| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Pentcho Valev" |
| Date: |
04 Feb 2006 12:51:27 AM |
| Object: |
Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
I see your clock running slow by a factor of 1/gamma and you see my
clock running slow by a factor of 1/gamma. This idiotic corollary of
the principle of constancy of the speed of light was enough to convince
the zombie world that Einstein was a deity but Einstein's appetite was
unsatiable. In Chapter 23 in his "Relativity" one observer is at rest,
another is "sitting eccentrically" on the edge of a rotating disk, the
former sees the latter's clock running slow by a factor of 1/gamma as
classic requires and the latter sees the former's clock running...Oh
Divine Einstein...fast by a factor of gamma! Einstein explains: The
latter observer experiences a gravitational field and that is the only
reason why he now sees the observer at rest's clock not running slow by
a factor of 1/gamma as classic requires but rather running fast by a
factor of gamma as Einstein requires. Curiously, the gravitational
field can be reduced to zero (by increasing the diameter of the disc
and keeping the linear speed of the periphery constant) and yet things
continue to happen as Einstein requires: the observer rotating with the
disk sees the observer at rest's clock running fast by a factor of
gamma. The zombie world believes things happen exactly in this way
because Einstein is a deity.
Why does the deity need this shift from reciprocal time dilation (as
classic requires) to non-reciprocal time contraction (as Einstein
requires)? The answer can be found here:
http://www.wbabin.net/valev/valev6.htm
Pentcho Valev
.
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
20 Feb 2006 02:53:10 PM |
|
|
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1140468406.951974.251320@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1140466216.216862.152970@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
What about them? Why should different frequencies
and wavelengths travel different lengths?
Why shouldn't they is more the question.
Different wavelengths traveling at the same
speed will cause the top of the waves to
hit the "things" at different times.
No. They are not "at the same speed".
They are for light though huh?.
Not in glass.
I'm not trying to make you look stupid. I thought you
actually knew the answer to this one but were having
trouble saying it.
Blue light and red light travel with different speeds
in glass.
So why don't they travel at different speeds in vacuum?
Because all EM radiation regardless of wavelength
travels at c in vacuum.
how could one be blue and one be red at all in vacuum
without different speeds being a cause?
Because they have different wavelengths and different
frequencies, but the speed = f*lambda is the same. Your
eye measures frequency of light, not speed.
Again, sound waves in air have different frequencies
and wavelengths, but all travel at the same speed.
Will you make up your mind
you just stated earlier that sound waves have different
speeds.
Sheesh!
Damn wishy washy relativists
LOL
.
|
|
|
| User: "Randy Poe" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
20 Feb 2006 04:11:32 PM |
|
|
Spaceman wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1140468406.951974.251320@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1140466216.216862.152970@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
What about them? Why should different frequencies
and wavelengths travel different lengths?
Why shouldn't they is more the question.
Different wavelengths traveling at the same
speed will cause the top of the waves to
hit the "things" at different times.
No. They are not "at the same speed".
They are for light though huh?.
Not in glass.
I'm not trying to make you look stupid. I thought you
actually knew the answer to this one but were having
trouble saying it.
Blue light and red light travel with different speeds
in glass.
So why don't they travel at different speeds in vacuum?
Because all EM radiation regardless of wavelength
travels at c in vacuum.
how could one be blue and one be red at all in vacuum
without different speeds being a cause?
Because they have different wavelengths and different
frequencies, but the speed = f*lambda is the same. Your
eye measures frequency of light, not speed.
Again, sound waves in air have different frequencies
and wavelengths, but all travel at the same speed.
Will you make up your mind
you just stated earlier that sound waves have different
speeds.
Where did I say that?
Here's what I've said in the last few posts about sound:
"You mean
if I make two sounds in air with different frequencies,
they'll automatically go in different directions?"
"Different wavelengths of sound in air, or of light in
vacuum, will NOT travel different paths. "
Which of those do you think is a statement that sound
waves have different speeds?
- Randy
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
20 Feb 2006 04:25:34 PM |
|
|
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1140473492.800889.323820@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1140468406.951974.251320@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1140466216.216862.152970@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
What about them? Why should different frequencies
and wavelengths travel different lengths?
Why shouldn't they is more the question.
Different wavelengths traveling at the same
speed will cause the top of the waves to
hit the "things" at different times.
No. They are not "at the same speed".
They are for light though huh?.
Not in glass.
I'm not trying to make you look stupid. I thought you
actually knew the answer to this one but were having
trouble saying it.
Blue light and red light travel with different speeds
in glass.
So why don't they travel at different speeds in vacuum?
Because all EM radiation regardless of wavelength
travels at c in vacuum.
how could one be blue and one be red at all in vacuum
without different speeds being a cause?
Because they have different wavelengths and different
frequencies, but the speed = f*lambda is the same. Your
eye measures frequency of light, not speed.
Again, sound waves in air have different frequencies
and wavelengths, but all travel at the same speed.
Will you make up your mind
you just stated earlier that sound waves have different
speeds.
Where did I say that?
