Prev: i will play the part of Androcles.
Next: JSH: Morphic non-linear Factoring Random solved
From: eric gisse on 7 May 2010 19:10
Michael Helland wrote:

> There is no range for light.
>
> Obviously it seems to travel for about 14 billion years and then stops.

This is wrong. Stop spewing.
From: BURT on 7 May 2010 19:35
On May 7, 1:34 pm, Michael Helland <mobyd...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> There is no range for light.
>
> Obviously it seems to travel for about 14 billion years and then stops.

It must travel further as it moves through ever expanding universal
distance.

Mitch Raemsch
From: Uncle Al on 8 May 2010 15:23
Michael Helland wrote:
>
> There is no range for light.

Infinite, just as for charge and gravitation.

idiot

> Obviously it seems to travel for about 14 billion years and then stops.

Wait a billion years - it will be 15.

idiot

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm
From: spudnik on 8 May 2010 17:56
see "Alfven cosmology." there is really no way, as of yet,
to determine whether the COBE radiation is not within system Sol;
not as silly an assumption as for the redshift, though,
which even Hubble apparently denounced, at least
for a while.

and, if you googol it, They'll know, for sure.

> The nuclear forces have a range, the EM is next with Hubble's Limit as
> a hand waving attempt at it and gravitation could be well after that
> maybe a few billion times larger than the observable cosmos.

thus:
hey, I'd forgotten about that;
wonder what HAnson could reply, given that
he associates it with Barbara Streisand,
who wasn't nearly as weighty.

> Conservation laws COME FROM Noether's theorem.

thus:
yeah, and "A=mcc" -- maether,
the *really* perfect gas. so, now, all that you have
to do is laboriously show that this theory accounts
for all of the phenomena of the other theory(s), instead
of asserting a handwavingology (as in scare-quoting,
"I have a dream!")

"Exactly what occurs -- exactly & with decimal points!"

> This is exactly what occurs when the mæther decompresses.

thus:
to reiterate, for the sake of Obispo, above,
Fermat had to prove the very special case, n=4,
because his proof only applied to prime exponents,
excepting two (plus the lemma on multiples of prime exponents).

thus:
yeah, OK; so, what is the difference between "energy" and "aether?..."
what is the shape of the wave of light?
> Aether is matter times the second power of the speed of light.

thus:
spatially, there are "mutually inscribed tetrahedra,"
meaning that the vertices of one lie on the faces
of the other, and vise versa.

thus:
the formalism of relativity isn't needed, if
one does not presume that Pascal's vacuum was perfect
(and still is) a la "Newtonian optics" or ray-tracing, and
the calculus-launch problemma of the brachistochrone.

thus:
how about this:
show us that your theory agrees with Sophie Germaine; then,
tackle the remaining primes.

thus:
NB, Lanczos used quaternions in _Variational Mechanics_
for special relativity, and it's just "real time" and
"three ('imaginary') axes of space;" but,
this is just the original "vectors."

compare Lanczos' biquaternions
with the "Cayley-Dickerson doubling" procedure,
to go from real to complex to quaternion to octonion.

"wroldlines" are just the crappola in Minkowski's "pants,"
totally obfuscatory outside of a formalism --
time is not a dimension; time is awareness & mensurability
(of dimensionality !-)

thus:
try a search on Gauss & Ceres. or
"go" to wlym.com.
> This problem and its solution are found in a paper by Ceplecha, 1987,

thus:
the problem appears to be,
"some observers measure the angle to the marker,
relative to the other observers,"
which would not give you the distance *on a plane*,
because of similar trigona. Gauss meaasured the curvature
of Earth with his theodolite *and* a chain measure
of distance (working for France in Alsace-Lorraine,
triangulatin' that contested area .-)

thus:
notice that no-one bothered with the "proofs" that I've seen, and
the statute of limitation is out on that, but, anyway,
I think it must have been Scalia, not Kennedy,
who changed his little, oligarchical "Federalist Society" mind.

thus:
sorry; I guess, it was Scalia who'd "mooted" a yea on WS-is-WS, but
later came to d'Earl d'O. ... unless it was Breyer, as I may
have read in an article about his retirement.

> I know of at least three "proofs" that WS was WS, but
> I recently found a text that really '"makes the case,"
> once and for all (but the Oxfordians, Rhodesian Scholars, and
> others brainwashed by British Liberal Free Trade,
> capNtrade e.g.).
> what ever it says, Shapiro's last book is just a polemic;
> his real "proof" is _1599_;
> the fans of de Vere are hopelessly stuck-up --
> especially if they went to Harry Potter PS#1.
> http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=http://entertainment.timesonline.co.....

--Light: A History!
http://wlym.com

--Waxman's capNtrade#2 [*]:
"Let the arbitrageurs raise the cost of your energy as much as They
can ?!?"
* His first such bill was in '91 under HW on NOx & SO2 viz acid rain;
so?
From: Y.Porat on 9 May 2010 07:05
On May 7, 10:39 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/7/10 3:34 PM, Michael Helland wrote:
>
> > There is no range for light.
>
> > Obviously it seems to travel for about 14 billion years and then stops.
>
>    No--Use your head. There were plenty of CMB photon out there in the
>    past. There are plenty now and there will be plenty in the future.
>
>    Two of the know fundamental forces in nature electromagnetic and
>    gravity have infinite range. There is no evidence to the contrary
>    and copious evidence in support.

--------------------
better YOU use your head!!

if light or attraction force agents
were traveling only is straight lines

our universe had to be depleted
of them long ago
or even at once by a huge blow !!
see
the 'Circlon' idea !!!

ATB
Y.Porat
--------------------------------------
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: i will play the part of Androcles.
Next: JSH: Morphic non-linear Factoring Random solved