Prev: Things to Reject in 21st Century Physics
Next: Anti matter and matter cannot be kept together
From: hanson on 18 Jul 2010 12:54
"Henry Wilson DSc" <..@..> wrote:
Pentcho Valev <pvalev(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>(FREQUENCY) = (SPEED OF LIGHT) / (WAVELENGTH)
>>If the observer stands on the surface of a celestial body with
>>a substantial gravitational field, or if, in the absence of a
>>gravitational field, the observer accelerates towards the
>> emitter, then he finds the frequency of coming light INCREASING,
>>and this is experimentally confirmed.
>>The above formula allows two (incompatible) implications:
>>
>>1. The wavelength is constant while the speed of light increases
>>with the frequency. This is fatal for Einstein's relativity and, if a
>>prophesy made by Einstein in 1954 is taken seriously, for
>>contemporary physics as a whole.
>>
>>2. The speed of light is constant while the wavelength decreases with
>>the frequency. This contradicts Einstein's general relativity where
>>the speed of light in a gravitational field is VARIABLE; moreover,
>>there can be nothing sillier than a wavelength varying with the speed
>>of the observer:
>>
http://sampit.geol.sc.edu/Doppler.html
>>"Moving observer: A man is standing on the beach, watching the tide.
>>The waves are washing into the shore and over his feet with a constant
>>frequency and wavelength. However, if he begins walking out into the
>>ocean, the waves will begin hitting him more frequently, leading him
>>to perceive that the wavelength of the waves has decreased."
>>
http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/big_bang/index.html
>>John Norton: "Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer
>>were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now
>>pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would
>>mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to
>>have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE WAVELENGTH
>> - THE DISTANCE BETWEEN CRESTS - TO HAVE DECREASED)."
>>Pentcho Valev -- pvalev(a)yahoo.com
>

Henry Wilson wrote:
> That is bullshit, of course.
> The distance between water wavecrests does
> not depend on the speed of one's boat.
> ---
> .......Einstein's Relativity...The religion that worships negative space.
>
hanson wrote:
.... Seems, there is a kink in both arguments above.... ahahaha...
It is still highly contested whether photons/light behave like water
waves. Jury is still out, except for Einstein Dingleberries to whom
it is a fait accompli, due to their worship practice of Albert's sphincter.
>
Henry, when the lake water is flat like a mirror, get on your boat.
Lay yourself down on the deck at the bow/front of the boat and
observe the formation of the shock wave and the wave crest
distances as the speed of the boat increases. You'll be surprised.
ahahahaha... Then in step 2 justify why the same should hold true
for light waves that move a hundred Million times faster and thru
a medium that contains 100 Thousand Billion Billion times less
particles then does a comparable volume of water...
>
Have fun, and thanks for the laughs, guys... ahahahanson

From: Henry Wilson DSc on 18 Jul 2010 19:08
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 09:54:45 -0700, "hanson" <hanson(a)quick.net> wrote:

>"Henry Wilson DSc" <..@..> wrote:
>Pentcho Valev <pvalev(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>(FREQUENCY) = (SPEED OF LIGHT) / (WAVELENGTH)

>http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/big_bang/index.html
>>>John Norton: "Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer
>>>were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now
>>>pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would
>>>mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to
>>>have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE WAVELENGTH
>>> - THE DISTANCE BETWEEN CRESTS - TO HAVE DECREASED)."
>>>Pentcho Valev -- pvalev(a)yahoo.com
>>
>
>Henry Wilson wrote:
>> That is bullshit, of course.
>> The distance between water wavecrests does
>> not depend on the speed of one's boat.
>> ---
>> .......Einstein's Relativity...The religion that worships negative space.
>>
>hanson wrote:
>... Seems, there is a kink in both arguments above.... ahahaha...
>It is still highly contested whether photons/light behave like water
>waves.

My model of a photon is that it resembles a length of ball chain, tapered at
the ends. The 'balls' represent nodes of a standing wave running back and forth
along the lump of 'aether' carried by the photon itself. Photons are
oscillating particles that have an effective length and cross section. Their
natural wavelength is intrinsic and universal....the distance between 'balls'.

However, if a photon is emitted by and ACCELERATING source, the back end
briefly moves up on the front end, causing a permanent shortening of
wavelength. This I have called ADoppler as distinct from conventional VDoppler
which is the 'rate of wavecrest arrival'. I have good evidence for this.

