"jahn" wrote in message
...


"Androcles" wrote in message
k...

"jahn" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
k...

"jahn" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
...

"jahn" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
. ..

"John Kennaugh" wrote
in
message
.uk...
Henri Wilson writes

Listen, consider this: when two differently moving sources
are
adjacent, they
each emit a short pulse of identical EM towards a distant
observer.

A--0.1c_____________________________O
B--0.6c

You claim both pulses will arrive at the observer
simultaneously.
Now please tell me why they should.

There are no standing waves or Gaussian group waves. Your
explanation
is crap.

The only explanation you can possibly provide is that the
velocity
of
light in
the space defined by A-O, is determined by a property of
that
space.

THAT IS 100% OUT OF THE AETHER THEORY BOOK.



A--0.1c_____________________________Ox
B--0.6c Oy ----v

in relativity both Ox and Oy will see light moving at c.
If
SR
is
not
a mathematical description of Lorentz ether then it
requires
that
every observer occupies his own parallel universe in which
he
is
stationary w.r.t the ether in that universe.

That is correct. In SR everyone has their own personal
aether
they
carry
around with them.

In the real world too. Walk across a carpet and touch a
doorknob if you don't believe it. Now... How fast does the
charge on the hand/knob capacitor change as you approach the
knob:

At 0.1c ?
At 0.6c ?


In the real world, about 3- 4 mph.

Drat!
I actually clipped this before sending:

[correct answer 0 points, worst scribbling 100 points]

But then I thought... nahhh these are adults. ;-)
So perhaps the class-clown wants to convert that
to radians per second for lambda 1200 nm.
... not that it will illuminate anything but you'll
miss your ride home from school.

Again... this notion is *counter* to my original, knee-jerk
opinion that the doppler frequency is determined
by the rate an advancing dipole encounters the
magnetic flux transitions.

It posits that the magnetic field doesn't even exist until
the wave and the dipole are close enough for the
Coulomb force to move charges in the dipole.


"Close enough" places a boundary of some sort.
Assuming a spherical boundary as a limit, determine the
radius of a photon.
Androcles.

There you go with your circular thinking about
circular corpuscles.

Not at all. They are tetrahedrons, with +, N, -, S at the vertices.
I'm simply placing an envelope around them since you have a
"close enough" "near field" approximation, there you go with
your vague ideas.

Hmmm... I like that! Big tetrahedrons that span the path?
Perhaps two of them?
This demands further research at the pond.

I didn't say they were big, and they don't retain one shape.
If you refer to the diagram with the sine and cosine waves at right
angles,
then double it to make
/\ \/
-| |+ /\
\/ N| |S
/\ \/
+| |- /\
\/ S| |N
/\ \/
then its a tetrahedron with points +, N, -, S.
When the E-field is zero, there is a monopole with a N vector.
When the B-field is zero, there is a charge with a + vector.
As a tetrahedron it can also spin.

Androcles




This stuff works a lot better
if you let the light forget about the Lorentz forces

You don't know how it works at all, let alone better.
Certainly not Lorentz, he imagines aether compresses
on one side only.


That is not too different from the effect we see in
reversing a path's direction by swapping transmitter
and receiver at a non reactive point.

The "compression" (near field effects) occurs on
both ends however or it would not be reciprocal.

The Lorentz force law isn't invalidated for lack
of explanation. I may not know why STP is 1 atm
but that doesn't invalidate aerodynamic calculations
that I might use it in.

If I guess the winning lottery number, will they
with hold payment because I can't show my calculations?

End of sermon )
Sue...



that ensured conservation of energy and charge
during it's manufacture and won't be needed again
until an interaction with matter is imminent.

Q. Does the word imminent suggest anticpation?
Not to me. It rather suggests inevitability.
Androcles


A. No more than the terms "advanced" and "retarded"
potential. What entites do to conserve
mass energy and charge can't be subject
to a light speed limit which is *based* on the
conservation laws established by the entities.


Remember... Maxwell was never too clear about what the
'displacement current' is displacing.
Sue...

|----Sue-at-72-------------------------------------------------------|

View this article only Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date:
1999/03/28
[zap wrap crap]

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 11:15:19 +0000, John Kennaugh
wrote:

Henri Wilson writes

Listen, consider this: when two differently moving sources are adjacent, they
each emit a short pulse of identical EM towards a distant observer.

