Prev: Sagnac Revisited. Why Paul and Awilson are Hopelessly Wrong.
Next: The electron is not a point.
From: Henry Wilson DSc on 2 Mar 2010 20:00
On Tue, 2 Mar 2010 16:12:26 -0800 (PST), Darwin123 <drosen0000(a)yahoo.com>
wrote:

>On Mar 2, 5:07�am, ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc) wrote:
>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 16:55:43 -0800 (PST), Darwin123 <drosen0...(a)yahoo.com>
>> wrote:

>>
>> >Why is this right?
>> >Mammals stick their head out of water or they die. They have eyes to
>> >see.
>> >Dolphins see out of the water. Otherwise, they couldn't do all those
>> >tricks.
>> >Why wouldn't dolphins be aware of stars?
>>
>> They probably would not be because like most animals, they don't see objects
>> that are not moving....but I could be wrong about that.
> Most mammals are aware of things that aren't moving. Anyone who
>plays with a dog knows that the animals recognizes pthers, even when
>they aren't moving.

Dogs and other predators may have some ability to detect still objects but it
is very poor.

I have seen kangaroos standing motionless within a few metres of two dogs which
were totally unaware of their existence. As you know, a rapid change in a scene
is much easier to detect than a slow one.

Have you ever noticed how pigeons move their heads when they walk? The head
remains perfectly motionless for a split second...then rapidly moves to its
next static position...and so on. The reason is that it can detect the
slightest movement of a predator during that split second.
Again, I have watched predatory bird sitting on a power line that was rocking
up and down slightly. THe bird kept its head dead still by lifting its neck up
and down.


> I heard that frogs can only see something that is moving. The
>neural circuits in their eyes subtract the stationary background.

True.

> Other animals use their sense of sight in producing camouflage.
>Chameleons, flounder and octopuses change color to match their
>stationary background. Octopuses even change shapes to match nearby
>stationary objects. I don't think they could do this without
>recognizing stationary objects.

They can certainly recognize the colour of stationary objects but that doesn't
imply they can identify shapes. All visual systems rely on identifying shapes
and have complex 'software' to do this. Much of it is inherited.

> Birds and crocodilians make nests out of sticks, stones and other
>objects. I don't think they could do this without seeing things.
>> As you probably know, humans developed the property know as 'rapid eye
>> movements' REM. Our eyes are constantly moving so we can see objects that >are at rest.
> I don't know if this is the reason for our rapid eye movements. I
>know that rapid eye movements have been studied for a few decades. I
>never heard the conclusion that it is for seeing objects at rest.

It is. That is the sole purpose of it. We move the eyes instead of the object.
If you know anything about electronics you will understand that an AC signal is
much easier to amplify than a DC one.
I don't know if any other apes have acquired REM. They probably have.

>>
>> >How do you know dolphins aren't aware of the stars?
> I asked Androcles. He said that marine mammals aren't aware of
>the stars. He gave no reason, but referred to them as being adapted to
>their environment. I don't see how adapting to a marine environment
>automatically means ignoring the stars, especially by creatures that
>have to poke their head out of the water. He may be right, but I asked
>him how he knew.

Andro often gets confused. No doubt they and other fish must have an inherent
understanding of total internal reflection but dolphins can certainly see
positions of hoops they leap through. They are obviously expert at compensating
for refraction. Tame dolphins seem to be able to see people and any fish they
hold out for them.
Still even if they could see the stars briefly, I doubt if they would be the
slightest bit interested.
How about monkeys and higher birds? They are certainly aware of the moon's
light.





Henry Wilson...

