"Dr. Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
...
| On Sat, 10 May 2008 00:30:38 +0100, "Androcles"

| wrote:
|
|
| "Dr. Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
| .. .
|
| | vt is the distance the startpoint (wrt static frame)
| | of each element of light moves backwards (in the rotating frame).
|
| The "distance" vt along an arc, not a straight line.
|
| It's so small it is as good as straight.

You'll never be a mathematician as long as you have a hole in your arse.




|
| |
| | What you should have said is
| |
| | "For one ray, ct = 2piR+vt , for the other ct = 2piR-vt. This gives t
=
| | (2piR +vt)/(c+v) and (2piR-vt)/(c-v)"
| |
| | I'd like to know how.....
|
| Ok, I'll tell you. Whether you understand or not is up to you.
|
| 2pi is an angle. It is 360 degrees of angle.
| 2piR is a distance around the circumference of a circle (all of it).
| pi is an angle. It is 180 degrees of angle.
| piR is a distance around the circumference (half of it).
| pi/2 is an angle. It is 90 degrees of angle.
| piR/2 is a distance around the circumference (quarter of it).
|
| alpha is a small angle.
| alphaR is a small distance around the circumference of a circle (part of
| it).
|
| Mathematicians can add angles.
| When we add 2pi to alpha we get a slightly bigger angle than 2pi
| If we multiply that by R we get a slightly greater distance than 2piR
|
| We write
| (2pi + alpha)R = 2piR + alphaR
|
| Ref:
| http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Distributive.html
|
|
| |
| | although it would have been
| | neater not to mix angle with linear distance.
| |
| | t = R.(2pi+alpha)/(c+v) and R.(2pi-alpha)/(c-v) where R.alpha = vt.
| |
| | Still, schoolboy mathematics is beyond your capabilities (and
| Tusseladd's).
| |
| | ....your maths ability is aptly demonstrated above......
|
| It always has been. It is nothing more difficult than
| http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Distributive.html
|
| That is of course "Raving again...."
|
| Lesson 2:
| t = R.(2pi+alpha)/(c+v) and R.(2pi-alpha)/(c-v) where R.alpha = vt.
|
|
| Perhaps I should call it " *My* theory" but that would rather silly,
| you would be expected to know before starting a
| rookie course in mathematics.
|
| Examine this:
| http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...gnacIdiocy.htm
|
| Einstein wrote
| 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.
|
| That is ****ing ridiculous.

| It IS...and so are you.

Interruptions moved to he

| If ct = 2piR+vt as you state, then t certainly does not equal (2piR
+vt)/(c+v),
| as you claim.
|
| This is 10yo stuff.
Beyond your mental age of 5 then.

On Apr 18, 11:19 am, Sanny wrote:
When in School I learnt 2 things about Light

1. Light is a Wave

I was shown Lenses and other Experiments to proove Light is a wave.

2. When I grew up I was told Light is Electro Magnetic Wave.

Later I was Told
3. Magnetic and Electric Field in a light travel at 90`

Can we Change the angle of movement of Electric & Magnetic Field? How
can we say they are perpendicular.

Later I was told Light has photons and its energy is = h*u

So light is a Particle moving at light Speed.

Then I was told Light is both Particle and Wave

Dont you feel things are getting Complex and Absurd.

After 12 years of my passing out of school I still want to know whats
the correct description of light.

Bye
Sanny

Extreme Discussions at:http://www.getclub.com/Discussion.php

Why do newsgroup assholes rename and otherwise hijack topics?

Is it another Jewish form of topic/author stalking, bashings and/or
mainstream damage-control?
.. - Brad Guth

On May 11, 4:19*am, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:

Dear Henri: And your list of know-it-alls is? — NoEinstein —

On Fri, 09 May 2008 23:52:40 GMT, Sam Wormley wrote:
Dr. Henri Wilson wrote:
On Fri, 09 May 2008 00:11:34 GMT, Sam Wormley wrote:

Dr. Henri Wilson wrote:
On Mon, 05 May 2008 07:48:55 -0400, "Robert J. Kolker"
wrote:

Benj wrote:

*I think it should be patently obvious at this point that nobody in
physics has the slightest clue what light is, even though they are
trying hard to cover up that fact.
Light is energy in the form of photons.
Benj's point well proven.
I suppose you will also describe a 'photon' as a 'package of light energy'.