A--0.1c_____________________________O
B--0.6c

You claim both pulses will arrive at the observer simultaneously.
Now please tell me why they should.

There are no standing waves or Gaussian group waves. Your explanation is crap.

The only explanation you can possibly provide is that the velocity of light in
the space defined by A-O, is determined by a property of that space.

THAT IS 100% OUT OF THE AETHER THEORY BOOK.



A--0.1c_____________________________Ox
B--0.6c Oy ----v

in relativity both Ox and Oy will see light moving at c. If SR is not a
mathematical description of Lorentz ether then it requires that every
observer occupies his own parallel universe in which he is stationary
w.r.t the ether in that universe.

In the maths they simply describe the observer's universe as "the
observers FoR". A FoR is an imaginary framework. In maths you can give
it any properties you like but if you want a physical interpretation of
it you cannot ascribe properties to an imaginary framework. The
properties required being the ability to support an entirely separate
reality and to control the speed of any light travelling within it.

The second postulate in affect says that the speed of light is always
constant w.r.t the observer observing it. In terms of propagating waves
that is the equivalent of saying that every observer is stationary w.r.t
the propagating medium. You cannot have an infinite number of ethers
existing in the same universe so SR requires an infinite number of
universes and the Lorentz transforms are a means of transforming between
universes.

Yes. It's quite funy really.

Each observer has his own personal aether in which the (one way) speed of light
will always be measured as c.
The relative speeds between 'personal aethers' is supposed to cause contracted
lengths and times when one observer delves into another's aether.

If you think about that, it is really boils down to saying "there is just ONE
ABSOLUTE aether" and lengths and times contract according to movement wrt that
absolute aether.
Albert was indeed very devious.



HW.

www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 10:44:34 +0000, John Kennaugh
wrote:

Androcles writes


But they are NOT similar. Lorentz allows c-v and c+v for a measurement
of
the speed of light when the Earth is moving through the aether. SR
does not.

My understanding is that Lorentz says that light will be c-v and c+v but
will be *measured* to be c because what you are measuring it *with* is
affected by travelling through the ether.

Since RS was declared a 'principle theory' it does not attempt to answer
questions about physical interpretation. As such it does not say *why*
the speed of light is always measured to be c. It could in fact be
because there is an ether and what Lorentz describes is right.

That idea is an anathema to relativists, i.e. that SR may simply be the
mathematics of LET but Einstein realised that you can't keep on saying
that the physical processes involved are not those described by LET
unless you can say what they are. He couldn't. The nearest Einstein got
was in his 1920 lecture where he talked about an ether without the
immobility of Lorentz's. He didn't like the idea that one FoR was
special as in LET i.e. the FOR stationary w.r.t the ether.

The problem is that that is the very reason LET works conceptually. If
there is absolute velocity then this can distort the perception of one
observer differently from that of another. Thus what is described by two
observers is two different distortions of the same reality. Without that
fixed reference there is nothing to provide distortion and the different
realities observed by two observers must actually exist.

The obvious conclusion is that relativists are suffering from a bad case
of self deception. If they reject LET they haven't got a theory which
can be physically interpreted.

That's right. At least in LET, contractions can be real.

In SR they can only be illusions.
In other words, nothing PHYSICALLY happens to rods or clocks during an
acceleration.
Yet relativists claim that physical changes DO actually occur, eg, in GPS
clocks.

HW.

www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

"Androcles" wrote in message
k...

"jahn" wrote in message
...


"Androcles" wrote in message
k...

"jahn" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
k...

"jahn" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
...

"jahn" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
. ..

"John Kennaugh"
wrote
in
message
.uk...
Henri Wilson writes

Listen, consider this: when two differently moving
sources
are
adjacent, they
each emit a short pulse of identical EM towards a
distant
observer.

A--0.1c_____________________________O
B--0.6c

You claim both pulses will arrive at the observer
simultaneously.
Now please tell me why they should.

There are no standing waves or Gaussian group waves.
Your
explanation
is crap.

The only explanation you can possibly provide is that
the
velocity
of
light in
the space defined by A-O, is determined by a property of
that
space.

THAT IS 100% OUT OF THE AETHER THEORY BOOK.



A--0.1c_____________________________Ox
B--0.6c Oy ----v

in relativity both Ox and Oy will see light moving at c.
If
SR
is
not
a mathematical description of Lorentz ether then it
requires
that
every observer occupies his own parallel universe in
which
he
is
stationary w.r.t the ether in that universe.

