| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Physics - Electromagnetic Forum » Welcome! to the Physics Newsgroups
Page 1 of 2 Goto page 1, 2 Next
|
| Author |
Message |
| N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc) |
 Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 12:52 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
X-No-archive: yes
======== Welcome! to the Physics Newsgroups ==========
The sci.physics.* and alt.sci.physics.* newsgroups are
forums devoted to the discussion of physics and
physics-related topics.
The contributors to these newsgroups constitute a
diverse group of laypeople, students, engineers, and
other professionals in addition to professional
physicists. All are united by an interest in physics,
and all are welcome to contribute postings here.
The Physics Newsgroup FAQ is available from a number of
Web sites listed later in this welcome message. Some
of the more narrowly focused physics newsgroups have
their own FAQs, which are regularly posted in the
appropriate newsgroups. The Physics Newsgroup FAQ is
available only as a web document since it is too big
and uses images and equations that cannot be
transformed into text.
Some of the newsgroups have their charter residing in
the Faq archive. To read these, see
http://www.physics.adelaide.edu.au/~dkoks/Faq/Administrivia/newsgroups.html
- Newsgroups for General Physics Discussions -
sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to
the discussion of mainstream physics (except
relativity), news from the physics community, and
physics-related social issues.
sci.physics.relativity is an open forum for discussions
about the theory of relativity, from elementary level
to research level discussions, from dissemination of
new theoretical ideas to speculative attacks on the
foundations of relativity. In general, threads in
this group should -not- be crossposted to
sci.physics, unless they involve quantum physics or
grand unification schemes that lie outside the topics
suggested above. The charter is held in the
Newsgroup FAQ (see above for url).
alt.sci.physics.new-theories is an open forum for
discussion of any topics related to conventional or
unconventional physics. In this context,
"unconventional physics" includes any ideas on
physical science, whether or not they are widely
accepted by the mainstream physics community.
sci.physics.research is a moderated newsgroup designed
to offer an environment with less traffic and more
opportunity for discussion of serious topics in
physics among experts and beginners alike. The
charter for this group is in the Newsgroup FAQ (see
above for url).
- Specialized Physics Newsgroups -
sci.physics.particle is an unmoderated newsgroup
dedicated to the discussion of all aspects of
particle physics by people with all levels of
expertise. The charter for this group may be read in
the Newsgroup FAQ (see above for url).
sci.physics.accelerators is an unmoderated newsgroup
for issues relating to particle accelerators and the
physics of beams. The charter for this group is in
the Newsgroup FAQ (see above for url).
alt.sci.physics.acoustics is an unmoderated newsgroup
for issues relating to sound and acoustics. Its FAQ
and a set of informal rules are held in the Newsgroup
FAQ (see above for url).
sci.physics.cond-matter is an unmoderated newsgroup
dedicated to the discussion of the physics of
condensed matter. The charter for this group may be
read in the Newsgroup FAQ (see above for url).
sci.physics.computational.fluid-dynamics is an
unmoderated newsgroup for discussion of computational
fluid dynamics with a charter at the Newsgroup FAQ
(see above for url).
sci.physics.electromag is an unmoderated newsgroup with
its own FAQ dedicated to the discussion of topics
pertaining to electromagnetics. The FAQ and charter
are held in the Newsgroup FAQ (see above for url).
sci.physics.fusion is an unmoderated newsgroup with its
own FAQ dedicated to the discussion of nuclear
fusion; refer to the Newsgroup FAQ (see above for
url).
sci.physics.plasma is a moderated newsgroup serving the
plasma science and technologies community. The
charter for this group may be read in the Newsgroup
FAQ (see above for url).
sci.physics.strings is a moderated newsgroup covering
whatever aspects of string theory that people want to
discuss. The charter for this group is at
http://schwinger.harvard.edu/~sps
sci.physics.foundations is a moderated group designed
to discuss any issue of the foundations of physics or
philosophy of physics, and in particular posts on
unresolved or controversial issues. The charter is
held at
http://vacuum-physics.com/spf
There are several other alt.sci.physics.* groups.