Admit it Kolker, virtually nothing is known about light...particularly light in
transit, which includes most of it.

Bob Kolker

* Henri, for a guy who claims to be educated, your posting record
* indicates otherwise.

* Physics FAQ: What is the mass of a photon?
* *http://edu-observatory.org/physics-f...ar/photon_mass...

* Physics FAQ: What is the experimental basis of Special Relativity?
* *http://edu-observatory.org/physics-f...periments.html

The Physics FAQ was put together by people like Roberts and van de Morbidity.
Why should I bother to read it?

So admit it Kolker, virtually nothing is known about light...

Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

....specialising in teaching physics to engineers and mathematicians.....

* What do you know about light, Henri?

Very little compared with what remains to be discovered.

But at least I'm not under the delusion that I know everything ....like some
people here.

Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

....specialising in teaching physics to engineers and mathematicians....- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Mon, 12 May 2008 11:29:56 -0700 (PDT), NoEinstein
wrote:

On May 11, 4:19*am, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:

Dear Henri: And your list of know-it-alls is? — NoEinstein —

Top posters are dickheads.


On Fri, 09 May 2008 23:52:40 GMT, Sam Wormley wrote:
Dr. Henri Wilson wrote:
On Fri, 09 May 2008 00:11:34 GMT, Sam Wormley wrote:

Dr. Henri Wilson wrote:
On Mon, 05 May 2008 07:48:55 -0400, "Robert J. Kolker"
wrote:

Benj wrote:

*I think it should be patently obvious at this point that nobody in
physics has the slightest clue what light is, even though they are
trying hard to cover up that fact.
Light is energy in the form of photons.
Benj's point well proven.
I suppose you will also describe a 'photon' as a 'package of light energy'.

Admit it Kolker, virtually nothing is known about light...particularly light in
transit, which includes most of it.

Bob Kolker

* Henri, for a guy who claims to be educated, your posting record
* indicates otherwise.

* Physics FAQ: What is the mass of a photon?
* *http://edu-observatory.org/physics-f...ar/photon_mass...

* Physics FAQ: What is the experimental basis of Special Relativity?
* *http://edu-observatory.org/physics-f...periments.html

The Physics FAQ was put together by people like Roberts and van de Morbidity.
Why should I bother to read it?

So admit it Kolker, virtually nothing is known about light...

Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

....specialising in teaching physics to engineers and mathematicians....

* What do you know about light, Henri?

Very little compared with what remains to be discovered.

But at least I'm not under the delusion that I know everything ....like some
people here.

Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

....specialising in teaching physics to engineers and mathematicians....- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -



Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

.....specialising in teaching physics to engineers and mathematicians....

On Apr 18, 8:19 pm, Sanny wrote:
When in School I learnt 2 things about Light

1. Light is a Wave

I was shown Lenses and other Experiments to proove Light is a wave.

2. When I grew up I was told Light is Electro Magnetic Wave.

Later I was Told
3. Magnetic and Electric Field in a light travel at 90`

Can we Change the angle of movement of Electric & Magnetic Field? How
can we say they are perpendicular.

Later I was told Light has photons and its energy is = h*u

So light is a Particle moving at light Speed.

Then I was told Light is both Particle and Wave

Dont you feel things are getting Complex and Absurd.

After 12 years of my passing out of school I still want to know whats
the correct description of light.

Bye
Sanny

Extreme Discussions at:http://www.getclub.com/Discussion.php

Light is the opposite of heavy.

We call light light because it's light.

It cant be without substance and still be.

It wouldn't just be light but it would be nothing.

The answer is kinda scary.

It can only mean that mass has no mass either.

Mass is nothing but waves much like light (only heavier).