That is correct. In SR everyone has their own personal
aether
they
carry
around with them.

In the real world too. Walk across a carpet and touch a
doorknob if you don't believe it. Now... How fast does the
charge on the hand/knob capacitor change as you approach
the
knob:

At 0.1c ?
At 0.6c ?


In the real world, about 3- 4 mph.

Drat!
I actually clipped this before sending:

[correct answer 0 points, worst scribbling 100 points]

But then I thought... nahhh these are adults. ;-)
So perhaps the class-clown wants to convert that
to radians per second for lambda 1200 nm.
... not that it will illuminate anything but you'll
miss your ride home from school.

Again... this notion is *counter* to my original, knee-jerk
opinion that the doppler frequency is determined
by the rate an advancing dipole encounters the
magnetic flux transitions.

It posits that the magnetic field doesn't even exist until
the wave and the dipole are close enough for the
Coulomb force to move charges in the dipole.


"Close enough" places a boundary of some sort.
Assuming a spherical boundary as a limit, determine the
radius of a photon.
Androcles.

There you go with your circular thinking about
circular corpuscles.

Not at all. They are tetrahedrons, with +, N, -, S at the vertices.
I'm simply placing an envelope around them since you have a
"close enough" "near field" approximation, there you go with
your vague ideas.

Hmmm... I like that! Big tetrahedrons that span the path?
Perhaps two of them?
This demands further research at the pond.

I didn't say they were big, and they don't retain one shape.

I knew that. The big ones won't work in your FTL ballistic
photons. :-)

If you refer to the diagram with the sine and cosine waves at right
angles,
OK
http://images.google.com/images?q=li...=Google+Search
then double it to make
/\ \/
-| |+ /\
\/ N| |S
/\ \/
+| |- /\
\/ S| |N
/\ \/
then its a tetrahedron with points +, N, -, S.

http://images.google.com/images?q=tb...www.sbuniv.edu
/~ggray.wh.bol/CHE3314/ether3.gif
When the E-field is zero, there is a monopole with a N vector.
When the B-field is zero, there is a charge with a + vector.
As a tetrahedron it can also spin.
This is what you mean?
http://www.csar.uiuc.edu/F_platforms/packages/tets.jpg
I don't think they are tets or dual tets.
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Pyramid.html
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Tetrahedron.html

The dual square pyramid could spin.
The tet, points n s + - might pack to fill an electrodynamic space
so I think that is what you mean.

Tets are good for builing matter because they are rigid.
We see them often in atomic structure.
However, the sides will be the correct length for only
one frequency. That seems a problem for building an
electrodynamic medium.
The synchrotron spectrum is a smooth straight line.
So.. no evidence of your space-grains and they
don't look very spinable to me.

Kind regards,
Sue...



Androcles




This stuff works a lot better
if you let the light forget about the Lorentz forces

You don't know how it works at all, let alone better.
Certainly not Lorentz, he imagines aether compresses
on one side only.


That is not too different from the effect we see in
reversing a path's direction by swapping transmitter
and receiver at a non reactive point.

The "compression" (near field effects) occurs on
both ends however or it would not be reciprocal.

The Lorentz force law isn't invalidated for lack
of explanation. I may not know why STP is 1 atm
but that doesn't invalidate aerodynamic calculations
that I might use it in.

If I guess the winning lottery number, will they
with hold payment because I can't show my calculations?

End of sermon )
Sue...



that ensured conservation of energy and charge
during it's manufacture and won't be needed again
until an interaction with matter is imminent.

Q. Does the word imminent suggest anticpation?
Not to me. It rather suggests inevitability.
Androcles


A. No more than the terms "advanced" and "retarded"
potential. What entites do to conserve
mass energy and charge can't be subject
to a light speed limit which is *based* on the
conservation laws established by the entities.


Remember... Maxwell was never too clear about what the
'displacement current' is displacing.
Sue...


|----Sue-at-72-------------------------------------------------------|

View this article only Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date:
1999/03/28
[zap wrap crap]

"jahn" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
k...

"jahn" wrote in message
...


"Androcles" wrote in message
k...

"jahn" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
k...

"jahn" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
...

"jahn" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
. ..