Here's what I've said in the last few posts about sound:
"You mean
if I make two sounds in air with different frequencies,
they'll automatically go in different directions?"
"Different wavelengths of sound in air, or of light in
vacuum, will NOT travel different paths. "
Which of those do you think is a statement that sound
waves have different speeds?
I said....
{> Why shouldn't they is more the question.
{> Different wavelengths traveling at the same
{> speed will cause the top of the waves to
{> hit the "things" at different times.
You said
}No. They are not "at the same speed".
You are wishy washy at best.
Stop being so wishy washy.
LOL
.
|
|
|
| User: "Randy Poe" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
20 Feb 2006 04:29:04 PM |
|
|
Spaceman wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1140473492.800889.323820@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
I said....
{> Why shouldn't they is more the question.
{> Different wavelengths traveling at the same
{> speed will cause the top of the waves to
{> hit the "things" at different times.
You said
}No. They are not "at the same speed".
Colors being separated by a prism do not involve sound
waves in air.
"Why shouldn't they" referred to "why shouldn't blue and
red light travel at different speeds". Remember we've been
talking about prisms?
- Randy
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
20 Feb 2006 04:44:53 PM |
|
|
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1140474544.067714.5180@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1140473492.800889.323820@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
I said....
{> Why shouldn't they is more the question.
{> Different wavelengths traveling at the same
{> speed will cause the top of the waves to
{> hit the "things" at different times.
You said
}No. They are not "at the same speed".
Colors being separated by a prism do not involve sound
waves in air.
"Why shouldn't they" referred to "why shouldn't blue and
red light travel at different speeds". Remember we've been
talking about prisms?
Yes, we were talking about prisms and that is the statement
you made while we were talking about the different
colors.
Randy, this twisting only shows you need to twist
instead of admitting you may have stated that incorrectly.
:)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Randy Poe" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
20 Feb 2006 05:02:12 PM |
|
|
Spaceman wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1140474544.067714.5180@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1140473492.800889.323820@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
I said....
{> Why shouldn't they is more the question.
{> Different wavelengths traveling at the same
{> speed will cause the top of the waves to
{> hit the "things" at different times.
You said
}No. They are not "at the same speed".
Colors being separated by a prism do not involve sound
waves in air.
"Why shouldn't they" referred to "why shouldn't blue and
red light travel at different speeds". Remember we've been
talking about prisms?
Yes, we were talking about prisms and that is the statement
you made while we were talking about the different
colors.
The different colors of light move at different speeds in the glass.
Sound waves of different frequencies move at the same
speed in air.
Randy, this twisting only shows you need to twist
instead of admitting you may have stated that incorrectly.
Which of those two statements do you think I "stated
incorrectly" or changed or "twisted". When we're talking
about prisms, we're not talking about sound. When we're
talking about sound, we're not talking about prisms.
The technical term for wavelength-dependent speed is
"dispersion". Glass is dispersive for light. Air is not dispersive
for sound.
- Randy
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
20 Feb 2006 05:06:28 PM |
|
|
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1140476532.256863.198160@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
The different colors of light move at different speeds in the glass.
Now you have said it again.
but yet lightspeed is the same to all observers.
Now answer this about your statement.
Why can lightspeed be different in glass for different colors
yet can't be different in vacuum for different colors.
.
|
|
|
| User: "T Wake" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
20 Feb 2006 05:26:51 PM |
|
|
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote in message
news:PoadnW1lHb_w1mfeRVn-jQ@comcast.com...
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1140476532.256863.198160@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
The different colors of light move at different speeds in the glass.
Now you have said it again.
but yet lightspeed is the same to all observers.
Do you know what "c" denotes?
Now answer this about your statement.
Why can lightspeed be different in glass for different colors
yet can't be different in vacuum for different colors.
Really....
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
20 Feb 2006 05:56:40 PM |
|
|
"T Wake" <taswakeAt@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1I6dnYuu9v7QzWfeRVny3w@pipex.net...
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote in message
news:PoadnW1lHb_w1mfeRVn-jQ@comcast.com...
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1140476532.256863.198160@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
The different colors of light move at different speeds in the glass.
Now you have said it again.
but yet lightspeed is the same to all observers.
Do you know what "c" denotes?
Now answer this about your statement.
Why can lightspeed be different in glass for different colors
yet can't be different in vacuum for different colors.
Really....
Really what?
you think it is ok for different speeds of light
in glass yet not ok in vacuum?
LOL
.
|
|
|
| User: "T Wake" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
20 Feb 2006 05:57:22 PM |
|
|
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote in message
news:-5KdnQdzD8ytymfeRVn-iA@comcast.com...
"T Wake" <taswakeAt@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1I6dnYuu9v7QzWfeRVny3w@pipex.net...
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote in message
news:PoadnW1lHb_w1mfeRVn-jQ@comcast.com...
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1140476532.256863.198160@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
The different colors of light move at different speeds in the glass.
Now you have said it again.
but yet lightspeed is the same to all observers.
Do you know what "c" denotes?
Now answer this about your statement.