........provider of free physics lessons
From: Henry Wilson DSc on 2 Mar 2010 20:52
On Wed, 3 Mar 2010 11:51:32 +1100, "Inertial" <relatively(a)rest.com> wrote:

>
>"Darwin123" <drosen0000(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:83cea469-8fa8-400c-8dd6-ab5883938bce(a)t41g2000yqt.googlegroups.com...
>> On Mar 2, 5:07 am, ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc) wrote:
>>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 16:55:43 -0800 (PST), Darwin123 <drosen0...(a)yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> >On Mar 1, 3:27 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_u> wrote:
>>> >> "Darwin123" <drosen0...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> >>news:6dc32653-9799-4934-815a-04353b89a715(a)z11g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...
>>> >> On Feb 27, 4:58 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_u> wrote:
>>>
>>> >> > "vincen...(a)yahoo.com" <datashap...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> >> >news:87a0b5ca-9cdb-42df-84cf-2ef3811e6a71(a)k5g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> >> > intelligent mammals living in the sea cannot be aware
>>> >> > of stars,
>>>
>>> >> Yes, drosen, that's right.
>>>
>>> >Why is this right?
>>> >Mammals stick their head out of water or they die. They have eyes to
>>> >see.
>>> >Dolphins see out of the water. Otherwise, they couldn't do all those
>>> >tricks.
>>> >Why wouldn't dolphins be aware of stars?
>>>
>>> They probably would not be because like most animals, they don't see
>>> objects
>>> that are not moving....but I could be wrong about that.
>> Most mammals are aware of things that aren't moving. Anyone who
>> plays with a dog knows that the animals recognizes pthers, even when
>> they aren't moving.
>> I heard that frogs can only see something that is moving. The
>> neural circuits in their eyes subtract the stationary background.
>> Other animals use their sense of sight in producing camouflage.
>> Chameleons, flounder and octopuses change color to match their
>> stationary background. Octopuses even change shapes to match nearby
>> stationary objects. I don't think they could do this without
>> recognizing stationary objects.
>> Birds and crocodilians make nests out of sticks, stones and other
>> objects. I don't think they could do this without seeing things.
>>> As you probably know, humans developed the property know as 'rapid eye
>>> movements' REM. Our eyes are constantly moving so we can see objects that
>>> >are at rest.
>> I don't know if this is the reason for our rapid eye movements. I
>> know that rapid eye movements have been studied for a few decades. I
>> never heard the conclusion that it is for seeing objects at rest.
>
>That's because it is bullshit that Henry made up.
>
>There are eye movements that are indeed rapid (but not called REM .. that
>refers to a stage of sleep where there is involuntary rapid eye moement)
>that allow us to shift our gaze around a scene so we can take in the detail
>.. as we only have 'high definition' vision in a very narrow field of view
>(the rest is low), so to get a detailed image, we need to keep moving our
>eyes from point-of-interest to point-of-interest. There's also some less
>rapid eye movements, such as tracking of moving objects, or adjusting the
>eye when we change the angle of our head of body so that we can still focus
>on a given part of a scene.

Normal REM is continuous but very much smaller....molecular level... than sleep
REM or abnormal REM

>>> >How do you know dolphins aren't aware of the stars?
>> I asked Androcles. He said that marine mammals aren't aware of
>> the stars. He gave no reason, but referred to them as being adapted to
>> their environment. I don't see how adapting to a marine environment
>> automatically means ignoring the stars, especially by creatures that
>> have to poke their head out of the water. He may be right, but I asked
>> him how he knew.
>
>Androcles obviously communes with the sea creatures.

.......only when drunk


Henry Wilson...

