ACCELERATiON = (MAGNiTUDE or DiRECTiON CHANGE of VELOCiTY) / DURATiON.
VELOCiTY = (ANY measured or imagined VECTOR) / DURATiON.
SPEED = (ANY actual PATH) / DURATiON.

What about mirror delay VELOCiTY DiRECTiON CHANGE (i.e. acceleration)?


tadchem wrote: David R Tribble wrote: brian a m stuckless wrote:
No.!! No no no.!! DP DooOP.!!
1. "A clock and a ruler are two different things" ..in REAL
life.!! but A clock and a ruler are BOTH objective POiNTmass
things, in GR.

A GR radius r = v^2 / g = v_escape^2 / 2*(n - 1)*g, from
a POiNT A, ON a WORLD-line in SPACE-time, is COMPLETELY
iNCONCiEVABLE, in gtr; (GR's T_uv CANNOT BE mathematically
RELATED to matter, in any way).!!

PROFOUNDLY, G_uv NO matter ..means NO SPACE-time-curvature
in GR.!!

2. "The measurement of the time of two instants of a clock" ..here
in YOUR example, is a momentum VELOCiTY *duration* (time duration).

3. You CANNOT know MEASURED CLOCK POSiTiON A, within PLANCK length.

EXHiBiT the VELOCiTY c & the SPEED c "as-MEASURED Least-Squares".!!
$$ DoooOP DOooOP De dooOP De dooOP De dooOP De dooOP De dooOP De.!!

CALL.!! CALL iMMEDiATELY.!! iMMEDiATELY.!!, if you happen to "fix"
any HUP, or GR, POiNT A closer than PLANCK length, lp ..duh.!!

A. HUP, UP, GR Tivity POSiTiON A PLANCK UNcertainty
[ i CANNOT locate POSiTiON A ..to within (+) or (-) lp / 2. ]
[ i CANNOT measure POSiTiON A closer than lp = hbar / Mp*c. ]
[ This applies iNHERENTLY to "EXACT position of ANY CLOCK." ]
[ This applies iNHERENTLY to "EXACT position of ANY RULER." ]
[ This applies iNHERENTLY for "EXACT position of ANY BALL." ]
*You CANNOT ((focus)) POSiTiON A closer than PLANCK LENGTH.!!

THEREfore, Heisenberg's UN-necessary UNcertainty's REDUNDANT.

B. Heisenberg's UNnecessary UNcertainty Principle
[ HEiSENBERG UNcertainty's ALL about HOW dimwits ((focus)). ]
[i CANNOT ((focus)) on BOTH ENDs of VELOCiTY vector AT ONCE.]

Heisenberg was NOT WRONG ..just because he GOT CAUGHT too OFTEN,
"Trying to ((focus)) on BOTH ENDs of VELOCiTY vectors, at once!"
brian a m stuckless

Bilge wrote: Rob_Exeter: Dear All,
I was wondering if anybody could help me, I am a first year
undergraduate Mechanical Engineering Student at the University
of Exeter and i am lookng for a good clear explanation of
Heisenburg's uncertainty principle. Preferably on the internet
as i am a student i don't have much money!! I would be extremely
grateful for any info at all!

I'm not sure where to find an explanation, but the explanation
is simple, at least heuristically. First of all, it is more
accurate to use the term ``indeterminacy'' than ``uncertainty.''
There is nothing uncertain about the values you measure. Second,
For any physical process which is finite, there is only a finite
amount of information to measure.
If you list the possible mesurements you can make, only a subset
of those measurenents will be required to extract that information.
Once you specify a particular subset, other measurements will either
be redundant or incomensurate with the measurements you've made.
Heisenberg's principle tells us which measurements are mutually
incompatible and which are not. Essentially, two measurements are
considered incompatible if an arbitrarily precise measurement of
both would permit you to obtain more information about a system
than there is to obtain. You can think of it similarly to counting
bits. Regardless of how to try to divide N bits, there are only N
bits to count. More formally, the quantities you can measure are
called observables in quantum mechanics. Observables are
represented by hermitian operators. (You can think of an operator
as a particular type of matrix). So if you have two operators, A
and B, a measurement of both A and B is the combination AB or BA.
If AB and BA differ by a factor of i\hbar, the two measurements
are incompatible and a precise measurement of one, necessarily
leaves the other indeterminate. Two measurements are only
compatible if AB - BA = 0.
(Tell me if you want a more formal explanation. I tried to
provide a physical picture of what the uncertainty principle
means rather than a technically rigorous explanation and
derivation.)
Heisenburg's Uncertainty Principle & Pelton Wheel Design.

|PD wrote:
| 1. A clock and a ruler are two different things.

Androcles wrote: | wrote:
| 2. You assumed that the leading edge of the light ray will return
| to the source location. BTW this assumption violates the UP. Why?
| Because it would mean that you would knoe the velocity and the
| location of the light ray simultaneously.

| 3. You assumed that 2(AB) does not include the delay time at the
| mirror.
|
| That's right, because I'm assuming I've already applied the
| technique I described to remove the mirror delay time from the --

| No, it is because isotropy -- demands that, once the mirror delay
| has been removed by experimental analysis, then --

| Androcles. Androcles.
Planck out of bag.!! HUP UP Tivity POSiTiON A PLANCK UNcertainty.

brian a m stuckless wrote:
ACCELERATiON = (MAGNiTUDE or DiRECTiON CHANGE of VELOCiTY) / DURATiON.