- Other Languages -
de.sci.physik is the German language group for physics
discussions.
fj.sci.physics is the Japanese language group for
physics discussions.
================ Posting Guidelines ==================
- All Are Welcome -
We welcome contributions from newcomers, including
questions at all levels of expertise. However, we do
ask that "newbies" always check the FAQ (see the next
section) -before- posting any questions, because
experience has shown that chances are very good that a
very similar question is answered there. (The word FAQ
is, after all, an acronym for "Frequently Asked
Questions".)
"Wild and crazy ideas" are also acceptable in the
appropriate newsgroups, alt.sci.physics.new-theories
and sci.physics.relativity) but please be sure to check
the available FAQs before posting to avoid the
embarrassment of posting something based on a VCM (very
common misconception).
- Crossposting is Discouraged -
Cross-posting from one physics newsgroup to another
newsgroup is, in general, strongly discouraged. It is
almost always best to post a question in the one group
which seems best suited rather than cross-posting it to
several groups.
If you respond to a message which is cross-posted to
irrelevant groups, please remove the other groups from
the Newsgroup line in the header of your response, or
use the Followup line in the header to direct further
followups to just one or two groups. Cross-posting is
-sometimes- acceptable if it is limited to at most two
or three other newsgroups, in each of which the topic
is clearly acceptable and is not considered overly
speculative.
For example, discussions about black holes and
cosmology can be cross-posted to sci.astro, but
discussion of faster-than-light travel or the twin
paradox should be posted only to
sci.physics.relativity. Likewise, theories intended to
topple the Standard Model should be posted only to
alt.sci.physics.new-theories.
- Newsgroups Devoted to Speculative Physics -
Please note that sci.physics is -not- considered an
appropriate forum for the discussion of unconventional
physics.
The newsgroup specifically dedicated to the discussion
of "alternative" physics is
alt.sci.physics.new-theories, and is the appropriate
forum for discussion of physics ideas which are not
widely accepted by the physics community. The charter
for sci.physics.relativity also allows for speculative
subjects.
- Posting Netiquette -
If you are replying to another post, please be sure to
cut out all irrelevant text, and to make every effort
to ensure that it is clear who said what. It may be
advisable to lurk here for a while to see how
experienced posters accomplish this. Realise too that
if another poster has placed
X-No-archive: yes
as the first line of their message, then it means that
they are instructing well-behaved retrieval engines not
to archive the text. So please do likewise: don't copy
their message into yours.
While many people post through Google at
http://groups.google.com, be aware that Google only
archives messages: it doesn't display messages marked
as above for no archiving.
The most effective posts are concise, clearly
expressed, and focus on a very specific point. It is
always a good idea to re-read what you have written
(and to employ a spell checker!) -before- posting your
message. It is also wise to make sure that your
subject line concisely and accurately describes the
content of the message.
Don't post textbook problems in the hope that someone
will do your homework for you. Do your own homework;
it's good for you. On the other hand, questions, even
about elementary physics, are always welcome. So if
you want to discuss the physics which is relevant to
your homework, feel free to do so. Be warned that you
may still have plenty of work to do, trying to figure
out which of the many answers you get are correct.
Your postings will be read by thousands of people so it
is worth taking a minute to read it back and check the
spelling, grammar and punctuation before posting. If
your browser has the capability, previewing your post
to check how it would actually look online is a wise
precaution.
- No Flames, Please! -
Be prepared for heated discussion. People have strong
opinions about the issues, and discussions can get a
little "loud" at times. Don't take it personally if
someone seems to always jump all over everything you
say. Everyone was jumping all over everybody long
before you got there! You can keep the discussion at a
low boil by trying to stick to the facts. Clearly
separate facts from opinion -- don't let people think
you are confusing your opinions with scientific truth.
And keep the focus of discussion on the ideas, not the
people who post them.
Tolerate everyone. People of many different points of
view, and widely varying educational backgrounds from
around the world participate in these newsgroups.
Respect for others will be returned in kind. Personal
criticism is usually not welcome.
Finally, it is important to always bear in mind that
some behavior is decidedly -unwelcome- at any time in
this newsgroup, including:
* spamming of any kind,
* cross-posting to large numbers of unrelated
newsgroups,
* posting on wildly irrelevant topics,
* repeated postings of identical messages,
* abusive flaming.
