MERRY CHRISTMAS
glird
Specially to mpc755 and Paul Stowe.
To Paul, for not answering my request to define mass, force, etc in
his long reply to me yesterday. (It left me pondering my OLD
definitions while dozing on and off through the night.)
To mpc for steering me toward the first new definition of a word that
I've had to make in several years. I will discuss the new definition
in a follow-up message.
The word is "aether"! {Should we call it "mpcether"}
glird
glird
glird
mpc755
The word is aether. It is a matter of what properties we apply to it.
So far the properties are displacement and entrainment and not being
at rest when displaced.
Happy Holidays.
Uncle Al
[snip crap]
> The word is "aether"! {Should we call it "mpcether"}
http://arXiv.org/abs/0706.2031
Physics Today 57(7) 40 (2004)
http://physicstoday.org/vol-57/iss-7/p40.shtml
<http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/Walsworth/pdf/PT_Romalis0704.pdf>
No aether
<http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2005-5/index.html>
http://arxiv.org/abs/0801.0287
No Lorentz violation
idiot
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm
Paul Stowe
To Glird and MPC755, to me and most the aether is, as the ancient
Greeks the medium of space. It, kike many concepts in the history of
science has taken on different characteristics for different people's
interpretations. In fact, many arguments are about those perceptions
of the medium rather that it itself.
It is my view (and I think was Maxwell's & Lorentz) that it is it,
that gives matter its properties. If so, it is NOT matter but instead
the building blocks of same. Peter Draper (PD) kept trying to pin me
into a corner into claiming that I was advocating a 'material' medium
as the aether. I countered and still claim that it is all determined
on how one uses the definitions. It seems clear from the observations
of nature that the aether must be of a particulate nature and consist
of quantized vortices as identified by Maxwell. These aether entities
will have individual momentum and thus a characteristic speed, c. It
is compressible, thus by definition of that term, has some spacing or
granularity between said entities. However, since from our
perspective, we can never stop a single aether entity rest mass, thus
the term mass as we define it cannot be assigned to them. We
certainly can 'compute' a value for it just like we can for a photon
but the very same restrictions apply. Thus massive terms can be
defined for the medium, a 'mass' density for example. I doubt that
the concept of pressure, per-se can even be applied since there would
exist nothing for such to exert itself against. However, momentum/
energy gradients, stress, strain, shear, temperature, and such are
applicable. The term 'ether' is a modern contracted version of the
same word and can be confused with the chemical which smells
sooo...sweet. As such, using the proper spelling avoids all such
confusion.
MERRY CHRISTMAS, HAPPY HOLIDAYS, and GOOD WILL TO ALL...
Regards,
Paul
mpc755
The concept of pressure can be applied to the aether. When the aether
is displaced by matter it is not at rest. The aether pushing back
towards the matter is the aether pressure. The aether pressure
associated with the aether displaced by massive objects is gravity.
A C-60 molecule in a double slit experiment creates a displacement
wave in the aether. The C-60 molecule always enters and exits a single
slit while the displacement wave the C-60 molecule creates in the
aether enters and exits multiple slits. When the displacement wave
exits the slits it creates interference which alters the direction the
C-60 molecule travels. Detecting the C-60 molecule causes the
displacement wave to be turned into chop (dechoerence) and there is no
interference and the direction the C-60 molecule travels is not
altered.
Paul Stowe
> glird wrote:
>
> [snip crap]
>
> > The word is "aether"! {Should we call it "mpcether"}
>
> http://arXiv.org/abs/0706.2031
> <http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/Walsworth/pdf/PT_Romalis0704.pdf>
> No aether
>
> <http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2005-5/index.html>http://arxiv.org/abs/0801.0287
> No Lorentz violation
>
> idiot
>
> --
> (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm
And is totally irrelevant to disproof of the aether.
As for finding an idiot, look into a mirror...
Paul Stowe
In my opinion, you difficulty is thinking that matter is, somehow,
different and 'displaces' the medium. That's not the case for Maxwell/
Kelvin's vortex knots/soliton model. Certainly there is flows,
oscillations, and density gradients but pressure is defined (and it is
a definition problem, again) as a force per unit area. If there
exists no surfaces upon which the pressure can act it has no meaning.
At the level of the aether this is the case. I have a question, have
you studied Maxwell's actual model?
mpc755
I have read a book on Maxwell and have searched him on the web.
Maxwell's concept of a displacement current which is a precursor to
Aether Displacement.
Even if you choose not to discuss the aether in terms of pressure, the
Earth is still then compressing the aether it interacts with as it
orbits the Sun. This interaction requires energy. If the aether does
not 'compress back', there is no momentum.
However you want to define it, matter displaces the aether which would
otherwise exist where the matter is. This displaced aether is not at
rest. In my terminology, the aether pushes back. This pushing back is
a pressure towards the displacing matter. When you get to massive
objects like the Earth, this pushing back is gravity. Aether is also
displaced by objects moving through it.
'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html
"the [ether] of the former is at every place determined by connections
with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places"
This state is the aether's state of displacement and entrainment.
This connection is why a moving C-60 molecule creates a displacement
wave in the aether and is the reason for the observed behaviors of a
C-60 molecule in a double slit experiment.
My modified de Broglie statement is:
A moving object or particle has an associated aether displacement wave.
glird
>
>< pressure is defined as a force per unit area. If there
exists no surfaces upon which the pressure can act it has no meaning.
At the level of the aether this is the case. >
That is exactly right!
(Now, Paul, perhaps you already KNOW the difference between "aether"
and ether, so perhaps my definition will be superfluous. :)
glird
xxein
xxein: Apparently Christmas has no affect on all this faulty logic
but have a good holliday season anyway.
mpc755
>
> >< pressure is defined as a force per unit area. If there
>
> exists no surfaces upon which the pressure can act it has no meaning.
> At the level of the aether this is the case. >
>
> That is exactly right!
What is it you are standing on? Is that not a surface? And what is
that built on? Is that not a surface?
Matter (compressed aether) displaces the aether.
Matter in its compressed form is a self contained entity. It is
connect to the aether (uncompressed matter), but the aether does not
exist where the matter (compressed aether) is. When the matter which
is occupying a point in three dimensional space moves, is a void left
behind, or does aether fill the space the matter existed in? The
aether 'fills back in'. I term this pressure.
mpc755
Light travels at 'c' with respect to the aether.
An atomic clock 'ticks' with respect to the aether pressure.
The aether pressure associated with the aether displaced by massive
objects is gravity.
When a double slit experiment is performed with a C-60 molecule the
C-60 molecule enters and exits a single slit while the displacement
wave the C-60 molecule creates in the aether travels through multiple
slits.
Einstein's train gedanken performed with any medium at rest with
respect to the embankment and the light traveling through the medium
travels from A and B to M'. Light travels with respect to the medium.
Einstein's train gadenken performed with aether at rest with respect
to the embankment and the light traveling through the aether travels
from A and B to M'. Light travels with respect to the aether.
In the image on the right here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#The_experiment
There are physical waves in the aether traveling both the blue and
red
paths, while a photon 'particle' travels the blue or red path. Where
the blue and red paths are combined in the image, the physical waves
in the aether create interference which alters the direction the
photon 'particle' travels.
Paul Stowe
Reading books on Maxwell's theory is not the same as reading Maxwell
first hand. Most either deliberately or by 'telephone' misrepresent
his works, especially the earlier ones. Heavyside for one was no fan
of Maxwell's model and deliberately and actively either misrepresented
or ignored many elements of Maxwell's work. He's famous for saying
Maxwell's theory is only Maxwell's equations. That's like saying that
everything that is a house is only that which you can see. In reading
your copious posting here it seems very clear to me that you do not
understand Maxwell's model. Try actually reading
http://www.vacuum-physics.com/Maxwell/maxwell_oplf.pdf
and understanding what is being presented.
Just for an example, what is the difference between pressure and
energy density for a simple irrotational gas? The answer, the number
of dimensions under evaluation. That is why one can write,
c^2 = 3P/z
since pressure is one dimensional we need the 3 to represent to total
energy density of 3D space. Did you notice that pressure and energy
density has the very same physical dimensionality?
