From: Sam Wormley on
On 12/26/09 10:18 PM, Henry Wilson DSc wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 03:27:06 -0600, Sam Wormley<swormley1(a)gmail.com> wrote:

>>
>> Answer the question, Henri--can you cite anything that claims
>> field are explained by other dimensions that we don't know
>> about... or is this another figment of your imagination?
>
> What is YOUR opinion wormey? What are fields made of?
>


It's pretty obvious, Henri, that you make some claim,
namely that "field are explained by other dimensions
that we don't know about"-- that is just some bullshit
statement that you cannot defend. Go away, Henri!
From: eric gisse on
Sam Wormley wrote:

> On 12/26/09 10:18 PM, Henry Wilson DSc wrote:
>> On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 03:27:06 -0600, Sam Wormley<swormley1(a)gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Answer the question, Henri--can you cite anything that claims
>>> field are explained by other dimensions that we don't know
>>> about... or is this another figment of your imagination?
>>
>> What is YOUR opinion wormey? What are fields made of?
>>
>
>
> It's pretty obvious, Henri, that you make some claim,
> namely that "field are explained by other dimensions
> that we don't know about"-- that is just some bullshit
> statement that you cannot defend. Go away, Henri!

Watch as he tries to take credit for concepts from classical E&M.

From: cjcountess on
Electron structure can be deduced from geometrical interpretation of
E=mc^2

1) Planck discovered E=hf for photons
2)Einstein discovered E=mc^2 for electrons
3)deBroglie discovered E=hf=mc^2 for electron and that it is also a
wave
4) Bohr discovered wavelength of electron = circumference of circle
with angular momentum of a multiple integer of h/2pi.

If we draw shorter and shorter waves on a graph, with corresponding
higher and higher energy, mass, and momentum, eventually we arrive at
a geometrical picture of a wave with energy = mc^2, whose wavelength =
circumference of circle, and angular momentum = multiple integer of (h/
2pi).

Analogous to a line of 1 inch in horizontal direction, x a line of 1
inch in vertical direction, to create 1 square inch, a wave at c in
linear direction, x c in 90 degree angular direction, creates 90
degree arc trajectory, which if constant creates a circle of
wavelength (cx2pi), with angular momentum of (h/2pi).If the amplitude
of wave is constant with previous waves along same EM spectrum, or if
we start with circular polarized wave, we get a wave making 2
rotations at right angle to each other, which creates a standing
spherical wave, making 2 rotations to complete 1 wave cycle of spin ½
and momentum (h/2pi/2). Furthermore, if the waves spins counter to it
trajectory, it will have -1 charge.

A backward spinning (-1 charged), standing spherical wave making 2
rotations to complete 1 wave cycle (spin1/2) with momentum of (h/2pi/
2), which coincide directly with uncertainty principles limit on
momentum and position, seems too much of a coincidence for it not to
represent true geometry of electron.
If we examine this picture on u tube, it too looks like a standing
spherical wave, rotating about 2 axis, and does not contradict this
geometrical picture.

Now I must admit that it is incredible to me how they got such a
picture but it is not in conflict with my geometrical description
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofp-OHIq6Wo&feature=related

Also see:
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dsn5q6f_101hgtjv9fb&hl=en

Conrad J Countess



From: glird on
On Dec 27, 5:04 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_q> wrote:
>
> Man is INSANE.

MANY decades ago I discovered that Earth is the lunatic asylum of
the Universe. Accordingly, if you are here, you are insane!






unfortunately 4 me, i 2 am here ... :-(

glird

From: glird on
On Dec 25, 10:24 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote:
>
> There can be properties at a given point, obviously, eg
> charge.

That's because "at a point' is entirely different than "in a point".

glird.