Could you please elucidate your theory of lowercase letters in
otherwise all-capitalized words?!?!!

"dearcilla" wrote in message oups.com...

brian a m stuckless wrote:
ACCELERATiON = (MAGNiTUDE or DiRECTiON CHANGE of VELOCiTY) / DURATiON.

Could you please elucidate your theory of lowercase letters in
otherwise all-capitalized words?!?!!

severe iNFERiORiTY complex.

Dirk Vdm

"Dirk Van de moortel"
wrote in message ...
"dearcilla" wrote in message
oups.com...

[brian a m stuckless aka BS]
ACCELERATiON =
(MAGNiTUDE or DiRECTiON CHANGE of VELOCiTY) / DURATiON.

[Cilla, dear and otherwise]
Could you please elucidate your theory of lowercase letters in
otherwise all-capitalized words?!?!!

[Dirk Vdm aka VD]
severe iNFERiORiTY complex.

Dirk Vdm

[hanson]
Cilla, VD probably does know BS since it appears that
both do sing in the same choir... as castrati.. One in tenor
the other one in semi-baritone.... ahahaha.... BUT,
Let'em sing!... All of'em... It's a beautiful choir....
ahahaha... ahahanson

$ Typo-corrected *ACCELERATiON* Frame-of-Reference (thanks Dirk):
ACCELERATiON = DiRECTiON, or (Velocity-MAGNiTUDE) / DURATiON, change.
o o o o
o o o vector
o o o PROjECTiON
A - - - VELOCiTY vector - - B - - - - - - C
o o o
o o o
o o ..ANY actual PATH o

GUESS *SPEED* is CLEARLY (..ANY actual PATH) / DURATiON.!!
VELOCiTY = (Any measured or imagined VECTOR) / DURATiON.!!
CLEARLY the POSiTiON B is an ARBiTRARY point on the PATH.!!
Any *OTHER two POiNTs* on the *SAME PATH* is a *DiFFERENT* VECTOR.!!

$ Has the FAT lady sung Brian's song.?!!
NO, Dirk. YOU should've HEARD Premier Brian Tobin, TALKiNG.!! WOW.!!
WHAT a ONE-WAY communicator.!! How he STRESSED WORDs, in emphasis.!!

EVERY politician LOVEs to have PROPER emphasis on PRONOUNCED text.!!

You will read MY posts, as if SPEAKiNG, loud & CLEAR, with THRUST.!!
brian a m stuckless

tadchem wrote: David R Tribble wrote: brian a m stuckless wrote:
No.!! No no no.!! DP DooOP.!!
1. "A clock and a ruler are two different things" ..in REAL
life.!! but A clock and a ruler are BOTH objective POiNTmass
things, in GR.

A GR radius r = v^2 / g = v_escape^2 / 2*(n - 1)*g, from
a POiNT A, ON a WORLD-line in SPACE-time, is COMPLETELY
(GR's T_uv CANNOT BE mathematically RELATED to matter,
in any way).!!

PROFOUNDLY, G_uv NO matter ..means NO SPACE-time-curvature
in GR.!!

2. "The measurement of the time of two instants of a clock" ..here
in YOUR example, is Momentum-VELOCiTY *DURATiON* ..a time-duration.

3. You CANNOT know MEASURED CLOCK-POSiTiON A, within PLANCK-length.
$$ DoooOP DOooOP De dooOP De dooOP De dooOP De dooOP De dooOP De.!!

Show: 1986 VELOCiTY c or the SPEED c "as-MEASURED Least-Squares".!!

CALL.!! CALL iMMEDiATELY.!! iMMEDiATELY.!! ..if you happen to "fix"
any HUP, UP, or GR POiNT A closer than a PLANCK length, lp ..duh.!!

A. HUP, UP or GR Tivity POSiTiON A PLANCK UNcertainty
[ i CANNOT locate POSiTiON A ..to within (+) or (-) lp / 2. ]
[ i CANNOT measure POSiTiON A closer than lp = hbar / Mp*c. ]
[ This applies iNHERENTLY to "EXACT position of ANY CLOCK." ]
[ This applies iNHERENTLY to "EXACT position of ANY RULER." ]
[ This applies iNHERENTLY for "EXACT position of ANY BALL." ]
*You CANNOT ((focus)) POSiTiON A closer than PLANCK LENGTH.!!

THEREfore, Heisenberg's UN-necessary UNcertainty's REDUNDANT.

B. Heisenberg's UNnecessary UNcertainty Principle
[ HEiSENBERG UNcertainty's ALL about HOW dimwits ((focus)). ]
[i CANNOT ((focus)) on BOTH ENDs of VELOCiTY vector AT ONCE.]

Heisenberg was NOT WRONG ..just because he GOT CAUGHT too OFTEN,
"Trying to ((focus)) on BOTH ENDs of VELOCiTY vectors, at once!"
brian a m stuckless

Bilge wrote: I was wondering if anybody could help me, --

| PD wrote: 1. A clock and a ruler are two different things.

| wrote:
| 2. You assumed that the leading edge of the light ray will return
| to the source location. BTW this assumption violates the UP. Why?
| Because it would mean that you would knoe the velocity and the
| location of the light ray simultaneously.
About MiRROR-delay Velocity-*DiRECTiON-change* (i.e. acceleration).?!!

Planck out of bag.!! HUP UP Tivity POSiTiON A PLANCK UNcertainty.