However 'I' want to define it in Maxwell's model matter does not
displace the aether. Matter is specific quantum fluidic self
contained structures of aether vorticity. That is the 'atomic vortex
hypothesis' of Helmholtz, Maxwell, and Lord Kelvin. There is, in that
sense, no displacement of the aether itself, just how it is
structured. If you have ever watched or blown smoke rings you know
what 'self contained' means in that sense. If air was in-viscous
those rings would be of a permanent nature. It is the viscosity of
the air that dissipates the structure.
Now I can lead you to Maxwell's own works but I cannot make you read &
understand them. It is the magnetic circulation in the vortices
interactions that result in the observed electric repulsion or
attraction which, of course, is why we call it electromagnetic
phenomena. There is no mystery there, we can reproduce the same
phenomena in any fluid medium on-demand. It is all based upon
Bernoulli's principle.
mpc755
When Maxwell discusses a displacement current is there a physical
displacement?
If Maxwell's displacement current is not a physical displacement,
which makes no sense, all that means is Maxwell's model is not Aether
Displacement. My model is Aether Displacement.
> Matter is specific quantum fluidic self
> contained structures of aether vorticity. That is the 'atomic vortex
> hypothesis' of Helmholtz, Maxwell, and Lord Kelvin. There is, in that
> sense, no displacement of the aether itself, just how it is
> structured. If you have ever watched or blown smoke rings you know
> what 'self contained' means in that sense. If air was in-viscous
> those rings would be of a permanent nature. It is the viscosity of
> the air that dissipates the structure.
>
> Now I can lead you to Maxwell's own works but I cannot make you read &
> understand them. It is the magnetic circulation in the vortices
> interactions that result in the observed electric repulsion or
> attraction which, of course, is why we call it electromagnetic
> phenomena. There is no mystery there, we can reproduce the same
> phenomena in any fluid medium on-demand. It is all based upon
> Bernoulli's principle.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Androcles
"mpc755" <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0e0d4a88-d6d2-499d...@t19g2000vbc.googlegroups.com...
=============================================
If Maxwell's displacement current is not a physical displacement,
which makes no sense, all that means is Maxwell's model is not Aether
Displacement. Your model is illogical crap that makes no sense, moron.
xxein
> On Dec 25, 5:24 pm, xxein <xx...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > xxein: Apparently Christmas has no affect on all this faulty logic
> > but have a good holliday season anyway.
>
> Light travels at 'c' with respect to the aether.
>
> An atomic clock 'ticks' with respect to the aether pressure.
>
of people are. That means everybody, many much degreed physicists
included.
But logic says you are nothing. Now you can feel bad. Too bad logic
ultimately rules, huh? I hope you are not still waiting for a Santa
Claus.
mpc755
The speed of a GPS satellite with respect to the aether causes it to
displace more aether and for that aether to exert more pressure on
the
clock in the GPS satellite than the aether pressure associated with a
clock at rest with respect to the Earth. This causes the GPS
satellite
clock to "result in a delay of about 7 ìs/day". The aether pressure
associated with the aether displaced by the Earth exerts less
pressure
on the GPS satellite than a similar clock at rest on the Earth
"causing the GPS clocks to appear faster by about 45 ìs/day".
Combining the aether pressure associated with the speed at which the
GPS satellite moves in the aether and the aether pressure associated
with the aether displaced by the Earth causes "clocks on the GPS
satellites tick approximately 38 ìs/day faster than clocks on the
ground" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS).
mpc755
Aether is an elastic medium and does not rest when displaced. It
pushes back. When matter displaces the aether, the pressure the
aether
exerts back towards the matter is gravity.
When a C-60 molecule is used in a double slit experiment, the
displacement wave the C-60 molecule creates in the aether enters and
exits multiple slits while the C-60 molecule enters and exits a
single
slit.
'DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT? By A.
EINSTEIN'
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf
"If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass
diminishes by L/c2."
The mass of the body does diminish, but the matter which no longer
exists as part of the body has not vanished. It still exists, as
aether. As the matter transitions to aether it expands in three
dimensions. The effect this transition has on the surrounding aether
and matter is energy.
Sam Wormley
>
> The speed of a GPS satellite with respect to the aether causes it to
> displace more aether and for that aether to exert more pressure on
> the clock in the GPS satellite than the aether pressure associated with a
> clock at rest with respect to the Earth. This causes the GPS
> satellite
How do you explain this graph:
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/fig_2.html
mpc755
Since the shuttle is moving fast in a low earth orbit, the displaced
aether of the shuttle pushes back and increases the pressure against
the shuttle which slows the rate at which the clock 'ticks'. Even
though the other satellites are moving faster through the aether than
the shuttle is, the other satellites are so far away from the Earth
that the aether pressure associated with the aether displaced by the
Earth (gravity) has more of an impact on the rate at which the clocks
'tick' than does its speed with respect to the aehter, which means
less overall aether pressure and the clocks 'tick' faster.
glird
MERRY CHRISTMAS!!
Before presenting the new definition I will paste here some relevant
things copied from one of my books:
"Matter exists in two modes, amorphous and particulate. The
amorphous mode is continuous, compressible, and easily movable.
Because it doesn't have a surface, it doesn't reflect light; thus is
now called "dark matter". Particles are patterned portions of the
same compressible material, each of which maintains a lasting
identity. Because all particles have a surface, sometimes they will
reflect light thus are visible to us. Any spaces between and within
such particles is always filled with matter.
"Particles and their intervening material (the "matrix")
collectively interact to form the solid, liquid, and gaseous states
with which we are familiar. The modes and states of matter are
interconvertible."
Here is more stuff copied from another of my books. {Please pardon
me or copying so much of it, but i am always fascinated by what I
wrote years ago,}
____________
This is the problem in terms of the theories of those days:
1. A universally stationary incompressible ether is taken as referent
for the absolute velocity, c, of electromagnetic waves, such as light,
enacted by it.
2. Once a ray leaves its source the ray continues on at c in the
ether, regardless of the motion of that source before or later.
3. If an observer is moving directly toward or away from the
approaching ray at a velocity v through this luminiferous medium the
classical principle of relativity requires, according to the rules of
addition and subtraction of velocities, that the ray is moving at c+v
and c v, respectively, relative to him. Therefore, observers stationed
on a planet moving through the ether at such an absolute velocity v
should find these variable relative velocities for light moving in
various different directions.
For a simple example of what this means consider three cars
traveling on a highway. One moves east, at 50 mph, the other two move
west at 50 and 60 mph respectively. How fast are the westbound cars
moving relatively to each other and how fast do the two of them
approach the eastbound car? How fast do they leave the eastbound car
behind, once they pass each other? As you work out the answers, you
are doing the above problem.
There is another set of components that we will generally ignore in
what follows, just as Voigt and Lorentz did. It is not needed except
for one detail: There are other directions than north, south, east and
west; just as there are other directions than X, Y and Z in a
coordinate system. Cars moving on other roads than the above, or rays
in other directions than along axes of a coordinate system, move at
different relative velocities than c v or c+v, with respect to our
above cars or observers. The one other such relative velocity with
which we will be concerned is that in which the light fronts propagate
perpendicularly to the direction in which the observer is moving.
(Another car is moving northward, under a bridge on which the above
three cars pass. What is the relative velocity of the three cars with
respect to this one?)
A straightforward application of the Pythagorean theorem* provides
the relative velocity of a beam upon the moving system's perpendicular
axis, such as the other arm of the interferometer. That value is c' =
qc, where q=(1-v^2/c^2)^.5, in either and both directions upon this Y
or Z directed arm. (Since Y and Z are treated equally in what
follows, we may often ignore affects in Z as we go.)
* In case you wish to know exactly how to obtain the above value, it
goes like this: Let the hypotenuse's length and direction be denotes
by ct, in which c is the velocity of light, t the time in transit,
thus ct the length of the hypotenuse of a right triangle. Let the base
line's length equal vt, v being the velocity of the given system along
its X axis line for the same time, t, thus vt being the distance the
system traveled. Let the vertical side of the right triangle thereby
formed represent the distance the light ascended relative to the
moving system's vertical axis in the time, t (as though the ray
traveled straight up Y instead of along the hypotenusal path).