"John Kennaugh"
wrote
in
message
.uk...
Henri Wilson writes

Listen, consider this: when two differently moving
sources
are
adjacent, they
each emit a short pulse of identical EM towards a
distant
observer.

A--0.1c_____________________________O
B--0.6c

You claim both pulses will arrive at the observer
simultaneously.
Now please tell me why they should.

There are no standing waves or Gaussian group waves.
Your
explanation
is crap.

The only explanation you can possibly provide is that
the
velocity
of
light in
the space defined by A-O, is determined by a property
of
that
space.

THAT IS 100% OUT OF THE AETHER THEORY BOOK.



A--0.1c_____________________________Ox
B--0.6c Oy ----v

in relativity both Ox and Oy will see light moving at
c.
If
SR
is
not
a mathematical description of Lorentz ether then it
requires
that
every observer occupies his own parallel universe in
which
he
is
stationary w.r.t the ether in that universe.

That is correct. In SR everyone has their own personal
aether
they
carry
around with them.

In the real world too. Walk across a carpet and touch a
doorknob if you don't believe it. Now... How fast does the
charge on the hand/knob capacitor change as you approach
the
knob:

At 0.1c ?
At 0.6c ?


In the real world, about 3- 4 mph.

Drat!
I actually clipped this before sending:

[correct answer 0 points, worst scribbling 100 points]

But then I thought... nahhh these are adults. ;-)
So perhaps the class-clown wants to convert that
to radians per second for lambda 1200 nm.
... not that it will illuminate anything but you'll
miss your ride home from school.

Again... this notion is *counter* to my original, knee-jerk
opinion that the doppler frequency is determined
by the rate an advancing dipole encounters the
magnetic flux transitions.

It posits that the magnetic field doesn't even exist until
the wave and the dipole are close enough for the
Coulomb force to move charges in the dipole.


"Close enough" places a boundary of some sort.
Assuming a spherical boundary as a limit, determine the
radius of a photon.
Androcles.

There you go with your circular thinking about
circular corpuscles.

Not at all. They are tetrahedrons, with +, N, -, S at the
vertices.
I'm simply placing an envelope around them since you have a
"close enough" "near field" approximation, there you go with
your vague ideas.

Hmmm... I like that! Big tetrahedrons that span the path?
Perhaps two of them?
This demands further research at the pond.

I didn't say they were big, and they don't retain one shape.

I knew that. The big ones won't work in your FTL ballistic
photons. :-)

If you refer to the diagram with the sine and cosine waves at right
angles,
OK
http://images.google.com/images?q=li...=Google+Search
then double it to make
/\ \/
-| |+ /\
\/ N| |S
/\ \/
+| |- /\
\/ S| |N
/\ \/
then its a tetrahedron with points +, N, -, S.

http://images.google.com/images?q=tb...www.sbuniv.edu
/~ggray.wh.bol/CHE3314/ether3.gif
When the E-field is zero, there is a monopole with a N vector.
When the B-field is zero, there is a charge with a + vector.
As a tetrahedron it can also spin.
This is what you mean?
http://www.csar.uiuc.edu/F_platforms/packages/tets.jpg
I don't think they are tets or dual tets.
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Pyramid.html
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Tetrahedron.html

The dual square pyramid could spin.
The tet, points n s + - might pack to fill an electrodynamic space
so I think that is what you mean.

Tets are good for builing matter because they are rigid.
We see them often in atomic structure.
However, the sides will be the correct length for only
one frequency. That seems a problem for building an
electrodynamic medium.
The synchrotron spectrum is a smooth straight line.
So.. no evidence of your space-grains and they
don't look very spinable to me.

I mean what I mean and not what you think I mean.
Androcles.




Kind regards,
Sue...



Androcles




This stuff works a lot better
if you let the light forget about the Lorentz forces

You don't know how it works at all, let alone better.
Certainly not Lorentz, he imagines aether compresses
on one side only.


That is not too different from the effect we see in
reversing a path's direction by swapping transmitter
and receiver at a non reactive point.

The "compression" (near field effects) occurs on
both ends however or it would not be reciprocal.

The Lorentz force law isn't invalidated for lack
of explanation. I may not know why STP is 1 atm
but that doesn't invalidate aerodynamic calculations
that I might use it in.

If I guess the winning lottery number, will they
with hold payment because I can't show my calculations?

End of sermon )
Sue...



that ensured conservation of energy and charge
during it's manufacture and won't be needed again
until an interaction with matter is imminent.