Bottom line: if you wouldn't say it in front of your
mother or your boss, please don't say it here.
If you respond to a message which is cross-posted to
irrelevant groups, please remove the other groups from
the Newsgroup line in the header of your response, or
use the Followup line in the header to direct further
followups to just one or two groups. Cross-posting is
-sometimes- acceptable if it is limited to at most two
or three other newsgroups, in each of which the topic
is clearly acceptable and is not considered overly
speculative. For example, discussions about black
holes and cosmology can be cross-posted to sci.astro,
but discussion of faster-than-light travel or the twin
paradox should be posted only to
sci.physics.relativity.
=== The Physics Newsgroup FAQ and Where to Find It ===
The Physics Newsgroup FAQ is available at a number of
web sites. You can obtain the FAQ at
Australia:
http://hermes.physics.adelaide.edu.au/~dkoks/Faq
Canada:
http://www.stillmoving.ca/physics/faq
Germany:
http://www.desy.de/pub/www/projects/Physics
Netherlands:
http://www.xs4all.nl/~johanw/PhysFAQ
Taiwan:
http://www.phys.ncku.edu.tw/mirrors/physicsfaq
USA:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics
http://scope.joemirando.net/faqs
http://www.obscure.org/physics-faq
http://www.edu-observatory.org/physics-faq
http://www.ronen.net/physics
http://members.cox.net/dlzc1/Faq/
The current editor of the Physics Newsgroup FAQ is Don
Koks, who may be reached by *plain text* email at
username: dkoks
rest of address: physics.adelaide.edu.au
Note that Mr. Koks uses spam-deleting software set
to delete email at the merest hint of spam-like
behaviour, so if an email to me receives no reply in
a few days, please try sending it again with *no* html,
as well as a subject line that clearly indicates it
relates to physics.
=================== Related FAQs =====================
There are many other places where you may find answers
to your questions. This is a partial list of other
FAQs and answer archives that are related to physics.
A more complete list may be found in the Physics
Newsgroup FAQ.
Frequently Asked Questions in Astronomy
http://sciastro.astronomy.net
Ask the Astronomer
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu.
Relativity on the World Wide Web
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/RelWWW/
alt.sci.physics.acoustics FAQ
http://www.campanellaacoustics.com/faq.html#basic
Sci/chem FAQ
http://isc.faqs.org/faqs/sci/chem-faq
Space
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/space
============= This Welcome Message ===================
This welcome message is periodically posted in some of
the sci.physics.* newsgroups. Currently, the welcome
editor is David A. Smith, while the editor of the
Physics Newsgroup FAQ is Don Koks.
We hope that you will find your participation in these
groups to be enjoyable, informative, and productive!
======================================Rev. 2008mar17 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Androcles |
| Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 1:11 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
This message is brought to you by Androcles
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
"N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)" <dlzc1@cox.net> wrote in message
news:7D1Tj.111946$497.89394@newsfe14.phx...
[snip]
| - Posting Netiquette -
I chopped out what wasn't relevant to physics, Smiffy.
Now, who decides what is relevant?
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| hanson |
| Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 5:07 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
===== ******** AHAHAHAHA!!!! ******* =======
Quote:
"Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics
wrote in message news:xV1Tj.70380$SY5.5168@newsfe13.ams2...
Quote: This message is brought to you by Androcles
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
Smitty "N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)" <dlzc1@cox.net> wrote in message
news:7D1Tj.111946$497.89394@newsfe14.phx...
[snip]
| - Posting Netiquette -
"Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote
Quote: I chopped out what wasn't relevant to physics, Smiffy.
Now, who decides what is relevant?
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
hanson wrote:
ahahahaha... yeah, but Smitty has those inner needs,
him yearning to be the fox that guards the hen house.
It suits him just fine... ahahaha...Smitty is to be envied
since there is that poster, Ben Jacoby, who will show
Smitty the righteous ways of Benj's *G-d*... ahahaha...