Application of the Pythagorean theorem, "the square of the hypotenuse
equals the sum of the squares of the two sides" then solves for c',
the relative velocity of the given beam with respect to the Y axis of
the moving system. The result is, c' = qc.
Replacing the "ether" with "empty space" as the referent for this
absolute velocity of light has no affect on the mathematics of the
problem. The ether was taken as stationary in Newtonian space anyway,
after Physics gave up Maxwell's ether in favor of a {nonexistent}
stationary incompressible medium.
The problem of their day, and the reason for choosing to consider
velocities relative to perpendicular axes of horizontally moving
systems, is revealed by the construction and operation of the
interferometer itself. The instrument split an incoming ray of light
into two mutually perpendicular paths, led them back and forth along
those paths by partially transmitting and partially reflecting
mirrors, then brought them together again at a viewpoint.
According to the above relative velocity considerations, the average
two way relative velocity of the beam in the direction of motion of
the Earth is different from that in the perpendicular directions;
hence in the mutually perpendicular paths within the interferometer.
The split beams should therefore arrive at the viewpoint at different
instants.
Explanation: The average relative velocity along X (taken as Earth's
and the interferometer's direction of motion) is found by taking into
account that the ray will spend different periods moving one way than
it does the other, due to its different relative velocities in the two
opposite directions. Accordingly, to obtain the time during which the
ray travels the outbound length at c-v, where we take that length as
one unit long, we just divide 1 by c-v, i.e. t1 = 1/(c-v). Similarly,
the return period is t2 = 1/(c+v). Adding these together gives us the
total time, t, to travel one unit length per leg both ways. Half of
that then gives us the average time along each leg. The average X
directed velocity of the ray is found by dividing the length of the
arm, x = 1 unit, by the average period of the ray per leg, ta. Hence:
c'= x/t_a, in which t_a = .5t, where t is the total time of the round-
trip of the ray. From above, t is equal to t1 + t2, and these are
given above as x/(c-v) and x/(c+v) respectively. Substituting equals
for equals, we obtain,
c' = x/t_a = x/.5t = 2x/t = 2x/(t1+t2) = 2x/[{x/(c-v)}+{x/(c
+v)}]
=2x/[2xc/(c^2-v^2)] = 1/[c/(c^2-v^2)] = (c^2-
v^2)/c.
Dividing both sides by c, we arrive at:
c'/c = (c^2 - v^2)/c^2 = 1 - v^2/c^2,
wherefore c' = (1 - v^2/c^2)c = Qc, where Q = 1 - v^2/c^2.
If we give all velocities as proportions of the speed of light, c,
then this becomes simply: c' = 1 - v^2/c^2 = Q.
Note: Q denotes the average two way relative velocity of light on the
axis of Earth's motion. The derivation presents it as a proportion of
the speed of light. Both for simplicity and because the above
mathematics requests it, we shall hereafter give all lengths as
fractions, x/c, of the distance light moves in unit time; all
velocities as fractions, v/c, of the velocity of light; and no matter
how long a unit time we choose, we shall appoint that unit of time as
"one second." Accordingly, the speed of light becomes 1 unit/sec. This
automatically defines a unit length as the distance light travels in
one second, where "one second" is restricted to the above definition
and does not, therefore, denote a conventional "second".
(A conventional "second" is appointed as follows: Earth's period
of rotation in its axis is divided into 24 segments, called "hours".
These are divided into 60 segments called "minutes". These are divided
into 60 segments called "seconds". All such segments of this kind of
"time" are kinematic abstractions that do not otherwise exist in
nature. So are the "second" and the units of time and length, as
defined above. The only reason for my above definition of one second
is to divorce our unit length from always being an unwieldy 186,300
miles. Otherwise, this is not intended as a criticism or replacement
of the conventional second.)
Where units of measure [dimensions] are not part of an equation or
calculation, we thus provide that c = 1 and x or v are always given in
terms of the above fractions. Though it may take a few minutes to
review and accustom yourself to these usages, we shall find that it
enormously simplifies coming demonstrations. What might otherwise take
a computer to calculate can instantly be computed in your head. [For
example, if a system moves at 239.9 x 1010 cm/sec while light moves
after it at 2.998 x 1010 cm/sec, and the system is about 931,500 miles
away to start with, how long will it take a ray to catch the system?
Answer: System X moves at .8c. Light moves at c. They are 5 light
units apart, initially. The relative velocity of the ray is c-v = .
2c. Therefore, the time required is: 5/.2 = 25 seconds. To check the
accuracy of the answer: In 25 seconds light moves 25 units while X
moves .8 x 25 = 20 units. X has thus reached x = 25 and so has the
ray. Answer verified.
Since we found that the average two way value is c'=Q in the axis of
motion, while the value of a perpendicularly directed relative
velocity of light is c'=q, then the relation between values of c' in
the relevant directions is
c'_x/c'_yz = Q/q = q^2/q = (1 - v^2/c^2)/sqrt(1 - v^2/
c^2)
= sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2) = q.
In short, the average relative velocity of a two way beam in the
direction of motion of a moving system is q times slower than that in
the perpendicular directions.
Accordingly, since the two arms of the interferometer were made
exactly the same length, while the average velocities of the split
beams differ by q in each leg, the two beams should arrive at the
viewpoint at different instants, hence be out of phase with each
other. They should therefore produce an interference pattern.
None was found.
Physicists call the experiment "negative"; first because the results
produced no interference patterns and second because that disagreed
with prior expectations. Theoretical physics could not explain these
results and that was the problem.
Though Voigt's paper was completely unconcerned with this general
problem it contained the entire virginal seed of the special theory of
relativity. He began by considering a light source remote from an
observer, at any given point of the observer's infinitely extending
Euclidean coordinate system. He allowed both the source and observer
system to be moving in any direction at all through the stationary
luminiferous ether.
He soon limited his considerations to the special case in which the
observer system maintained a given inertial velocity, v, along its own
X direction. Relatively to such a system, the luminiferous medium
flowed through at -v.* Plane waves of light transmitting through this
ether thus presumably passed this observer system at varied relative
velocities, causing a Doppler shift in viewed wavelength.
* This was the very basis and underlying physical theory of the
Michelson-Morley experiment. They were seeking to discover, from
simple mathematical analysis of the resulting interference patterns,
the precise value of v, Earth's "absolute velocity" through the ether,
thus through Newtonian absolute space. That was to have been the
penultimate step through which a purely deterministic theoretical
Physics could complete itself.
Through a complicated-looking series of affine and rotational
transformation equations, Voigt aligned the observer's coordinate
system so its direction of motion was upon its own rotated X axis, and
translated (i.e. moved) its origin to the light source at an initial
time, t=0.
He then considered the relative positions of consecutively emitted
plane wave fronts, moving at c along X, by plotting them on the XYZ
axes of the observer's coordinate system. His mathematics then treated
the fronts as though they successively emitted from the system's
origin, which was instantaneously relocated upon the moving light
source at every new emission. Though the coordinate system was moving
at v through the ether, his procedure treated it as though it only did
so in discontinuous, instantaneous leaps; one per successive emission
of a light front. His coordinate system was thus taken as stationary
in the ether, though its origin was instantaneously relocated to the
light source as each successive wave initiated. This procedure
permitted him to allow that light is propagated at c with respect to
that medium, thus to his coordinate system at rest therein.
It permitted something else, as we shall see. [Not only
"permitted", but inserted it; namely, that the light front continued
to propagate at c relative to the jerky system itself, as though the
system were at rest despite its own absolute motion! As we shall see,
twenty years later Einstein repeated this identical complex procedure
for an accelerated system.]
Voigt then used the resulting equations to derive Doppler's equation
for the Doppler shift in viewed frequencies with respect to a moving
observer or a moving light source. Having thus derived the Doppler
equations he abandoned his prior mathematics and used the classical
Galilean transformations [x'=x vt, y'=y, z'=z] to compare spatial co-
ordinates obtained for given points by differently moving observer
systems.