........provider of free physics lessons
From: Androcles on 3 Mar 2010 00:30

"Henry Wilson DSc" <..@..> wrote in message
news:24fro59c21e46ujo9spvogjdmp0mass3jc(a)4ax.com...
> On Wed, 3 Mar 2010 11:51:32 +1100, "Inertial" <relatively(a)rest.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Darwin123" <drosen0000(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:83cea469-8fa8-400c-8dd6-ab5883938bce(a)t41g2000yqt.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Mar 2, 5:07 am, ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc) wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 16:55:43 -0800 (PST), Darwin123
>>>> <drosen0...(a)yahoo.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> >On Mar 1, 3:27 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_u> wrote:
>>>> >> "Darwin123" <drosen0...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> >>news:6dc32653-9799-4934-815a-04353b89a715(a)z11g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...
>>>> >> On Feb 27, 4:58 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_u>
>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >> > "vincen...(a)yahoo.com" <datashap...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> >> >news:87a0b5ca-9cdb-42df-84cf-2ef3811e6a71(a)k5g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>> >> > intelligent mammals living in the sea cannot be aware
>>>> >> > of stars,
>>>>
>>>> >> Yes, drosen, that's right.
>>>>
>>>> >Why is this right?
>>>> >Mammals stick their head out of water or they die. They have eyes to
>>>> >see.
>>>> >Dolphins see out of the water. Otherwise, they couldn't do all those
>>>> >tricks.
>>>> >Why wouldn't dolphins be aware of stars?
>>>>
>>>> They probably would not be because like most animals, they don't see
>>>> objects
>>>> that are not moving....but I could be wrong about that.
>>> Most mammals are aware of things that aren't moving. Anyone who
>>> plays with a dog knows that the animals recognizes pthers, even when
>>> they aren't moving.
>>> I heard that frogs can only see something that is moving. The
>>> neural circuits in their eyes subtract the stationary background.
>>> Other animals use their sense of sight in producing camouflage.
>>> Chameleons, flounder and octopuses change color to match their
>>> stationary background. Octopuses even change shapes to match nearby
>>> stationary objects. I don't think they could do this without
>>> recognizing stationary objects.
>>> Birds and crocodilians make nests out of sticks, stones and other
>>> objects. I don't think they could do this without seeing things.
>>>> As you probably know, humans developed the property know as 'rapid eye
>>>> movements' REM. Our eyes are constantly moving so we can see objects
>>>> that
>>>> >are at rest.
>>> I don't know if this is the reason for our rapid eye movements. I
>>> know that rapid eye movements have been studied for a few decades. I
>>> never heard the conclusion that it is for seeing objects at rest.
>>
>>That's because it is bullshit that Henry made up.
>>
>>There are eye movements that are indeed rapid (but not called REM .. that
>>refers to a stage of sleep where there is involuntary rapid eye moement)
>>that allow us to shift our gaze around a scene so we can take in the
>>detail
>>.. as we only have 'high definition' vision in a very narrow field of view
>>(the rest is low), so to get a detailed image, we need to keep moving our
>>eyes from point-of-interest to point-of-interest. There's also some less
>>rapid eye movements, such as tracking of moving objects, or adjusting the
>>eye when we change the angle of our head of body so that we can still
>>focus
>>on a given part of a scene.
>
> Normal REM is continuous but very much smaller....molecular level... than
> sleep
> REM or abnormal REM
>
>>>> >How do you know dolphins aren't aware of the stars?
>>> I asked Androcles. He said that marine mammals aren't aware of
>>> the stars. He gave no reason, but referred to them as being adapted to
>>> their environment. I don't see how adapting to a marine environment
>>> automatically means ignoring the stars, especially by creatures that
>>> have to poke their head out of the water. He may be right, but I asked
>>> him how he knew.
>>
>>Androcles obviously communes with the sea creatures.
>
> ......only when drunk
>
drosen should ask Inert the QUESTION, I need some more idiot names
for my web page.
http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/QUESTION.htm




