Minkowski Metric.
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Infinite vs. instant
Next: It's a heatwave
From: eric gisse on 14 Jun 2010 20:59 ...@..(Henry Wilson DSc) wrote: [...] > It is only when they are plotted (displacement against time) that one can > describe changes in phase angles in terms of an 'angular velocity'. But > that's hardly a common procedure. Especially for people who have never worked a problem set out of a mechanics or electrodynamics textbook. [...] > Paul, it was obviously Einstein who was the fake. Is that what you tell yourself when you can't even work through 19th century physics problems? [...] > > SR does NOT predict the results when SR is correcty applied. How would you know? You claim to find SR incomprehensible. [...]
From: spudnik on 14 Jun 2010 22:56 yeah; go play with MPC# -- he quotes Einstein's babble about aether, two, with a link to it. y'know, a really good book is _Einstein's Mistakes_, although it is hardly anti-Einstien, as some googolers must think ... googolos? > How would you know? You claim to find SR incomprehensible. thus&so: may be, so; as the article says, there just is so little historical data. see S. Fred Singer's retrospective metastudy e.g., or i.e. not.... another factor is deforestation, which obviously changes evapo- transpiration near mountains. > > But Francou resists speculating about what will happen to the larger > > glaciers, which are generally located higher than 5,100 metres. thus&so: arctic ice is not icesheets; it is evanescent. whereas the antarctic icesheets can go no higher, so that an increase in calving could be either a) just increased melting & an actual decrease of the icesheet; b) increased snowfall. however, there was no evidence of the former, when I asked about it at a conference on satellite telemetry at UCLA (knew two of the profs on the panel, one saying, "no change seen, as yet" .-) Obama Creates a British Company !?!... http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles%202007/MornerInterview.pdf http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles_2010/Climate_swindle.pdf thus&so: a popular impression is that oilcos are against Kyoto and other cap&trade schemes, like Waxman's; well, hm. urban heat islands are said to be accounted-for by the IPCC, in some kind of a fudge-factor; interesting, if true, but how accurate? thus&so: in Santa Monica, the subsidy of photovoltaics, as with compact flourescent lights, is to buy "clean tech" from SW Asia, primarily. in other words, the decrease of our carbon footprints is a massive cargo-cult. what is the toxicity of all of those CFLs, being tossed in the garbage, instead of collected somewhat more carefully, as with the larger flourescents in apartments, offices & factories? thus&so: the Milankovitch orbital periods are probably just synchronizing, not causative; that is, only during the glacial epochs, such as the present Quaternary Period (last two million years or so .-) > Earth is warming due to the Earth's precession on it's axis thus&so: if a "semi-hamiltonian" path ended on the same face as it began, is't hamiltonian? thus&so: 1/9 is, in base-9, 1/10; or 0.10000... so, what is the canonical digit for base-one? thus&so: time obviously doesn't bend, except in a subjective sense of living & dying, sleeping & waking ... it's too bad about Schroedinger's joke-cat, though ... Schroedinger's cat is dead; long-live Schroedinger's cat! the curvature of space was dyscovered with "synchronized sundials" by Aristarchus; it was measured in Alsace-Lorraine by Gauss, with his theodolite & trigonation ... for money, ne'er again! Dear Editor; It is apparent from the City ordinance, proposed to ban high-density polyethylene (HDPE) bags -- excepting take-out at restaurants -- that it will be a state-wide eco-tax. The "green fee" is slated to be 25 cents for any paper bag from the retailer, grocer or farmer at the market. This is unfortunate for two reasons, although, as I stated a year ago in Council, when it first came-up, the super-light-weight & super-inexpenseve bags (much less than the Staff Report was willing to concede) are so good at what they do, before they inevitably break-up & decompose (but , according to the apocrypha & studies of Heal the Bay etc., HDPEbagsR4ever) that coastal cities may be justified in a ban, to prevent stormdrain blockages. Firstly, just like with "hemp for haemarrhoids," it is not a panacea or much of an economic stop-gap, if only because "only criminals & baby-smotherers will have HDPE bags." Really, there are plenty of natural plastics; "plastic" is really an adjective, as in the plastic arts! Note also that even plant-derived plastic bags will be banned, although they are acknowledged to biodegrade. Secondly, a