As to the time, t; in Newtonian physics time is the same everywhere
so there was no need to provide for any t', a different "time" for
each specific observer system. (This "time" is the purely metrical
time of mathematical physics.)
Though there was no intended relation between the two events,
another observer, H. Lorentz, discovered in Voigt's paper a solution
to the dilemma that now puzzled the world's physicists: How to account
for the positive M&M interferometer demonstration that there is no
detectable difference in light speed of beams traversing Earth in
different directions.
In 1893 Lorentz, acknowledging that Fitzgerald had independently
come to the same conclusion, suggested a way to resolve the "null
experiment". To allow equal priority to the two people, Physics named
this device the "Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction hypothesis". It merely
stipulates that if the X arm were q shorter than the Y arm, say by
letting the arm in the direction of absolute velocity through the
electromagnetic wave conducting medium contract by q, then it would
take equal average times for the rays to travel these two arms at the
respectively different relative velocities, wherefore the two beams
would arrive at the viewpoint simultaneously, thus produce no
interference fringes.
The real priority for the Lorentz Fitzgerald length contraction; and
for the time dilatation "first" extracted by Larmour from the
equations floating around in 1900; and for the "local time" equation
Einstein later stipulated as the father of special relativity, belongs
to Voigt; although he never knew nor intended it.
Note: Relativists attribute the [wrong] "local time" equation to
Einstein, who wrongly attributed the [right] local time equation to
Poincare', who attributed it to Lorentz, who correctly attributed it
to Voigt, in a footnote in, if I recall right, an 1895 paper.
Whittaker attributed the entire Lorentz Transformation Equation Group
(so named by Poincare', who first produced them in 1905 in "Sur le
Dynamique") to Voigt's 1887 paper; in a footnote which first led me to
retrieve Voigt's never-previously-translated-into-English paper.
Whittaker was wrong. The Lorentz Transformation Equations, which are
the mathematical heart of special relativity theory, do not appear in
Voigt's paper; nor anywhere else prior to Poincare's of 1905 that
sparked their derivation a month or so later, by Einstein.
Therein lies the tale now being told.
____________
oh well ... time out while I continue to search for my prior
definition of "ether" before I define "aether" anew....
Oh well, i don't have to look again; because i already pasted in,
above, what's needed for me to continue.
"Matter exists in two modes, amorphous and particulate."
In my prior definitions i wrote, "The 'ether' is here defined as 'the
continuity aspect of space-filling compressible matter, even if
particles are part of that continuum." That definition remains valid.
However {!!} it no longer applies to "aether". Here, then, is my
new definition -- which I will now write for the very first time
anywhere.
The word "aether" denotes "the amorphous continuous resistively-
compressible matter that fills space everywhere, including the space
inside of particles; any and all of which are made of it.
ok ... i copied that and will paste it into a new file to be saved
for study later. For now,
Happy Holidays to Everyone,
and
Good night,
glird
Sam Wormley
Did you happen to notice the polarity of time dilation
changes at about just under 10,000 km radius, how does
your aether know how to act?
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/tn_frctfrq.png
mpc755
> On Dec 25, 10:15 am, glird <gl...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
> MERRY CHRISTMAS!!
>
> > Specially to mpc755 and Paul Stowe.
>
> > To Paul, for not answering my request to define mass, force, etc
> > in his long reply to me yesterday. (It left me pondering my OLD
> > definitions while dozing on and off through the night.)
> > To mpc for steering me toward the first new definition of a word
> > that I've had to make in several years. I will discuss the new
> > definition in a follow-up message.
> > The word is "aether"!
>
> Before presenting the new definition I will paste here some relevant
> things copied from one of my books:
> "Matter exists in two modes, amorphous and particulate. The
> amorphous mode is continuous, compressible, and easily movable.
> Because it doesn't have a surface, it doesn't reflect light; thus is
> now called "dark matter". Particles are patterned portions of the
> same compressible material, each of which maintains a lasting
> identity. Because all particles have a surface, sometimes they will
> reflect light thus are visible to us. Any spaces between and within
> such particles is always filled with matter.
Since particles have a surface and have a lasting indentity, they are
self contained particles which displace the aether which would
otherwise exist where the particle, with a surface, does.
Tom Potter
"Sam Wormley" <swor...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b5CdnSDJhNyH8ajW...@mchsi.com...
As can be seen by this thread
and by Sammy's reference which states:
"These clocks have gravitational and motional frequency shifts"..
Sammy's reference, like Einstein,
did not comprehend that clocks are
environment-affect-accumulators
and that what is indicated on clocks
is a function of the environment
they have been exposed to.
"Clocks <DO NOT> have gravitational and motional frequency shifts".
The OSCILLATORS that are used to drive the clocks.
do have "gravitational and motional frequency shifts"
As Galileo discovered hundreds of years ago
acceleration (A gravitational effect) affects the period of oscillators,
and as Doppler discovered the relative velocity between
a source and a sink affects the frequency received by the sink
due to the shortening or lengthening of the space between
the source and the sink between successive detection points.
( The point the collapse of the wave function occurs in the sink.)
A clock is whatever environment-affect-accumulator (Clock)
is used by a sentient being to scale separation of events.
( A pocket watch, days, months, years, heart beats,
pendulum swings, crystal vibrations, sand dial, etc.)
Built-in correlators have evolved in certain classes of animals
that enable them to correlate incoming events with past events,
and to correlate sets of past events with other past events.
In man the hippocampus serves this function.
Various correlations drive various gland secretions
at various levels as a functions of the correlations,
thus spurring physical reactions in animals.
In order to better understand his environment
man has externalized and improved correlators
and uses them to make finer separations between events
and to perform faster and more accurate correlations
on sets of events that have been accumulated by him,
his race, his religion, his nation, his trees, etc.
Note that one's CLOCK is the particular
environment-affect-accumulator
that is being used at a particular time
as his event-separation-standard.
Trees are clocks,
and although tree rings can be used
to indicate the number of seasonal variations
that the trees have been exposed to,
running at a tree,
or exposing a tree to different velocities and gravities
does not affect the count of the tree rings,
nor does running at electronic counters,
that are used to accumulate pulses
from oscillators synced to stable atomic processes,
change the counts on the electronic counters.
--
Tom Potter
http://tdp1001.spaces.live.com
http://www.tompotter.us/misc.html
http://webspace.webring.com/people/st/tdp1001
http://notsocrazyideas.blogspot.com
http://tdp1001.wiki.zoho.com
-----------------------------------------------
mpc755
>
> - Show quoted text -
If a GPS satellite was able to move fast enough through the aether, it
could cause a clock to 'tick' slower than a similar clock on the
Earth. It is all about the aether pressure. Whether it be due to the
aether pressure associated with the aether displaced by massive
objects (gravity) or the aether displaced by a fast moving object
(C-60 molecule in a double slit experiment). The aether is not at rest
when displaced and pushes back.
If you slowed the Shuttle down so it was at 'rest' with the entrained
aether of the Earth, its clock would 'tick' faster than a similar
clock on the Earth.
The graph is showing the combined aether pressure associated with the
aether displaced by the moving object and the aether pressure
associated with the distance the object is from the center of the
Earth due to the aether displaced by the Earth.
The aether pressure related to the speed of an object relative to the
aether and the aether pressure associated with the aether displaced by
the Earth and its effect on the object combine to form the graph.
Androcles
====================
Prove it, shithead.
Inertial
news:447b6e00-3aa4-4c9d...@k23g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
Except we don't do that .. we measure the speed of light (c) relative to
whichever frame of reference we are measureing
> 2. Once a ray leaves its source the ray continues on at c in the
> ether, regardless of the motion of that source before or later.
Get rid of 'in the ether' and you're fine
> 3. If an observer is moving directly toward or away from the
> approaching ray at a velocity v through this luminiferous medium the
> classical principle of relativity requires, according to the rules of
> addition and subtraction of velocities, that the ray is moving at c+v
> and c v, respectively, relative to him.