From: Inertial on 3 Mar 2010 00:52

"Androcles" <Headmaster(a)Hogwarts.physics_u> wrote in message
news:bumjn.216454$kR2.158172(a)newsfe05.ams2...
>
> "Henry Wilson DSc" <..@..> wrote in message
> news:24fro59c21e46ujo9spvogjdmp0mass3jc(a)4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 3 Mar 2010 11:51:32 +1100, "Inertial" <relatively(a)rest.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Darwin123" <drosen0000(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:83cea469-8fa8-400c-8dd6-ab5883938bce(a)t41g2000yqt.googlegroups.com...
>>>> On Mar 2, 5:07 am, ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc) wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 16:55:43 -0800 (PST), Darwin123
>>>>> <drosen0...(a)yahoo.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> >On Mar 1, 3:27 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_u> wrote:
>>>>> >> "Darwin123" <drosen0...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>> >>news:6dc32653-9799-4934-815a-04353b89a715(a)z11g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...
>>>>> >> On Feb 27, 4:58 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_u>
>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >> > "vincen...(a)yahoo.com" <datashap...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>> >> >news:87a0b5ca-9cdb-42df-84cf-2ef3811e6a71(a)k5g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>
>>>>> >> > intelligent mammals living in the sea cannot be aware
>>>>> >> > of stars,
>>>>>
>>>>> >> Yes, drosen, that's right.
>>>>>
>>>>> >Why is this right?
>>>>> >Mammals stick their head out of water or they die. They have eyes to
>>>>> >see.
>>>>> >Dolphins see out of the water. Otherwise, they couldn't do all those
>>>>> >tricks.
>>>>> >Why wouldn't dolphins be aware of stars?
>>>>>
>>>>> They probably would not be because like most animals, they don't see
>>>>> objects
>>>>> that are not moving....but I could be wrong about that.
>>>> Most mammals are aware of things that aren't moving. Anyone who
>>>> plays with a dog knows that the animals recognizes pthers, even when
>>>> they aren't moving.
>>>> I heard that frogs can only see something that is moving. The
>>>> neural circuits in their eyes subtract the stationary background.
>>>> Other animals use their sense of sight in producing camouflage.
>>>> Chameleons, flounder and octopuses change color to match their
>>>> stationary background. Octopuses even change shapes to match nearby
>>>> stationary objects. I don't think they could do this without
>>>> recognizing stationary objects.
>>>> Birds and crocodilians make nests out of sticks, stones and other
>>>> objects. I don't think they could do this without seeing things.
>>>>> As you probably know, humans developed the property know as 'rapid eye
>>>>> movements' REM. Our eyes are constantly moving so we can see objects
>>>>> that
>>>>> >are at rest.
>>>> I don't know if this is the reason for our rapid eye movements. I
>>>> know that rapid eye movements have been studied for a few decades. I
>>>> never heard the conclusion that it is for seeing objects at rest.
>>>
>>>That's because it is bullshit that Henry made up.
>>>
>>>There are eye movements that are indeed rapid (but not called REM .. that
>>>refers to a stage of sleep where there is involuntary rapid eye moement)
>>>that allow us to shift our gaze around a scene so we can take in the
>>>detail
>>>.. as we only have 'high definition' vision in a very narrow field of
>>>view
>>>(the rest is low), so to get a detailed image, we need to keep moving our
>>>eyes from point-of-interest to point-of-interest. There's also some less
>>>rapid eye movements, such as tracking of moving objects, or adjusting the
>>>eye when we change the angle of our head of body so that we can still
>>>focus
>>>on a given part of a scene.
>>
>> Normal REM is continuous but very much smaller....molecular level... than
>> sleep
>> REM or abnormal REM
>>
>>>>> >How do you know dolphins aren't aware of the stars?
>>>> I asked Androcles. He said that marine mammals aren't aware of
>>>> the stars. He gave no reason, but referred to them as being adapted to
>>>> their environment. I don't see how adapting to a marine environment
>>>> automatically means ignoring the stars, especially by creatures that
>>>> have to poke their head out of the water. He may be right, but I asked
>>>> him how he knew.
>>>
>>>Androcles obviously communes with the sea creatures.
>>
>> ......only when drunk
>>
> drosen should ask Inert the QUESTION, I need some more idiot names
> for my web page.
> http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/QUESTION.htm

I've answered 'the question' before .. the answer is that Androcles can't
read formulas and doesn't know WHAT Einstein said.


