-Troll wrote:

In article , "Mike"
wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in
message

igy.com. ..


I don't think it a dimension like the ones you write about but
there is also spin. Spin has several qualities of its own.
Time is not a *physical* dimension like the others, but it is
equally real and measurable.

Does something that has 0 duration physically exist? Not in this
universe.

Does something that has 0 length physically exist? Not in this
universe.

Telamon wrote:

Yeah, I agree about time. I was mentioning spin, which is not a
dimension like the three spatial and time.

So here you are, YET AGAIN aiding and abetting a post that has
*nothing* to do with short wave. (maybe rec.physics, rec.quantum
mechanics???)

Oh, sorry. I forgot. It's OK for you, just not anyone else.

Happy Holidays anyway!

If you bothered to read other related threads started by the OP the
questions revolve around how antennas work, near and far fields of
electromagnetic waves. Here there has been an argument around classical
and quantum physics and how EM waves propagate. You will have to read
other threads to make sense of it.

You however are just Trolling as usual. Must really suck to be you to
have to keep changing your handle just so people can read you after
being kill filed time and again. Maybe you could actually add something
to the discussion other than the usual Trolling crapola.

I hope you learn to wise up in the new year.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

Telamon,,,,, tell all them purty wimmins in Ventura,old Hansom Larry
(that's me) Loves them.
cuhulin

What Albert Einstein said about Radio.
 

What sucks is telling people they suck.
cuhulin