Except that doesn't happen
> Therefore, observers stationed
> on a planet moving through the ether at such an absolute velocity v
> should find these variable relative velocities for light moving in
> various different directions.
Except that doesn't happen
> For a simple example of what this means consider three cars
> traveling on a highway. One moves east, at 50 mph, the other two move
> west at 50 and 60 mph respectively. How fast are the westbound cars
> moving relatively to each other and how fast do the two of them
> approach the eastbound car? How fast do they leave the eastbound car
> behind, once they pass each other? As you work out the answers, you
> are doing the above problem.
But that is not the case for things (light) travelling at c
[snip more irrelevance]
> Replacing the "ether" with "empty space" as the referent for this
> absolute velocity of light
There is no need for any particular referent for the 'absolute' velocity of
light .. it is 'c' wrt all inertial referents
> has no affect on the mathematics of the
> problem.
Indeed .. because you need no absolute reference
[snip heaps more unnecessary stuff]
> ____________
>
> oh well ... time out while I continue to search for my prior
> definition of "ether" before I define "aether" anew....
What a waste of a post then
> Oh well, i don't have to look again; because i already pasted in,
> above, what's needed for me to continue.
> "Matter exists in two modes, amorphous and particulate."
> In my prior definitions i wrote, "The 'ether' is here defined as 'the
> continuity aspect of space-filling compressible matter, even if
> particles are part of that continuum." That definition remains valid.
So you just wasted a post on a whole lot of waffle you didn't need.
> However {!!} it no longer applies to "aether". Here, then, is my
> new definition -- which I will now write for the very first time
> anywhere.
> The word "aether" denotes "the amorphous continuous resistively-
> compressible matter that fills space everywhere, including the space
> inside of particles; any and all of which are made of it.
So in what meaningful way is that any different?
Sam Wormley
I knew you would fall for that. Thanks for plsaying.
Sam Wormley
>
>
> As Galileo discovered hundreds of years ago
> acceleration (A gravitational effect) affects the period of oscillators,
>
As usual Potter implies an understanding that Galileo
did not have. Galileo used the periodicity of a pendulum
to time ball rolling down inclined planes. He DID NOT have
knowledge that a pendulum at the top of the hill would tick
at a different rate than at the bottom of the hill. That
would come more than 300 years later.
Potter, you are such a bullshitter--you should have been a
salesman!
Sam Wormley
>
> Since particles have a surface and have a lasting indentity, they are
> self contained particles which displace the aether which would
> otherwise exist where the particle, with a surface, does.
>
What ever gave you the idea that particles such as leptons
and quarks have surfaces?
mpc755
>
> - Show quoted text -
When a double slit experiment is perfomed with a C-60 molecule, the
C-60 molecule always enters and exits a single slit while the
displacement wave in the aether travels through multiple slits.
That is what all of the experiment evidence suggests because whenever
a C-60 molecule is detected exiting the slits, it is always exiting a
single slit.
To think a C-60 molecule exits multiple slits when you do not look for
it, is nonsense.
mpc755
If you performed Einstein's train gedanken in water at rest with
respect to the embankment, where do you measure to when you determine
how far the light travels to M' from the lighting strikes at A/A' and
B/B'? You either measure to where A and B are when the light reaches
M' or you measure to A' and B' and factor in the speed of the train
relative to the embankment which gives the speed of light relative to
the water. However you do it, if the light from the lightning strikes
at A/A' and B/B' reach the Observer at M simultaneously, the Obsever
at M on the train and the Observer at M' on the embankment both
conclude the lightning strikes were simultaneous.
> > Good night,- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
mpc755
> "Sam Wormley" <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Wave functions are mathematical constructs. Take for instance a C-60
molecule in a double slit experiment. If detectors are placed at the
exits to the slits the C-60 molecule is detected exiting a single slit
because the C-60 molecule always exits a single slit. It is the
displacement wave the C-60 molecule creates in the aether which enters
and exits multiple slits. The act of detecting turns the displacement
wave into chop (decoherence) and there is no interference.
Androcles
=============================================
Well done. That's the best proof of shitheaded ignorance I've ever seen.
When a double door experiment is performed with an elephant, the
elephant always enters and exits a single door while the coffee drips
through the filter paper (whether it has slits or not).
That is what all of the experiment evidence suggests because whenever
an elephant is detected exiting the doors, it is always exiting a single
door.
To think an elephant exits multiple doors when you do not look for
it, is nonsense.
This has sweet fuck all to do with proving anything else, but I thought
I'd share it with you.
mpc755
> > ====================
> > Prove it, shithead.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> When a double slit experiment is perfomed with a C-60 molecule, the
> C-60 molecule always enters and exits a single slit while the
> displacement wave in the aether travels through multiple slits.
>
> That is what all of the experiment evidence suggests because whenever
> a C-60 molecule is detected exiting the slits, it is always exiting a
> single slit.
>
> To think a C-60 molecule exits multiple slits when you do not look for
> it, is nonsense.
> =============================================
> Well done. That's the best proof of shitheaded ignorance I've ever seen.
>
> When a double door experiment is performed with an elephant, the
> elephant always enters and exits a single door while the coffee drips
> through the filter paper (whether it has slits or not).
>
> That is what all of the experiment evidence suggests because whenever
> an elephant is detected exiting the doors, it is always exiting a single
> door.
>
> To think an elephant exits multiple doors when you do not look for
> it, is nonsense.
>
> This has sweet fuck all to do with proving anything else, but I thought
> I'd share it with you.
The elephant is traveling fast enough through water that it creates a
bow wave in the water. The bow wave enters and exits multiple doors
while the elephant enters and exits a single door. The bow wave exits
the doors and creates interference. If the bow wave was large enough
and the associated interference is large enough, the interference will
alter the direction the elephant travels. If there are elephant
trainers standing in the doorways in order to detect the elephant, the
elephant trainers will destroy the coherenece (dechoherence) of the
waves and turn them into chop. The chop will not alter the direction
the elephant travels.
Androcles
=============================================
When a double door experiment is performed with an elephant no water
is used, shithead. When a no-slit coffee filter experiment is performed
it is done in the kitchen, not at the bottom of the sea, cretin.
mpc755
In a modified double door experiment water is used. The water is
analogous to aether in a double slit experiment. The water is
displaced and so is the aether.
A moving particle or object creates a displacement wave in the medium
it exists in.
Androcles
=======================================
I don't modify experiments to fake results, idiot. No water is used,
the elephant would drown and the RSPCA would object.
To think an elephant exits multiple doors when you do not look for
it, is nonsense, Dumbo.
Tom Potter
Start with these Sammy.
http://www.imss.fi.it/ms72/INDEX.HTM
I would like to thank my pal Sammy for
indicating that I should have been a salesman,
considering that
"Nothing happens until somebody sells something."
and that after good salesmen get orders,
a company can get all of the scientists, engineers, technicians,
office personnel, etc. that they want.
I think that Sammy is trying to make the point
that entrepreneurs are free market generals,
salesmen are free market warriors,
public employees are free market cowards,
and the masses are sheep.
Of course, the Mass Media
( New York Times, Washington Post, Time Inc., etc.)
that conned the masses into believing that General Relativity
is a useful model of reality
are much better salesmen that I could ever hope to be.
I would never be able to sell a model
that used rubber clocks and rulers
to speculate about time travel, worm holes,
gravitons, the beginning and end of the universe
and the mind of God to anyone.
( Unless they were stupid or very impressionable.)
Sam Wormley
>
> "Sam Wormley" <swor...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:JKidnbLq-dxLTqjW...@mchsi.com...
>> On 12/25/09 9:46 PM, Tom Potter wrote:
>>>
>>> As Galileo discovered hundreds of years ago
>>> acceleration (A gravitational effect) affects the period of oscillators,
>>
>> As usual Potter implies an understanding that Galileo
>> did not have. Galileo used the periodicity of a pendulum
>> to time ball rolling down inclined planes. He DID NOT have
>> knowledge that a pendulum at the top of the hill would tick
>> at a different rate than at the bottom of the hill. That
>> would come more than 300 years later.