Of course music is also just waves.

And thoughts are just waves.

Perhaps waves are "all that" in stead of "just"?

But if they are.....

Then one wave isn't more real then the other.

There mere thought there would be a god would create one that very
instant.

Subspace should really be called thought space.

Moving physical objects from one dimension to the other is our
challenge.

But in the current mindset we wish for things like WMD's and
Terrorists.

So you should keep advocating those particles.

We wouldn't want people to imagine the universe not real by accident?
*shrugh*

Sanny schreef:
When in School I learnt 2 things about Light

1. Light is a Wave

I was shown Lenses and other Experiments to proove Light is a wave.


2. When I grew up I was told Light is Electro Magnetic Wave.

Later I was Told
3. Magnetic and Electric Field in a light travel at 90`

Can we Change the angle of movement of Electric & Magnetic Field? How
can we say they are perpendicular.

Later I was told Light has photons and its energy is = h*u

So light is a Particle moving at light Speed.

Then I was told Light is both Particle and Wave

Dont you feel things are getting Complex and Absurd.

After 12 years of my passing out of school I still want to know whats
the correct description of light.

Bye
Sanny

Extreme Discussions at: http://www.getclub.com/Discussion.php


I hate school for trying to force a specific view on the subject as
being the ultimate truth.

There should be something open for discussion.

On May 5, 6:33 pm, NoEinstein wrote:
On May 5, 2:19 am, Benj wrote:

I think it should be patently obvious at this point that nobody in
physics has the slightest clue what light is, even though they are
trying hard to cover up that fact.

Dear Benj: When you can't measure up, you generalize that no one has
smarts greater than you. Light is ether energy in motion (photons).
More explanations would be pointless for you. — NoEinstein —

Dear NoEin: I can't believe that after nearly 400 posts you guys are
STILL calling each other schoolyard names and questioning each other's
intelligence! And you haven't even solved "The Jewish Question" yet
either! Saying "light is ether energy in motion" says absolutely
NOTHING! Tis YOU who can't "measure up" and are wallowing in
generalities.

I stand by my original statement!

You want to prove me wrong then give us a model that "explains" the
observed experimental "facts of light". I mean a REAL, UNDERSTANDABLE
model that shows how light can act as both a wave and a particle.
Saying that it is because light is "ether energy" says absolutely
NOTHING! Until you give us that much, more conversation with you
would be pointless.

On May 16, 9:02*am, Benj wrote:
On May 5, 6:33 pm, NoEinstein wrote:

On May 5, 2:19 am, Benj wrote:
*I think it should be patently obvious at this point that nobody in
physics has the slightest clue what light is, even though they are
trying hard to cover up that fact.

Dear Benj: *When you can't measure up, you generalize that no one has
smarts greater than you. *Light is ether energy in motion (photons).
More explanations would be pointless for you. *— NoEinstein —

Dear NoEin: I can't believe that after nearly 400 posts you guys are
STILL calling each other schoolyard names and questioning each other's
intelligence! *And you haven't even solved *"The Jewish Question" yet
either! *Saying "light is ether energy in motion" says absolutely
NOTHING! Tis YOU who can't "measure up" and are wallowing in
generalities.

I stand by my original statement!

You want to prove me wrong then give us a model that "explains" the
observed experimental "facts of light". I mean a REAL, UNDERSTANDABLE
model that shows how light can act as both a wave and a particle.
Saying that it is because light is "ether energy" says absolutely
NOTHING! *Until you give us that much, more conversation with you
would be pointless.

Dear Benj: You don't want truths, you want agreement. Since you are
wrong, I can't agree. Sorry. — NoEinstein —

“ Light � is an imponderable 4-D electroMagnetic field
propagating in an imponderable 4-D gravitational field.

Depending on how much of it you might be able to observe,
it might be a semi-random spec of radiation pressure.

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. �.

In an Ideal laser beam, it's a pure wave ( perfectly coherent ),
hitting both slits at the same time, yet undetectable at either one.