Q. Does the word imminent suggest anticpation?
Not to me. It rather suggests inevitability.
Androcles


A. No more than the terms "advanced" and "retarded"
potential. What entites do to conserve
mass energy and charge can't be subject
to a light speed limit which is *based* on the
conservation laws established by the entities.


Remember... Maxwell was never too clear about what the
'displacement current' is displacing.
Sue...


|----Sue-at-72-------------------------------------------------------|

View this article only Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date:
1999/03/28
[zap wrap crap]

"Androcles" wrote in message
k...

"jahn" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
k...

"jahn" wrote in message
...


"Androcles" wrote in message
k...

"jahn" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
k...

"jahn" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
...

"jahn" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
. ..

"John Kennaugh"
wrote
in
message

.uk...
Henri Wilson writes

Listen, consider this: when two differently moving
sources
are
adjacent, they
each emit a short pulse of identical EM towards a
distant
observer.

A--0.1c_____________________________O
B--0.6c

You claim both pulses will arrive at the observer
simultaneously.
Now please tell me why they should.

There are no standing waves or Gaussian group waves.
Your
explanation
is crap.

The only explanation you can possibly provide is that
the
velocity
of
light in
the space defined by A-O, is determined by a property
of
that
space.

THAT IS 100% OUT OF THE AETHER THEORY BOOK.



A--0.1c_____________________________Ox
B--0.6c Oy ----v

in relativity both Ox and Oy will see light moving at
c.
If
SR
is
not
a mathematical description of Lorentz ether then it
requires
that
every observer occupies his own parallel universe in
which
he
is
stationary w.r.t the ether in that universe.

That is correct. In SR everyone has their own personal
aether
they
carry
around with them.

In the real world too. Walk across a carpet and touch a
doorknob if you don't believe it. Now... How fast does
the
charge on the hand/knob capacitor change as you approach
the
knob:

At 0.1c ?
At 0.6c ?


In the real world, about 3- 4 mph.

Drat!
I actually clipped this before sending:

[correct answer 0 points, worst scribbling 100 points]

But then I thought... nahhh these are adults. ;-)
So perhaps the class-clown wants to convert that
to radians per second for lambda 1200 nm.
... not that it will illuminate anything but you'll
miss your ride home from school.

Again... this notion is *counter* to my original, knee-jerk
opinion that the doppler frequency is determined
by the rate an advancing dipole encounters the
magnetic flux transitions.

It posits that the magnetic field doesn't even exist until
the wave and the dipole are close enough for the
Coulomb force to move charges in the dipole.


"Close enough" places a boundary of some sort.
Assuming a spherical boundary as a limit, determine the
radius of a photon.
Androcles.

There you go with your circular thinking about
circular corpuscles.

Not at all. They are tetrahedrons, with +, N, -, S at the
vertices.
I'm simply placing an envelope around them since you have a
"close enough" "near field" approximation, there you go with
your vague ideas.

Hmmm... I like that! Big tetrahedrons that span the path?
Perhaps two of them?
This demands further research at the pond.

I didn't say they were big, and they don't retain one shape.

I knew that. The big ones won't work in your FTL ballistic
photons. :-)

If you refer to the diagram with the sine and cosine waves at right
angles,
OK

http://images.google.com/images?q=li...=Google+Search
then double it to make
/\ \/
-| |+ /\
\/ N| |S
/\ \/
+| |- /\
\/ S| |N
/\ \/
then its a tetrahedron with points +, N, -, S.


http://images.google.com/images?q=tb...www.sbuniv.edu
/~ggray.wh.bol/CHE3314/ether3.gif
When the E-field is zero, there is a monopole with a N vector.
When the B-field is zero, there is a charge with a + vector.
As a tetrahedron it can also spin.
This is what you mean?
http://www.csar.uiuc.edu/F_platforms/packages/tets.jpg
I don't think they are tets or dual tets.
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Pyramid.html
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Tetrahedron.html

The dual square pyramid could spin.
The tet, points n s + - might pack to fill an electrodynamic
space
so I think that is what you mean.

Tets are good for builing matter because they are rigid.
We see them often in atomic structure.
However, the sides will be the correct length for only
one frequency. That seems a problem for building an
electrodynamic medium.
The synchrotron spectrum is a smooth straight line.
So.. no evidence of your space-grains and they
don't look very spinable to me.