>>
>> Potter, you are such a bullshitter--you should have been a
>> salesman!
>>
>> Where in the literature is is discovery noted, Potter?
>
> Start with these Sammy.
>
> http://www.imss.fi.it/ms72/INDEX.HTM
>
> http://scanserver.ulib.org/is/scanserver/newton/xml/doc.scn?pg=409&rp=http%3A%2F%2Fscanserver.ulib.org%2Fis%2Fscanserver%2FSearch.asp%3FgroupId%3Dnewton%26bookId%3Dnewton%26query%3Dpendulum&auth=c2b421b91241a34ea8
>
Like I said, Potter, where in the literature, is there
indication that Galileo had knowledge of different pendulum
periods in different gravitational potentials? Newton would
have been thrilled! Give us a break, Potter.
xxein
> On Dec 25, 8:29 pm,xxein<xx...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
xxein: I have shown my math and locic for GPS several times. Now
let's see yours.
Tom Potter
Sammy, read my references.
I can explain it to you,
provide references for you
BUT
I can't understand it for you.
--
Tom Potter
--
Sam Wormley
> As Galileo discovered hundreds of years ago
> acceleration (A gravitational effect) affects the period of
>
Where in the literature you cite is this discovery noted, Potter?
mpc755
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> xxein: I have shown my math and locic for GPS several times. Now
> let's see yours.
The speed of a GPS satellite with respect to the aether causes it to
displace more aether and for that aether to exert more pressure on the
clock in the GPS satellite than the aether pressure associated with a
clock at rest with respect to the Earth. This causes the GPS satellite
clock to "result in a delay of about 7 ìs/day". The aether pressure
associated with the aether displaced by the Earth exerts less pressure
on the GPS satellite than a similar clock at rest on the Earth
"causing the GPS clocks to appear faster by about 45 ìs/day".
Combining the aether pressure associated with the speed at which the
GPS satellite moves in the aether and the aether pressure associated
with the aether displaced by the Earth causes "clocks on the GPS
satellites tick approximately 38 ìs/day faster than clocks on the
ground" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS).
The above is a physical explanation of why clocks 'tick' at different
rates depending upon the aether pressure associated with their speed
relative to the aether combined with the effects of the aether
pressure associated with the aether displaced by massive objects
(gravity).
I've explained what is physically occurring in nature to cause clocks
to 'tick' at different rates. Let's hear yours.
Androcles
On Dec 27, 6:16 pm, xxein <xx...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Dec 25, 8:41 pm, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 25, 8:29 pm,xxein<xx...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 25, 5:28 pm, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:> On Dec 25, 5:24
> > > pm,xxein<xx...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > > > >xxein: Apparently Christmas has no affect on all this faulty logic
> > > > > but have a good holliday season anyway.
>
> > > > Light travels at 'c' with respect to the aether.
>
> > > > An atomic clock 'ticks' with respect to the aether pressure.
>
> > >xxein: You are blind to logic. But don't feel too bad. Nearly 100%
> > > of people are. That means everybody, many much degreed physicists
> > > included.
>
> > > But logic says you are nothing. Now you can feel bad. Too bad logic
> > > ultimately rules, huh? I hope you are not still waiting for a Santa
> > > Claus.
>
> > The speed of a GPS satellite with respect to the aether causes it to
> > displace more aether and for that aether to exert more pressure on
> > the
> > clock in the GPS satellite than the aether pressure associated with a
> > clock at rest with respect to the Earth. This causes the GPS
> > satellite
> > associated with the aether displaced by the Earth exerts less
> > pressure
> > on the GPS satellite than a similar clock at rest on the Earth
> > Combining the aether pressure associated with the speed at which the
> > GPS satellite moves in the aether and the aether pressure associated
> > with the aether displaced by the Earth causes "clocks on the GPS
> > ground"
> > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS).-Hide quoted
> > text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> xxein: I have shown my math and locic for GPS several times. Now
> let's see yours.
The speed of a GPS satellite with respect to the aether causes it to
displace more aether
===============================================
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS -- None.
GPS receivers do not have atomic clocks.
Idiot.
mpc755
wrote:
> "mpc755" <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ddea2d3b-321c-4207...@m26g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 27, 6:16 pm, xxein <xx...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 25, 8:41 pm, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 25, 8:29 pm,xxein<xx...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 25, 5:28 pm, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:> On Dec 25, 5:24
> > > > pm,xxein<xx...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > >xxein: Apparently Christmas has no affect on all this faulty logic
> > > > > > but have a good holliday season anyway.
>
> > > > > Light travels at 'c' with respect to the aether.
>
> > > > > An atomic clock 'ticks' with respect to the aether pressure.
>
> > > >xxein: You are blind to logic. But don't feel too bad. Nearly 100%
> > > > of people are. That means everybody, many much degreed physicists
> > > > included.
>
> > > > But logic says you are nothing. Now you can feel bad. Too bad logic
> > > > ultimately rules, huh? I hope you are not still waiting for a Santa
> > > > Claus.
>
> > > The speed of a GPS satellite with respect to the aether causes it to
> > > displace more aether and for that aether to exert more pressure on
> > > the
> > > clock in the GPS satellite than the aether pressure associated with a
> > > clock at rest with respect to the Earth. This causes the GPS
> > > satellite
> > > associated with the aether displaced by the Earth exerts less
> > > pressure
> > > on the GPS satellite than a similar clock at rest on the Earth
> > > Combining the aether pressure associated with the speed at which the
> > > GPS satellite moves in the aether and the aether pressure associated
> > > with the aether displaced by the Earth causes "clocks on the GPS
> > > ground"
> > > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS).-Hidequoted
> > > text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > xxein: I have shown my math and locic for GPS several times. Now
> > let's see yours.
>
> The speed of a GPS satellite with respect to the aether causes it to
> displace more aether
>
> ===============================================
> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
> Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS -- None.
> GPS receivers do not have atomic clocks.
> Idiot.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_clock
"Atomic clocks are the basis of the GPS navigation system."
Androcles
> > > associated with the aether displaced by the Earth exerts less
> > > pressure
> > > on the GPS satellite than a similar clock at rest on the Earth
> > > Combining the aether pressure associated with the speed at which the
> > > GPS satellite moves in the aether and the aether pressure associated
> > > with the aether displaced by the Earth causes "clocks on the GPS
> > > ground"
> > > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS).-Hidequoted
> > > text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > xxein: I have shown my math and locic for GPS several times. Now
> > let's see yours.
>
> The speed of a GPS satellite with respect to the aether causes it to
> displace more aether
>
> ===============================================
> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
> Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS -- None.
> GPS receivers do not have atomic clocks.
> Idiot.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_clock
"Atomic clocks are the basis of the GPS navigation system."
Then you ought to have one in every receiver, shithead.
The basis of the Global POSITIONING System is geometry
and that is COMPUTED with the COMPUTER in every
receiver, not the atomic clock it doesn't have.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wiki
: a Web site that allows visitors to make changes, contributions, or
corrections
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wacky
: absurdly or amusingly eccentric or irrational : crazy <wacky ideas>
It's "wackypedia", you just can't spell.
Virgil
"Tom Potter" <xpriv...@mailinator.com> wrote:
>
> "Sam Wormley" <swor...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:GpqdnUeWGNYx5KrW...@mchsi.com...
> > On 12/27/09 3:54 AM, Tom Potter wrote:
> >>
> >> "Sam Wormley" <swor...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:JKidnbLq-dxLTqjW...@mchsi.com...
> >>> On 12/25/09 9:46 PM, Tom Potter wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> As Galileo discovered hundreds of years ago
> >>>> acceleration (A gravitational effect) affects the period of
> >>>> oscillators,
> >>>
> >>> As usual Potter implies an understanding that Galileo
> >>> did not have. Galileo used the periodicity of a pendulum
> >>> to time ball rolling down inclined planes. He DID NOT have
> >>> knowledge that a pendulum at the top of the hill would tick
> >>> at a different rate than at the bottom of the hill. That
> >>> would come more than 300 years later.
> >>>
> >>> Potter, you are such a bullshitter--you should have been a
> >>> salesman!