Carry on guys. Thanks for the laughs.... ahahahanson |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Androcles |
| Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 6:02 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
This message is brought to you by Androcles
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
"hanson" <hanson@quick.net> wrote in message
news:cm5Tj.2261$qW.1546@trnddc06...
| ===== ******** AHAHAHAHA!!!! ******* =======
| >
| "Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics>
| wrote in message news:xV1Tj.70380$SY5.5168@newsfe13.ams2...
| > This message is brought to you by Androcles
| > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
| >
| > Smitty "N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)" <dlzc1@cox.net> wrote in message
| > news:7D1Tj.111946$497.89394@newsfe14.phx...
| > [snip]
| > | - Posting Netiquette -
| >
|
| "Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote
| > I chopped out what wasn't relevant to physics, Smiffy.
| > Now, who decides what is relevant?
| > Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
| >
| hanson wrote:
| ahahahaha... yeah, but Smitty has those inner needs,
| him yearning to be the fox that guards the hen house.
| It suits him just fine... ahahaha...Smitty is to be envied
| since there is that poster, Ben Jacoby, who will show
| Smitty the righteous ways of Benj's *G-d*... ahahaha...
| Carry on guys. Thanks for the laughs.... ahahahanson
|
Deer Smiffy? A fox? He runs to mommy if he sees so much as an
egg, never mind a chicken.
How the fuck is it etiquette to be downright rude, slice out and ignore
the other bloke's point of view without acknowledging or replying to
his point?
Sheesh, snipping is ok if it's been read and replied to and should be done
by the author himself in the interests of tidiness, but the behaviour of
Uncle "[snip crap]" is in no way etiquette. Do we see Deer Smiffy all over
his
case, pissing and moaning about it? Of course not. Deer Smiffy hasn't the
guts to stand up to him.
What's even funnier is that Deer Smiffy thinks thousands of people
read these posts, all anxious to learn math and physics, they are all out
there lurking and never say a fucking word. How real is that?
Haven't see Blind Poe for a couple of weeks... hope the
old bugger's ok, I do like to see him struggle. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc) |
| Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 9:42 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Dear hanson:
"hanson" <hanson@quick.net> wrote in message
news:cm5Tj.2261$qW.1546@trnddc06...
Quote: ===== ******** AHAHAHAHA!!!! ******* =======
....
ahahahaha... yeah, but Smitty has those inner needs,
him yearning to be the fox that guards the hen house.
It suits him just fine... ahahaha...Smitty is to be envied
since there is that poster, Ben Jacoby, who will show
Smitty the righteous ways of Benj's *G-d*... ahahaha...
Carry on guys. Thanks for the laughs.... ahahahanson
The hens are long gone. I'm hoping they will come back. Seems
like all we have a blackbirds of various sorts...
David A. Smith |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Sciphy guy... |
| Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 7:01 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On May 3, 5:02 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas... at (no spam) Hogwarts.physics> wrote:
Quote: What's even funnier is that Deer Smiffy thinks thousands of people
read these posts, all anxious to learn math and physics, they are all out
there lurking and never say a fucking word. How real is that?
Well . . . maybe more real than you might believe.
Less ego and more focus on physics would be an improvement.
Not many of us want to jump into a messy chicken coup when the crap
and blood are distracting us from the higher potential of the group.
I can't fault someone for reminding us of some suggested ground
rules.
If you don't like them then please ignore them as we all choose to
ignore most of what is posted that is irrelevant and irreverant to a
true discussion and debate of the topics of physics. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Androcles... |
| Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 12:45 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
This message is brought to you by Androcles
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
"Sciphy guy" <mcfater at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:db1ec128-1732-4c27-8eaa-a2a3a5d3a770 at (no spam) 8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
| On May 3, 5:02 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas... at (no spam) Hogwarts.physics> wrote:
|
| > What's even funnier is that Deer Smiffy thinks thousands of people
| > read these posts, all anxious to learn math and physics, they are all
out
| > there lurking and never say a fucking word. How real is that?
|
| Well . . . maybe more real than you might believe.
|
| Less ego and more focus on physics would be an improvement.
Try it. Answer this question.
Why did the egomaniac Einstein say
the speed of light form A to B is c-v,
the speed of light form B to A is c+v,
the "time" is the same for either direction, nymshifting mcfarter?