I mean what I mean and not what you think I mean.
Androcles.

Yes... I see that. That word "monopole" sneeked
right past me on the first read.
http://www.allhatnocattle.net/waffle_house.htm ;-)
Sue...




Kind regards,
Sue...



Androcles




This stuff works a lot better
if you let the light forget about the Lorentz forces

You don't know how it works at all, let alone better.
Certainly not Lorentz, he imagines aether compresses
on one side only.


That is not too different from the effect we see in
reversing a path's direction by swapping transmitter
and receiver at a non reactive point.

The "compression" (near field effects) occurs on
both ends however or it would not be reciprocal.

The Lorentz force law isn't invalidated for lack
of explanation. I may not know why STP is 1 atm
but that doesn't invalidate aerodynamic calculations
that I might use it in.

If I guess the winning lottery number, will they
with hold payment because I can't show my calculations?

End of sermon )
Sue...



that ensured conservation of energy and charge
during it's manufacture and won't be needed again
until an interaction with matter is imminent.

Q. Does the word imminent suggest anticpation?
Not to me. It rather suggests inevitability.
Androcles


A. No more than the terms "advanced" and "retarded"
potential. What entites do to conserve
mass energy and charge can't be subject
to a light speed limit which is *based* on the
conservation laws established by the entities.


Remember... Maxwell was never too clear about what the
'displacement current' is displacing.
Sue...



|----Sue-at-72-------------------------------------------------------|

View this article only Newsgroups:
sci.physics.relativity
Date:
1999/03/28
[zap wrap crap]

"jahn" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
k...

"jahn" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
k...

"jahn" wrote in message
...


"Androcles" wrote in message
k...

"jahn" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
k...

"jahn" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
...

"jahn" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
. ..

"John Kennaugh"
wrote
in
message

.uk...
Henri Wilson writes

Listen, consider this: when two differently moving
sources
are
adjacent, they
each emit a short pulse of identical EM towards a
distant
observer.

A--0.1c_____________________________O
B--0.6c

You claim both pulses will arrive at the observer
simultaneously.
Now please tell me why they should.

There are no standing waves or Gaussian group waves.
Your
explanation
is crap.

The only explanation you can possibly provide is
that
the
velocity
of
light in
the space defined by A-O, is determined by a
property
of
that
space.

THAT IS 100% OUT OF THE AETHER THEORY BOOK.



A--0.1c_____________________________Ox
B--0.6c Oy ----v

in relativity both Ox and Oy will see light moving
at
c.
If
SR
is
not
a mathematical description of Lorentz ether then it
requires
that
every observer occupies his own parallel universe in
which
he
is
stationary w.r.t the ether in that universe.

That is correct. In SR everyone has their own personal
aether
they
carry
around with them.

In the real world too. Walk across a carpet and touch
a
doorknob if you don't believe it. Now... How fast does
the
charge on the hand/knob capacitor change as you
approach
the
knob:

At 0.1c ?
At 0.6c ?


In the real world, about 3- 4 mph.

Drat!
I actually clipped this before sending:

[correct answer 0 points, worst scribbling 100 points]

But then I thought... nahhh these are adults. ;-)
So perhaps the class-clown wants to convert that
to radians per second for lambda 1200 nm.
... not that it will illuminate anything but you'll
miss your ride home from school.

Again... this notion is *counter* to my original,
knee-jerk
opinion that the doppler frequency is determined
by the rate an advancing dipole encounters the
magnetic flux transitions.

It posits that the magnetic field doesn't even exist until
the wave and the dipole are close enough for the
Coulomb force to move charges in the dipole.


"Close enough" places a boundary of some sort.
Assuming a spherical boundary as a limit, determine the
radius of a photon.
Androcles.

There you go with your circular thinking about
circular corpuscles.

Not at all. They are tetrahedrons, with +, N, -, S at the
vertices.
I'm simply placing an envelope around them since you have a
"close enough" "near field" approximation, there you go with
your vague ideas.

Hmmm... I like that! Big tetrahedrons that span the path?
Perhaps two of them?
This demands further research at the pond.

I didn't say they were big, and they don't retain one shape.