It is th scientific ignorance of ADoppler that renders ALL astronomy wrong,
since stellar velocity estimates are likely to be way out.

>Jury is still out, except for Einstein Dingleberries to whom
>it is a fait accompli, due to their worship practice of Albert's sphincter.
>>
>Henry, when the lake water is flat like a mirror, get on your boat.
>Lay yourself down on the deck at the bow/front of the boat and
>observe the formation of the shock wave and the wave crest
>distances as the speed of the boat increases.


That's different. the boat speed is responsible for the waves.

The subsequent distance between wave crests remains the same no matter how fast
an aquatic observer is traveling. The dingleberries confuse 'wavelength' with
wavecrest arrival frequency'.

>You'll be surprised.
>ahahahaha... Then in step 2 justify why the same should hold true
>for light waves that move a hundred Million times faster and thru
>a medium that contains 100 Thousand Billion Billion times less
>particles then does a comparable volume of water...

Well, I'm sure light is affected in some small way as it travels across vast
distances of very rare gas....enough to cause a distance dependent redshift.

>Have fun, and thanks for the laughs, guys... ahahahanson


Henry Wilson...

........Einstein's Relativity...The religion that worships negative space.
From: hanson on 19 Jul 2010 02:15
"Henry Wilson DSc" <..@..> wrote:
> "hanson" <hanson(a)quick.net> wrote:
>>"Henry Wilson DSc" <..@..> wrote:
>>Pentcho Valev <pvalev(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
Pentcho wrote:
>>>>(FREQUENCY) = (SPEED OF LIGHT) / (WAVELENGTH)
<http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/big_bang/index.html>
>>>>John Norton: "Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer
>>>>were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now
>>>>pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would
>>>>mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to
>>>>have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE WAVELENGTH
>>>> - THE DISTANCE BETWEEN CRESTS - TO HAVE DECREASED)."
>>>>Pentcho Valev -- pvalev(a)yahoo.com
>>>
>> Adressing Pentcho, Henry Wilson wrote:
>>> That is bullshit, of course.
>>> The distance between water wavecrests does
>>> not depend on the speed of one's boat.
>>>
>>hanson wrote:
>>... Seems, there is a kink in both arguments above.... ahahaha...
>>It is still highly contested whether photons/light behave like water
>>waves.
>>It is still highly contested whether photons/light behave like water
>>waves. Jury is still out, except for Einstein Dingleberries to whom
>>it is a fait accompli, due to their worship practice of Albert's
>>sphincter.
>
Henry decribes his Photon model and wrote:
> My model of a photon is that it resembles a length of ball chain,
> tapered at the ends. The 'balls' represent nodes of a standing
wave running back and forth
> along the lump of 'aether' carried by the photon itself. Photons are
> oscillating particles that have an effective length and cross section.
> Their natural wavelength is intrinsic and universal....the distance
> between 'balls'.
> However, if a photon is emitted by and ACCELERATING source,
> the back end briefly moves up on the front end, causing a permanent
> shortening of wavelength. This I have called ADoppler as distinct
> from conventional VDoppler which is the 'rate of wavecrest arrival'.
> I have good evidence for this.
> It is th scientific ignorance of ADoppler that renders ALL astronomy
> wrong, since stellar velocity estimates are likely to be way out.
>
hanson wrote:
Wonderful story, Henry. If it enhances your Weltbild, then you have a
winner for yourself. Selling it though is another matter as you know.
>
Your gag reminds me of the light model that depicts EM radiation
as a chain-link trajectory between emitter and absorber, with the
entire chain length being a concatenated span, depending on
gravitaional influence. The individual photon itself is one single link
in form of a packet of periodically pulsating energy, manifesting
alternatively as a waning and waxing torus of electric then magnetic
energy... etc.. etc...
>
There are dozens if not hundreds of variants of the Photon saga
around. But I have yet to see anyone pointing at his own model
or equation and say: "See here! When I looked at my equation,
it immediately told me how to make this gizmo, which I patented
and which made me financially independent." --- Since NO such
event has ever taken place, not even for Einstein, I find it hilarious
that folks here cuss and curse each other over their respective
perception of nature.... ahahahaha....