Changing your name doesn't make thousands of you, fruitcake.
*plonk* |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)... |
| Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 12:58 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
X-No-Archive: yes
Dear Sciphy guy:
"Sciphy guy" <mcfater at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:db1ec128-1732-4c27-8eaa-a2a3a5d3a770 at (no spam) 8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
Quote: On May 3, 5:02 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas... at (no spam) Hogwarts.physics
wrote:
What's even funnier is that Deer Smiffy thinks
thousands of people read these posts, all
anxious to learn math and physics, they are
all out there lurking and never say a fucking
word. How real is that?
Well . . . maybe more real than you might believe.
Yes, it is quite interesting that so many people do not realize
that internet search engines return hits into these
"conversations" for years. The future does have some difficulty
reaching Androcles' ears, so he does not believe in them.
Quote: Less ego and more focus on physics would be
an improvement.
Not many of us want to jump into a messy
chicken coup when the crap and blood are
distracting us from the higher potential of the
group. I can't fault someone for reminding us
of some suggested ground rules.
Thanks.
Quote: If you don't like them then please ignore them
as we all choose to ignore most of what is
posted that is irrelevant and irreverant to a
true discussion and debate of the topics of
physics.
Speaking of discussion and debate, have you found
sci.physics.foundations yet?
David A. Smith |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Jeff▲Relf... |
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 12:01 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Re: The Sci.Physics FAQ on “ Falling into a Black Hole ”:
“ www.Ronen.NET/Physics/Relativity/BlackHoles/Fall_In.HTML ”,
Many say that Sagittarius A* ( at the center of the Milky Way )
is a “ Black Hole ”; but it's bright in gamma rays ( from anti-matter )
and, technically, it's just a “ highly massive compact object ”.
Although Sgr A*'s mass is 3.7 mega suns,
it's 12.5 light-hours wide ( or less ), so it isn't all that compact.
( Pluto is 5 light-hours from the sun )
General Relativity does Not predict black holes.
Even Stephen Hawking no longer believes in true black holes
( because it doesn't jibe with Quantum Mechanical Path Integerals ).
In 1939, Einstein dismissed black holes thusly:
“ The ‘ Schwarzschild singularity ’ does not appear
for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily.
And this is due to the fact that otherwise
the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light. ”.
You ( Mr. Smith ) told me ( and others ):
“ Your postings will be read by thousands of people.. ”.
Quality data / models are very hard to come by;
but if, for example, I made direct replies to 3 different people,
I'd be surpised if 9 people actually read some of it.
In Sci.Physics, over the last 12.7 days ( 4 thousand posts ),
I count only 30 people who've made 33+ posts ( 106 made 7+ posts ).
Michael Helland had the highest “ exposure ”
( i.e. XRank, like PageRank™ ) followed by kenseto, jjsajd, PD, Sanny,
rbwinn, El Enrrabadore, Michael Moroney, paparios, Jeff▲Relf, etc.
The full list is at:
“ www.Cotse.NET/users/jeffrelf/_Phy_R.TXT
www.Cotse.NET/users/jeffrelf/_Phy_R_TXT.PNG ”. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Eric Gisse... |
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 1:15 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On May 12, 2:01 am, Jeff$B"%(BRelf <Jeff_R... at (no spam) X.Invalid> wrote:
[snip whatever]
What's the point of saying things that everyone knows are not true? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Bill Snyder... |
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 7:19 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Mon, 12 May 2008 04:15:44 -0700 (PDT), Eric Gisse
<jowr.pi at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: On May 12, 2:01 am, Jeff?Relf <Jeff_R... at (no spam) X.Invalid> wrote:
[snip whatever]
What's the point of saying things that everyone knows are not true?
Same as always for the Relfoid: attention-getting.
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Jeff▲Relf... |
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 9:32 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Dictionary.COM tell me “ metaphysics ” means:
“ A priori speculation upon questions that are
--> unanswerable to scientific observation <-- ,
analysis, or experiment. ”.
Show me a true black hole ( in the brightest part of a galaxy ? ).