I knew that. The big ones won't work in your FTL ballistic
photons. :-)

If you refer to the diagram with the sine and cosine waves at
right
angles,
OK

http://images.google.com/images?q=li...=Google+Search
then double it to make
/\ \/
-| |+ /\
\/ N| |S
/\ \/
+| |- /\
\/ S| |N
/\ \/
then its a tetrahedron with points +, N, -, S.


http://images.google.com/images?q=tb...www.sbuniv.edu
/~ggray.wh.bol/CHE3314/ether3.gif
When the E-field is zero, there is a monopole with a N vector.
When the B-field is zero, there is a charge with a + vector.
As a tetrahedron it can also spin.
This is what you mean?
http://www.csar.uiuc.edu/F_platforms/packages/tets.jpg
I don't think they are tets or dual tets.
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Pyramid.html
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Tetrahedron.html

The dual square pyramid could spin.
The tet, points n s + - might pack to fill an electrodynamic
space
so I think that is what you mean.

Tets are good for builing matter because they are rigid.
We see them often in atomic structure.
However, the sides will be the correct length for only
one frequency. That seems a problem for building an
electrodynamic medium.
The synchrotron spectrum is a smooth straight line.
So.. no evidence of your space-grains and they
don't look very spinable to me.

I mean what I mean and not what you think I mean.
Androcles.

Yes... I see that. That word "monopole" sneeked
right past me on the first read.
http://www.allhatnocattle.net/waffle_house.htm ;-)

One at each corner.
Androcles

Sue...




Kind regards,
Sue...



Androcles




This stuff works a lot better
if you let the light forget about the Lorentz forces

You don't know how it works at all, let alone better.
Certainly not Lorentz, he imagines aether compresses
on one side only.


That is not too different from the effect we see in
reversing a path's direction by swapping transmitter
and receiver at a non reactive point.

The "compression" (near field effects) occurs on
both ends however or it would not be reciprocal.

The Lorentz force law isn't invalidated for lack
of explanation. I may not know why STP is 1 atm
but that doesn't invalidate aerodynamic calculations
that I might use it in.

If I guess the winning lottery number, will they
with hold payment because I can't show my calculations?

End of sermon )
Sue...



that ensured conservation of energy and charge
during it's manufacture and won't be needed again
until an interaction with matter is imminent.

Q. Does the word imminent suggest anticpation?
Not to me. It rather suggests inevitability.
Androcles


A. No more than the terms "advanced" and "retarded"
potential. What entites do to conserve
mass energy and charge can't be subject
to a light speed limit which is *based* on the
conservation laws established by the entities.


Remember... Maxwell was never too clear about what the
'displacement current' is displacing.
Sue...



|----Sue-at-72-------------------------------------------------------|

View this article only Newsgroups:
sci.physics.relativity
Date:
1999/03/28
[zap wrap crap]

[snip]
Yes... I see that. That word "monopole" sneeked
right past me on the first read.
http://www.allhatnocattle.net/waffle_house.htm ;-)

One at each corner.
Androcles

Monopole
Discount new & used items.
Search for monopole now!
www.eBay.com

http://pdg.lbl.gov/2000/s028.pdf
Sue... http://james.dickey.com/laugh.jpg







Sue...




Kind regards,
Sue...



Androcles




This stuff works a lot better
if you let the light forget about the Lorentz forces

You don't know how it works at all, let alone better.
Certainly not Lorentz, he imagines aether compresses
on one side only.


That is not too different from the effect we see in
reversing a path's direction by swapping transmitter
and receiver at a non reactive point.

The "compression" (near field effects) occurs on
both ends however or it would not be reciprocal.

The Lorentz force law isn't invalidated for lack
of explanation. I may not know why STP is 1 atm
but that doesn't invalidate aerodynamic calculations
that I might use it in.

If I guess the winning lottery number, will they
with hold payment because I can't show my calculations?

End of sermon )
Sue...



that ensured conservation of energy and charge
during it's manufacture and won't be needed again
until an interaction with matter is imminent.

Q. Does the word imminent suggest anticpation?
Not to me. It rather suggests inevitability.
Androcles


A. No more than the terms "advanced" and "retarded"
potential. What entites do to conserve
mass energy and charge can't be subject
to a light speed limit which is *based* on the
conservation laws established by the entities.


Remember... Maxwell was never too clear about what
the
'displacement current' is displacing.
Sue...




|----Sue-at-72-------------------------------------------------------|

View this article only Newsgroups:
sci.physics.relativity
Date:
1999/03/28
[zap wrap crap]