very small Carbon Tax would be much more realistic than simply allowing Waxman's CO2 cap & trade nostrum, of letting the abitrageurs & daytraders raise the price of our energy as much as they can in the "free market" -- with no provision whatever for government revenue (contrary to the slogan of "cap & tax" used by Tea Partiers, "Republicans," and the WSUrinal). As with the much-greater amount of materiel & energy that is required for the paper bags, we might do better to ban *low* density polypropolene bags at department & boutique stores, which are many times heavier than the HDPE bags. It is surprising that a fifth of the HDPE bags are recycled, considerng that a) they're only good for garbage, if they get dirty, and b) they are quite often re-used by folks; recycling them is an unsanitary joke, though composting might be educational fun. The retailers would get ten of the 25 cents, which seems to be a quite an incentive for the overhead. However, has anyone seen any analysis on the energy requirements for the "reusable" replacement, and their importation? --Sincerely, Brian H. --Stop BP's/Waxman's arbitragueur-daytripper's delight, cap&trade (Captain Tax in the feeble minds of Tea Partiers, "'republicans' R us," and the WSUrinal (and the latter just l o v e Waxman's '91 cap&trade bill !-)) http://wlym.com
From: Jerry on 15 Jun 2010 09:19 On Jun 15, 7:51 am, "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.ander...(a)somewhere.no> wrote: > On 15.06.2010 01:49, Henry Wilson DSc wrote: > > I have explained your errors before. You think that a rotating apparatus viewed > > in the rotating frame is identical to a nonR apparatus viewed in the nonR > > frame. > > > You are oblivious to the fact that the emission point of a particular beam > > element moves backwards in the rotating frame. > > Some correction, eh? :-) > Ralph's assertion, of course, only makes sense in the context of a belief in absolute space and a preferred coordinate system. He seems unable to understand this point. Jerry
From: Henry Wilson DSc on 15 Jun 2010 17:09 On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 06:19:57 -0700 (PDT), Jerry <Cephalobus_alienus(a)comcast.net> wrote: >On Jun 15, 7:51�am, "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.ander...(a)somewhere.no> >wrote: >> On 15.06.2010 01:49, Henry Wilson DSc wrote: > >> > I have explained your errors before. You think that a rotating apparatus viewed >> > in the rotating frame is identical to a nonR apparatus viewed in the nonR >> > frame. >> >> > You are oblivious to the fact that the emission point of a particular beam >> > element moves backwards in the rotating frame. >> >> Some correction, eh? :-) >> > >Henry's assertion, of course, only makes sense in the context of >a belief in absolute space and a preferred coordinate system. Jerry, old girl, if you a riding on a carousel and drop your empty dementia pill bottle on the ground, how does it appear to move in your frame? >He seems unable to understand this point Paul's great claim to fame is that he was able to demonstrate that, according to BaTh, there is no fringe displacement in a nonrotating ring gyro. Does he deserve some kind of prize, I wonder? >Jerry Henry Wilson... ........Einstein's Relativity...The religion that worships negative space.
From: Jerry on 16 Jun 2010 08:04
On Jun 15, 4:09 pm, ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc) wrote: > On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 06:19:57 -0700 (PDT), Jerry > > > > > > <Cephalobus_alie...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >On Jun 15, 7:51 am, "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.ander...(a)somewhere.no> > >wrote: > >> On 15.06.2010 01:49, Henry Wilson DSc wrote: > > >> > I have explained your errors before. You think that a rotating apparatus viewed > >> > in the rotating frame is identical to a nonR apparatus viewed in the nonR > >> > frame. > > >> > You are oblivious to the fact that the emission point of a particular beam > >> > element moves backwards in the rotating frame. > > >> Some correction, eh? :-) > > >Henry's assertion, of course, only makes sense in the context of > >a belief in absolute space and a preferred coordinate system. > > Jerry, old girl, if you a riding on a carousel and drop your empty dementia > pill bottle on the ground, how does it appear to move in your frame? Incorrect analogy of an absolute, fixed ground onto which you may drop your bottle and it may remain "at rest". Let's try a different AND STILL INCORRECT analogy. Ralph, you senile old man, if you are riding on a carousel in outer space and drop your FULL demential pill bottle (that you obviously refuse to take), how does it appear to move in your frame? Jerry |