> >>>
> >>> Where in the literature is is discovery noted, Potter?
Where Galileo noted that the period of a pendulum depended on its
length, which affectsthe geometry of the acceleration of gravity on the
bob.
mpc755
> > > > associated with the aether displaced by the Earth exerts less
> > > > pressure
> > > > on the GPS satellite than a similar clock at rest on the Earth
> > > > Combining the aether pressure associated with the speed at which the
> > > > GPS satellite moves in the aether and the aether pressure associated
> > > > with the aether displaced by the Earth causes "clocks on the GPS
http://www.gps.gov/applications/timing/index.html
"In addition to longitude, latitude, and altitude, the Global
Positioning System (GPS) provides a critical fourth dimension – time.
Each GPS satellite contains multiple atomic clocks that contribute
very precise time data to the GPS signals. GPS receivers decode these
signals, effectively synchronizing each receiver to the atomic clocks.
This enables users to determine the time to within 100 billionths of a
second, without the cost of owning and operating atomic clocks."
mpc755
> In article <hh96i0$v8...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> "Tom Potter" <xprivatn...@mailinator.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Sam Wormley" <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:GpqdnUeWGNYx5KrW...@mchsi.com...
> > > On 12/27/09 3:54 AM, Tom Potter wrote:
>
> > >>news:JKidnbLq-dxLTqjW...@mchsi.com...
> > >>> On 12/25/09 9:46 PM, Tom Potter wrote:
>
> > >>>> As Galileo discovered hundreds of years ago
> > >>>> acceleration (A gravitational effect) affects the period of
> > >>>> oscillators,
>
> > >>> As usual Potter implies an understanding that Galileo
> > >>> did not have. Galileo used the periodicity of a pendulum
> > >>> to time ball rolling down inclined planes. He DID NOT have
> > >>> knowledge that a pendulum at the top of the hill would tick
> > >>> at a different rate than at the bottom of the hill. That
> > >>> would come more than 300 years later.
>
> > >>> Potter, you are such a bullshitter--you should have been a
> > >>> salesman!
>
> > >>> Where in the literature is is discovery noted, Potter?
>
> Where Galileo noted that the period of a pendulum depended on its
> length, which affectsthe geometry of the acceleration of gravity on the
> bob.
The acceleration physically caused by the aether pressure associated
with the aether displaced by the Earth (gravity).
Androcles
> > > > associated with the aether displaced by the Earth exerts less
> > > > pressure
> > > > on the GPS satellite than a similar clock at rest on the Earth
> > > > Combining the aether pressure associated with the speed at which the
> > > > GPS satellite moves in the aether and the aether pressure associated
> > > > with the aether displaced by the Earth causes "clocks on the GPS
http://www.gps.gov/applications/timing/index.html
================================================
There ya go. GPS receivers work on the time they are given by the
satellites, not on ground time. So if the atomic clocks gained
an hour a day it wouldn't matter, the receiver is slaved to it and
is still just as inaccurate as every other GPS receiver, +/- 40 metres
vertical, not good enough to land a plane on a runway.
Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS -- None.
Idiot.
GPS receivers do not have atomic clocks but users can determine
the time to within 100 billionths of a second, not the 38 microseconds
gain or loss per day that you claimed.
Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS -- Still none.
Imbecile.
Effects_of_relativity_on_time_itself-- Still none.
Moron.
mpc755
If you read back through this 'conversation' you will see I never said
GPS receivers have atomic clocks. I said GPS satellites have atomic
clocks.
The speed of a GPS satellite with respect to the aether causes it to
displace more aether and for that aether to exert more pressure on the
clock in the GPS satellite than the aether pressure associated with a
clock at rest with respect to the Earth. This causes the GPS satellite
clock to "result in a delay of about 7 ìs/day". The aether pressure
associated with the aether displaced by the Earth exerts less pressure
on the GPS satellite than a similar clock at rest on the Earth
"causing the GPS clocks to appear faster by about 45 ìs/day".
Combining the aether pressure associated with the speed at which the
GPS satellite moves in the aether and the aether pressure associated
with the aether displaced by the Earth causes "clocks on the GPS
satellites tick approximately 38 ìs/day faster than clocks on the
ground" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS).
Androcles
===============================================
Effects_of_non-existent aether_on_time_itself-- Still none.
Shithead.
===============================================
The speed of a GPS satellite with respect to the aether
=======================================
There is no aether.
Fuckwit.
causes it to
displace more aether and for that aether to exert more pressure on the
clock in the GPS satellite than the aether pressure associated with a
clock at rest with respect to the Earth. This causes the GPS satellite
clock to "result in a delay of about 7 �s/day".
=======================================
No delay found, no aether found.
Dumbfuck.
The aether pressure
associated with the aether displaced by the Earth exerts less pressure
on the GPS satellite than a similar clock at rest on the Earth
"causing the GPS clocks to appear faster by about 45 �s/day".
=======================================
No increase found, no aether found.
Cretin.
Combining the aether pressure associated with the speed at which the
GPS satellite moves in the aether and the aether pressure associated
with the aether displaced by the Earth causes "clocks on the GPS
satellites tick approximately 38 �s/day faster than clocks on the
ground" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS).
GPS receivers do not have atomic clocks but users can determine
the time to within 100 billionths of a second, not the 38 microseconds
gain or loss per day that you claimed.
Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS -- Still none.
Effects_of_aether_on_GPS -- Still none.
Jerk off.
Effects_of_relativity_on_time_itself-- Still none.
Effects_of_aether_on_time_itself-- Still none.
Wanker.
mpc755
>
> =======================================
> No delay found, no aether found.
> Dumbfuck.
>
> The aether pressure
> associated with the aether displaced by the Earth exerts less pressure
> on the GPS satellite than a similar clock at rest on the Earth
> =======================================
> No increase found, no aether found.
> Cretin.
>
> Combining the aether pressure associated with the speed at which the
> GPS satellite moves in the aether and the aether pressure associated
> with the aether displaced by the Earth causes "clocks on the GPS
> ground" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS).
>
> GPS receivers do not have atomic clocks but users can determine
> the time to within 100 billionths of a second, not the 38 microseconds
> gain or loss per day that you claimed.
> Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS -- Still none.
> Effects_of_aether_on_GPS -- Still none.
> Jerk off.
> Effects_of_relativity_on_time_itself-- Still none.
> Effects_of_aether_on_time_itself-- Still none.
> Wanker.
The 38 microseconds per day gain is what the clocks in GPS satellites
would run at if not 'corrected' before being launched.
Androcles
>
> =======================================
> No delay found, no aether found.
> Dumbfuck.
>
> The aether pressure
> associated with the aether displaced by the Earth exerts less pressure
> on the GPS satellite than a similar clock at rest on the Earth
> =======================================
> No increase found, no aether found.
> Cretin.
>
> Combining the aether pressure associated with the speed at which the
> GPS satellite moves in the aether and the aether pressure associated
> with the aether displaced by the Earth causes "clocks on the GPS
> ground" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS).
>
> GPS receivers do not have atomic clocks but users can determine
> the time to within 100 billionths of a second, not the 38 microseconds
> gain or loss per day that you claimed.
> Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS -- Still none.
> Effects_of_aether_on_GPS -- Still none.
> Jerk off.
> Effects_of_relativity_on_time_itself-- Still none.
> Effects_of_aether_on_time_itself-- Still none.
> Wanker.
The 38 microseconds per day gain is what the clocks in GPS satellites
would run at if not 'corrected' before being launched.
============================================
Effects_of_relativity_on_time_itself-- Still none.
Effects_of_aether_on_time_itself-- Still none.
Lying ignorant stupid bastard. Fuck off.
mpc755
Correct. The aether has no effect on time itself because time is a
concept. Time is not physical. The rate at which a clock 'ticks' has
nothing to do with time.
What is your physical explanation as to why an atomic clock would
'tick' faster in a GPS satellite if it was not 'corrected' prior to
launch?
