|
 |
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
From: HW@..(Henri Wilson)
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 22:52:00 GMT
Subject: Re: New theory: Space is not curved. It is logarithmic.
On 21 Sep 2006 04:55:06 -0700, "Eric Gisse" <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Henri Wilson wrote: >So in other words, you don't know the answer. >> >Why are you using the "Maxwell's equations need a medium" copout >> Geesey, ahev never said Maxwell's equations are incorrect. Of course they are >So in other words, you DON'T accept Maxwell's equations. You can't pick >> force you to create Wilson's equations? Or have you refrained from doing that >> Geesey, If I measure the two constants and apply Maxwell, I will get the answer >You have no idea how to "apply Maxwell". >> >> >Since - according to you - Maxwell's equations use a medium, the >> >> Their values are zero in a perfect vacuum...That means devoid of fields, too. >> >WRONG. >> Prove it Geesey... >F = q_1q_2 * r^ * 1/r^2. >There is no constraint on what is between the two charges. >Take div.E = rho/epsilon_0. There is still no constraint. >You have no functional understanding of Maxwell's equations or what c...which also happens to be the speed of EM wrt its source (for reasons as yet unknown) Maxwell's equations say absolutely nothing about the speed of EM from a >> >Take an introductory physics course, Henri. Specifically, study the If it has fields it is not 'vacuum', geesey. >> >section about the electrostatic force. There does not need to be >> >anything between two point charges for a field to exist and exert >> >force. >> You are really funny Geesey. Firstly you say there doesn't have to be >Vacuum is devoid of matter, not fields. What is a field, Geesey? >Stop re-inventing terminology to suit the moment. Geesey, one day you will realise how physics has been stopped in its tracks by the Einsteinian red herring. >> >Why do you keep using such sad copouts? Since you believe yourself to Thankyou. I take that to imply I am not completely barinwashed by the >> >be such an awesome physicist, why is it you are suddenly incapable of >> >dealing with the concept of "vacuum"? You were *so* sure of yourself >> >when you were talking about photons slowing down and speeding up in >> >space. >> Why shouldn't they? Space is not completely homogeneous. How could it be? >...because it is? Space is the same no matter which direction you look >Oh, you wouldn't know this because your knowledge of cosmology is stuck establishment, like you are. >> >Is it because I am forcing you to take the debate to a level you have Its time you tried yo answer a few of your simple questions yourself. I'm not >> >not thought out at all? Are you incapable of supporting your assertions >> >on a mathematically rigorious level? >> Geesey, one day you will realise how naive you are. >> I would give you a plus for enthusiam though. You never give up. >So is that a "yes" to my questions? going to do your assignments for you. >> >> >You say you understand Maxwell's equations.....right? Fucking moron. Maxwell believed in an absolute aether. >> >> They are fucking easy to understand. >> >Then why do you have such difficulty understanding basic concepts or >> Geesey, speeds are not absolute, they are relative. >Yet...c is absolute in Maxwell's equations. >This is trivial to show via Maxwell showed that in a dielectric medium, EM moves at c wrt that medium. The >the wave equations in E and B. Go ahead Henri, show me how Maxwell's >equations permit a wave speed that goes as c+v. Oh wait, you can't! You >don't understand anything about Maxwell's equations. medium defines a rest frame. >> >That is *not* a proof. There are NO transformations. >> >I am asking for a MATHEMATICAL proof that a wave can have a velocity of >> There you do again....showing your complete ignorance of physics. >> Relative to what is this velocity you are talking about geesey? >GALILEAN TRANSFORMATIONS DO NOT PRESERVE MAXWELL'S EQUATIONS YOU Time interval and LENGTH are absolute. >Open and read any E&M book published after 1930. Griffith's It's worth a lot more than the one you'll never get, Geesey. >introduction to electrodynamics is a crowd favorite. >> >Since you supposedly have a degree in applied mathematics and >> I have Geesey, It's up on my wall in front of me. I am looking at it now. Are >Of you? Why would I be? >You show no sign of having any mathematical education beyond skimming >> >I have asked this simple task of you at least a half dozen times over I have better things to do that waste time trying to eductae a hopeless case >> >the last year. Each and every time you either insult me and run away, >> >or change the subject and run away. Why might that be, Henri? >> I really don't know why I waste time answering this garbage Geesey. >...because you are a moron with no self control like you , geesey. >> >Go ahead, dismiss what I am saying by insulting me. It just makes it Fucking little shit! >> >easier to believe you have no degree in anything, much less one in >> >applied mathematics. >> What are those two certificates in frames then? >I have to see them to answer that question. >I want to know where you obtained your degree from so I can figure out www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/degGrese.jpg HW. You can burn all yer books! You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||