From: Peter Webb on 3 Mar 2010 01:00

"Androcles" <Headmaster(a)Hogwarts.physics_u> wrote in message
news:bumjn.216454$kR2.158172(a)newsfe05.ams2...
>
> "Henry Wilson DSc" <..@..> wrote in message
> news:24fro59c21e46ujo9spvogjdmp0mass3jc(a)4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 3 Mar 2010 11:51:32 +1100, "Inertial" <relatively(a)rest.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Darwin123" <drosen0000(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:83cea469-8fa8-400c-8dd6-ab5883938bce(a)t41g2000yqt.googlegroups.com...
>>>> On Mar 2, 5:07 am, ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc) wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 16:55:43 -0800 (PST), Darwin123
>>>>> <drosen0...(a)yahoo.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> >On Mar 1, 3:27 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_u> wrote:
>>>>> >> "Darwin123" <drosen0...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>> >>news:6dc32653-9799-4934-815a-04353b89a715(a)z11g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...
>>>>> >> On Feb 27, 4:58 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_u>
>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >> > "vincen...(a)yahoo.com" <datashap...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>> >> >news:87a0b5ca-9cdb-42df-84cf-2ef3811e6a71(a)k5g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>
>>>>> >> > intelligent mammals living in the sea cannot be aware
>>>>> >> > of stars,
>>>>>
>>>>> >> Yes, drosen, that's right.
>>>>>
>>>>> >Why is this right?
>>>>> >Mammals stick their head out of water or they die. They have eyes to
>>>>> >see.
>>>>> >Dolphins see out of the water. Otherwise, they couldn't do all those
>>>>> >tricks.
>>>>> >Why wouldn't dolphins be aware of stars?
>>>>>
>>>>> They probably would not be because like most animals, they don't see
>>>>> objects
>>>>> that are not moving....but I could be wrong about that.
>>>> Most mammals are aware of things that aren't moving. Anyone who
>>>> plays with a dog knows that the animals recognizes pthers, even when
>>>> they aren't moving.
>>>> I heard that frogs can only see something that is moving. The
>>>> neural circuits in their eyes subtract the stationary background.
>>>> Other animals use their sense of sight in producing camouflage.
>>>> Chameleons, flounder and octopuses change color to match their
>>>> stationary background. Octopuses even change shapes to match nearby
>>>> stationary objects. I don't think they could do this without
>>>> recognizing stationary objects.
>>>> Birds and crocodilians make nests out of sticks, stones and other
>>>> objects. I don't think they could do this without seeing things.
>>>>> As you probably know, humans developed the property know as 'rapid eye
>>>>> movements' REM. Our eyes are constantly moving so we can see objects
>>>>> that
>>>>> >are at rest.
>>>> I don't know if this is the reason for our rapid eye movements. I
>>>> know that rapid eye movements have been studied for a few decades. I
>>>> never heard the conclusion that it is for seeing objects at rest.
>>>
>>>That's because it is bullshit that Henry made up.
>>>
>>>There are eye movements that are indeed rapid (but not called REM .. that
>>>refers to a stage of sleep where there is involuntary rapid eye moement)
>>>that allow us to shift our gaze around a scene so we can take in the
>>>detail
>>>.. as we only have 'high definition' vision in a very narrow field of
>>>view
>>>(the rest is low), so to get a detailed image, we need to keep moving our
>>>eyes from point-of-interest to point-of-interest. There's also some less
>>>rapid eye movements, such as tracking of moving objects, or adjusting the
>>>eye when we change the angle of our head of body so that we can still
>>>focus
>>>on a given part of a scene.
>>
>> Normal REM is continuous but very much smaller....molecular level... than
>> sleep
>> REM or abnormal REM
>>
>>>>> >How do you know dolphins aren't aware of the stars?
>>>> I asked Androcles. He said that marine mammals aren't aware of
>>>> the stars. He gave no reason, but referred to them as being adapted to
>>>> their environment. I don't see how adapting to a marine environment
>>>> automatically means ignoring the stars, especially by creatures that
>>>> have to poke their head out of the water. He may be right, but I asked
>>>> him how he knew.
>>>
>>>Androcles obviously communes with the sea creatures.
>>
>> ......only when drunk
>>
> drosen should ask Inert the QUESTION, I need some more idiot names
> for my web page.
> http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/QUESTION.htm
>

Here is the question on your web page, for those who couldn't be bothered to
look:

Why did Einstein say
the speed of light from A to B is c-v,
the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
the "time" each way is the same?

Here is the answer:

He in fact said nothing like it, and indeed its not even true.

So, now you know.

Any other questions about what Einstein said about SR?






First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Sagnac Revisited. Why Paul and Awilson are Hopelessly Wrong.
Next: The electron is not a point.