Initially hanson wrote:
>>Henry, when the lake water is flat like a mirror, get on your boat.
>>Lay yourself down on the deck at the bow/front of the boat and
>>observe the formation of the shock wave and the wave crest
>>distances as the speed of the boat increases.You'll be surprised.
>
Henry wrote:
> The subsequent distance between wave crests remains the same
> no matter how fast an aquatic observer is traveling. The dingleberries
> confuse 'wavelength' with wavecrest arrival frequency'.
>
hanson wrote:
ahahahahaha.. Henry, you did NOT perform the above experiment.
You made a Gedanken experiment, which has the same fatal flaw
that Einstein Dingleberries are accused of.. and as you say, create
amongst other things, " a religion that worships negative space."
>
Initially hanson wrote:
>>ahahahaha... Then in step 2 justify why the same should hold true
>>for light waves that move a hundred Million times faster and thru
>>a medium that contains 100 Thousand Billion Billion times less
>>particles then does a comparable volume of water...
>
Henry wrote:
> Well, I'm sure light is affected in some small way as it travels across
> vast distances of very rare gas....enough to cause a distance
> dependent redshift.
>
hanson wrote:
.... ahahaha.. Yeah, the tired light gig, the gravit-retardation song,
and all the other alternative stories, fabulations and grand tales
that are floationg around. All are fascinating in their own way...
And of course, all do only reflect very tiny aspects of the elusive
reality of light. There is so much about the photon that we have
not discovered yet... Only Einstein Dingleberries think otherwise.
>
A lot could be realized and put into perspective if more would
be posted about the scales of the domains, along with what is
discussed. Example: If the Sun is grapefruit in size, the Earth is
a ballpoint pen tip in size. The Earth-Sun distance is about 16.5
yards (15 meters), & the solar *system* is ~ 1 kilometer across.
The next Star is 2500 km away!... with essentially Nothing being
between these lonely grapefruits and their satellite ball points..
....... ahahahaha.. Space is spacey... aka empty... ... [1] below.
>
More astounding: ALL the just mentioned show, proclaimed to be
so, is done by a ~ 3 lbs heavy glob of cranial matter that's made
up mainly of C, H, O & N atoms. 4 types of atoms only & 3/4 of
it being there as water. Yet these 3 lbs do contain 1-followed by
25 zeros of individual atoms, between which EM/photonic events
do take place that have produced this astounding anthropic pix.
>
Even more astounding again: When you look into the insides of
any one of theses atoms you will find a self-similar picture of the
same vast emptiness between points of matter... as was seen on
the celestial world level depicted above.... Lots of empty space
again, pun or no pun.... ahahahahaha....

Can you fathom now how EXTRAORDINARILY fantastic, grand &
profound EM phenomena are? .. IOW any and all current models
about Light do only reflect a very crude representation of Nature's
reality. So, fighting about, who is right or wrong, over a crude toy
of reality indicates quite obviously that.... ahahaha... ahahaha...
It's your turn now, guys, to say what EM is telling you...ahahaha...
Thanks for the laughs, Henry and guy/ette/s.... ahahahanson
>
Henry Wilson signs of and wrote:
> Einstein's Relativity:...The religion that worships negative space.
>
hanson wrote:
[1] Pencil out how long and how far the space-shuttle would have
to fly, orbital speed, in intergalactic, "empty" space that contains
4 H-atoms/cubic meter, to garner 1 single kilogram of Hydrogen
with a catch funnel of, say, 10 meters in dia. Henry, here you are
allowed to make Gedanken experiments. But not so on the boat
in he lake... ahahahaha... Take care Henry.

From: hanson on 19 Jul 2010 16:03

"Henry Wilson DSc" <..@..> wrote:
> ....a remarkably polite and restrained posting from you Hanson
> .....I'm glad you don't consider me your enemy....
> ... so keep on laughing....
>
hanson wrote:
ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHAHA.. Good one!, Henry!...
However, I do not consider anyone as my enemy.
Yet, some folks, like Greenies & Einstein Dingleberries,
invariably ask for enemas. But that is their yearning and
choosing. So, me being a great Samaritan, do oblige.
Thanks for the laughs, Henry... ahahaha... ahahanson
>
> Henry Wilson wrote...
> .......Einstein's Relativity = The religion that worships negative space.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news(a)netfront.net ---
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Things to Reject in 21st Century Physics
Next: Anti matter and matter cannot be kept together