The speed of a GPS satellite with respect to the aether causes it to
displace more aether and for that aether to exert more pressure on the
clock in the GPS satellite than the aether pressure associated with a
clock at rest with respect to the Earth. This causes the GPS satellite
clock to "result in a delay of about 7 ìs/day". The aether pressure
associated with the aether displaced by the Earth exerts less pressure
on the GPS satellite than a similar clock at rest on the Earth
"causing the GPS clocks to appear faster by about 45 ìs/day".
Combining the aether pressure associated with the speed at which the
GPS satellite moves in the aether and the aether pressure associated
with the aether displaced by the Earth causes "clocks on the GPS
satellites tick approximately 38 ìs/day faster than clocks on the
ground" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS).
Androcles
On Dec 28, 10:35 am, "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics_q>
What is your physical explanation as to why atomic clocks 'tick'
faster in a GPS satellite?
============================================
They don't. You are spreading a fairy tale, you fuckin' wanker.
What's your physical explanation for the Easter Bunny laying
chocolate eggs?
What's your physical explanation for Santa delivering millions
of toys on Xmas Eve?
What's your physical explanation for the pot of gold at the
end of a rainbow?
Fuck off, you are a lunatic.
mpc755
What is your physical explanation as to why an atomic clock would
glird
>
> There is no need for any particular referent for the 'absolute' velocity of light .. it is 'c' wrt all inertial referents >
Prove it WITHOUT using clocks hand-set to MEASURE c+v = c-v = c.
glird
glird
>
>< Idiot. shithead. Imbecile. Moron. Shithead.
Fuckwit. Cretin. Jerk off. Lying ignorant
stupid bastard. Fuck off >
Having almost exhausted his vocabulary, he wrote equally ignorable
stuff between those words.
glird
Androcles
"glird" <gl...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:fe65ca38-4f91-4e60...@j14g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 28 "Androcles" wrote:
>>
>>< Idiot. shithead. Imbecile. Moron. Shithead.
> Fuckwit. Cretin. Jerk off. Lying ignorant
> stupid bastard. Fuck off >
>
If you have nothing to say, shithead, shut the fuck up.
Androcles
What is
[snip]
Your turn to answer me.
========================================
glird
> "glird" <gl...@aol.com> wrote
>
> > On Dec 28 "Androcles" wrote:
Idiot. shithead. Imbecile. Moron. Shithead.
Fuckwit. Cretin. Jerk off. Lying ignorant
stupid bastard. Fuck off
you have nothing to say, shithead, shut the fuck up."
Fotunately for the rest of us, he obeyed himself ... this time.
glird
glird
Alas, THIS time the head ass at Hogswart ignored his mirror image's
advice, "If you have nothing to say, shithead, shut the fuck up"!
Androcles
*plonk*
Do not reply to this generic message, it was automatically generated;
you have been kill-filed, either for being boringly stupid, repetitive,
unfunny, ineducable, repeatedly posting politics, religion or off-topic
subjects to a sci. newsgroup, attempting cheapskate free advertising
for profit, because you are a troll, because you responded to George
Hammond the complete fruit cake, simply insane or any combination
or permutation of the aforementioned reasons; any reply will go unread.
Boringly stupid is the most common cause of kill-filing, but because
this message is generic the other reasons have been included. You are
left to decide which is most applicable to you.
There is no appeal, I have despotic power over whom I will electronically
admit into my home and you do not qualify as a reasonable person I would
wish to converse with or even poke fun at. Some weirdoes are not kill-
filed, they amuse me and I retain them for their entertainment value
as I would any chicken with two heads, either one of which enables the
dumb bird to scratch dirt, step back, look down, step forward to the
same spot and repeat the process eternally.
This should not trouble you, many of those plonked find it a blessing
that they are not required to think and can persist in their bigotry
or crackpot theories without challenge.
You have the right to free speech, I have the right not to listen. The
kill-file will be cleared annually with spring cleaning or whenever I
purchase a new computer or hard drive.
Update: the last clearance was 25/12/09. Some individuals have been
restored to the list.
I'm fully aware that you may be so stupid as to reply, but the purpose
of this message is to encourage others to kill-file fuckwits like you.
I hope you find this explanation is satisfactory but even if you don't,
damnly my frank, I don't give a dear. Have a nice day and fuck off.
mpc755
> "mpc755" <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> [snip]
> Your turn to answer me.
> ========================================
> What's your physical explanation for Santa delivering millions
> of toys on Xmas Eve?
> What's your physical explanation for the pot of gold at the
> end of a rainbow?
> Fuck off, you are a lunatic.
What is your physical explanation as to why an atomic clock would
'tick' faster in a GPS satellite if it was not 'corrected' prior to
launch?
The speed of a GPS satellite with respect to the aether causes it to
displace more aether and for that aether to exert more pressure on the
clock in the GPS satellite than the aether pressure associated with a
clock at rest with respect to the Earth. This causes the GPS satellite
clock to "result in a delay of about 7 ìs/day". The aether pressure
associated with the aether displaced by the Earth exerts less pressure
on the GPS satellite than a similar clock at rest on the Earth
"causing the GPS clocks to appear faster by about 45 ìs/day".
Combining the aether pressure associated with the speed at which the
GPS satellite moves in the aether and the aether pressure associated
with the aether displaced by the Earth causes "clocks on the GPS
satellites tick approximately 38 ìs/day faster than clocks on the
ground" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS).
glird
>
>< It is the magnetic circulation in the vortices
interactions that result in the observed electric repulsion or
attraction which, of course, is why we call it electromagnetic
phenomena. There is no mystery there, we can reproduce the same
phenomena in any fluid medium on-demand. It is all based upon
Bernoulli's principle. >
Yes indeed, but in a slightly modified way.
Please state and explain the mechanism of his principle and we can
then discuss it further.
glird
Paul Stowe
Ok, let's take the classic simple ring vortex (basically a tornado
looped into a ring). It has a traditional donut shape with a 'hole'
in the center looking down from the top. If you slice the ring vortex
in half from the side vide you have,
_ ^ ^ _
_|_| |_|_
| |_ _| |
Where the vortex circulation is as illustrated in the diagram above.
This is called the 'poloidal' circulation and has some magnitude or (i)
ntensity... Looking top down we can also have a circulation around
the ring, this is called the 'torroidal' circulation and has a totally
independent magnitude (i'). The eductor effect will cause the ring to
'crawl' thru the medium (forward or 'down' for the circulation
illustrated above). One may want to look up Helmholtz and Kelvin's
theorems if they are interested in more detail. Now interacting
vortices have interesting behaviors. Those with like circulation
patterns will 'repel' or 'push away' from each other and those with
with exact counter rotations (both poloidal and torroidal) will
attract AND! annihilates (convert all circulations into irrotational
motion) each other. Those with different poloidal/torroidal
circulations behave in a complex manner depending upon the magnitude
of the circulations but, in general, opposites attract, likes repel.
And we haven't yet touched upon the fact that such vortices can
oscillate around both the poloidal and torroidal axes. Moreover any
such oscillations must be harmonics of each other and quantum whole
numbers of the circumferences. This IS why Maxwell's model is, by its
basic nature, a quantum mechanical model. He of couse did not yet
have sufficient information to realize this. In the end, if the speed
of the flow increases the shear increases reducing the magnitude of
the fluid force perpendicular to said flow. Ok, Ok, the pressure of
'the fluid' is reduced...
mpc755
But if you 'stack' the vortices on top of one another, like
circulation patterns will attract and opposite circulation patters
will repel. This is what is occurring when the north and south poles
of two magnets are placed together. Since the like circulation pattern
of each magnets aether vortex is placed end-to-end, the vortices
become a single vortex.
Paul Stowe
Maxwell describes this in detail in his work "On Physical Lines of
Force". Like torroidal, unlike poloidal circulations atrract, unlike
torroidal, like poloidal repel, IF constrained. Two ring vortices
will alternately pass thru their centers if aligned and have like
poloidal circulation. This is what I meant by complex behaviors...
mpc755
The best I have been able to guess as to the relationship between the
aether entrained by the Earth and the magnetic field is to think of
the magnetic field as waves in the aether, similar to an aether
vortex, moving through the Earth's entrained aether.