Literally, you told me nothing but:
“ What's the point of saying
things that everyone knows are not true ? ”.
Are you saying..
Einstein was wrong when he dismissed black holes thusly ( in 1939 ):
“ The ‘ Schwarzschild singularity ’ does not appear
for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily.
And this is due to the fact that otherwise
the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light. ” ?
Stephen Hawking was wrong when he ( belatedly ) said:
“ a true event horizon never forms, just an apparent horizon. ” ?
and Hawking was wrong again when he said:
“ There is no baby universe branching off, as I once thought.
The information remains firmly in our universe.
I'm sorry to disappoint science fiction fans,
but if information is preserved, there is no possibility of
using black holes to travel to other universes.
If you --> jump into a black hole <-- ,
your mass-energy will be returned to our universe,
but in a mangled form, which contains the information about
what you were like, but in an unrecognisable state. ” ?
Are you saying it's not true that only 30 people made 33+ posts
to Sci.Physics in the 12.7 days ( prior to 9.2 hours ago ) ?
Michael Helland didn't have the highest “ exposure ”
( i.e. XRank, like PageRank™ ) followed by kenseto, jjsajd, and PD ? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Jeff▲Relf... |
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 10:09 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Let me know when you're ready to discuss the Sci.Physics FAQ
( instead of attacking me personally ). |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| zzbunker at (no spam) netscape.net... |
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 10:27 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On May 12, 3:32 pm, Jeff$B"%(BRelf <Jeff_R... at (no spam) X.Invalid> wrote:
Quote: Dictionary.COM tell me " metaphysics " means:
" A priori speculation upon questions that are
--> unanswerable to scientific observation <-- ,
analysis, or experiment. ".
Show me a true black hole ( in the brightest part of a galaxy ? ).
Literally, you told me nothing but:
" What's the point of saying
things that everyone knows are not true ? ".
Are you saying..
Einstein was wrong when he dismissed black holes thusly ( in 1939 ):
" The ' Schwarzschild singularity ' does not appear
for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily.
But, that's been the physics mantra though Maxwell though,
so nothing really new was discovered about time, space or anything.
The whole idea is that radiation can do anything and everything,
but everything else in the universe has chains.
Quote: And this is due to the fact that otherwise
the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light. " ?
Stephen Hawking was wrong when he ( belatedly ) said:
" a true event horizon never forms, just an apparent horizon. " ?
and Hawking was wrong again when he said:
" There is no baby universe branching off, as I once thought.
The information remains firmly in our universe.
I'm sorry to disappoint science fiction fans,
but if information is preserved, there is no possibility of
using black holes to travel to other universes.
If you --> jump into a black hole <-- ,
your mass-energy will be returned to our universe,
but in a mangled form, which contains the information about
what you were like, but in an unrecognisable state. " ?
Are you saying it's not true that only 30 people made 33+ posts
to Sci.Physics in the 12.7 days ( prior to 9.2 hours ago ) ?
Michael Helland didn't have the highest " exposure "
( i.e. XRank, like PageRank(tm) ) followed by kenseto, jjsajd, and PD ? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Jeff▲Relf... |
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 11:08 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
What do you mean:
“ radiation can do anything and everything,
but everything else in the universe has chains. ” ?
Nothing is acausal. Randomness is ignorance.
For a black body at room temperature with a meter^2 surface area,
a photon in the visible range appears every thousand years or so.
Quoting WikiPedia on “ Planck's law ”:
“ Although Planck's formula predicts that
a black body will radiate energy at all frequencies, the formula is
only practically applicable when many photons are being measured. ”.
So Planck's law was a better fit for semi-random, statistical systems,
while Einstein's 4-D fields were a better fit for the orbit of mercury,
and other non-random systems ( e.g. gravitational lensing ).
To become famous, you must find a better fit for the empirical data.
To be meaningful, a “ God ” must be like a “ land Lord ”;
i.e. he must be able to “ Evict ” you on a whim,
and you must pay “ Rent ”, e.g. tithing, taxes and regulations, etc. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Page 1 of 2 Goto page 1, 2 Next
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Tue May 13, 2008 9:32 pm
|
|