Why can lightspeed be different in glass for different colors
yet can't be different in vacuum for different colors.
Really....
Really what?
you think it is ok for different speeds of light
in glass yet not ok in vacuum?
Haha. Do you know why you get different speeds of light in glass?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd Parker" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
21 Feb 2006 03:53:32 AM |
|
|
In article <PoadnW1lHb_w1mfeRVn-jQ@comcast.com>,
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1140476532.256863.198160@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
The different colors of light move at different speeds in the glass.
Now you have said it again.
but yet lightspeed is the same to all observers.
Now answer this about your statement.
Why can lightspeed be different in glass for different colors
yet can't be different in vacuum for different colors.
Light doesn't interact with a vacuum; it does with glass.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
21 Feb 2006 09:23:19 AM |
|
|
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:dtf9he$t7n$3@leto.cc.emory.edu...
Light doesn't interact with a vacuum; it does with glass.
Correct,
So explain doppler of light without "interaction".
Seems you are left to relative speed being the cause.
and if so. the speed of light is not constant to all
because if it hit all at c only, no relative wavelength
difference would ever be measured.
:)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd Parker" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
21 Feb 2006 05:04:25 AM |
|
|
In article <p5ednXEHGuzDrWbeRVn-vQ@comcast.com>,
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote:
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:dtf9he$t7n$3@leto.cc.emory.edu...
Light doesn't interact with a vacuum; it does with glass.
Correct,
So explain doppler of light without "interaction".
Stretching out of subsequent wavelengths (or compression if source and
observer are approaching).
Seems you are left to relative speed being the cause.
No, as I've explained to you TWICE already, the spacing between crests changes
due to the relative motion.
and if so. the speed of light is not constant to all
because if it hit all at c only, no relative wavelength
difference would ever be measured.
:)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
21 Feb 2006 11:10:33 AM |
|
|
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:dtfdmb$2aq$1@leto.cc.emory.edu...
Stretching out of subsequent wavelengths (or compression if source and
observer are approaching).
wavelengths do not "stretch" nor compress
unless a medium causes such.
Seems you are left to relative speed being the cause.
No, as I've explained to you TWICE already, the spacing between crests
changes
due to the relative motion.
That is the relative speed causing the "relative" different wavelength.
The wavelength does not physically change length.
No compression or stretching is occuring at all.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd Parker" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
21 Feb 2006 09:10:58 AM |
|
|
In article <loidnYGLEdId1GbeRVn-sw@comcast.com>,
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote:
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:dtfdmb$2aq$1@leto.cc.emory.edu...
Stretching out of subsequent wavelengths (or compression if source and
observer are approaching).
wavelengths do not "stretch" nor compress
unless a medium causes such.
Seems you are left to relative speed being the cause.
No, as I've explained to you TWICE already, the spacing between crests
changes
due to the relative motion.
That is the relative speed causing the "relative" different wavelength.
The wavelength does not physically change length.
No compression or stretching is occuring at all.
If a source is 10 m away from you as it emits a crest of wavelength #1, 11 m
as it emits #2, and 12 m as it emits #3, the spacing between the crest of #2
and #3 will be 1 m longer than the spacing between the crest of #1 and #2, so
the wavelength will have become longer.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
21 Feb 2006 03:41:23 PM |
|
|
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:dtfs4k$hpc$1@leto.cc.emory.edu...
In article <loidnYGLEdId1GbeRVn-sw@comcast.com>,
If a source is 10 m away from you as it emits a crest of wavelength #1, 11
m
as it emits #2, and 12 m as it emits #3, the spacing between the crest of
#2
and #3 will be 1 m longer than the spacing between the crest of #1 and #2,
so
the wavelength will have become longer.
The relative wavelength change is still caused by the relative motion.
Again, you just refuse to look at the "actual cause"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Henry Haapalainen" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
21 Feb 2006 06:27:41 PM |
|
|
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> kirjoitti viestissä
news:y82dnSmiEMNmFWbeRVn-sg@comcast.com...
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:dtfs4k$hpc$1@leto.cc.emory.edu...
In article <loidnYGLEdId1GbeRVn-sw@comcast.com>,
If a source is 10 m away from you as it emits a crest of wavelength #1,
11
m
as it emits #2, and 12 m as it emits #3, the spacing between the crest
of
#2
and #3 will be 1 m longer than the spacing between the crest of #1 and
#2,
so
the wavelength will have become longer.
The relative wavelength change is still caused by the relative motion.
Again, you just refuse to look at the "actual cause"
There is physics outside relativity theories. Wavelengths do not change.
Henry Haapalainen
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
21 Feb 2006 06:27:39 PM |
|
|
"Henry Haapalainen" <kirppu@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:dtgap9$b57$1@phys-news4.kolumbus.fi...
There is physics outside relativity theories. Wavelengths do not change.
I know.
The speed difference is the only thing that can create
a relative change in wavelength only (not a truly physical change)
:)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "PD" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
22 Feb 2006 08:17:59 AM |
|
|
Henry Haapalainen wrote:
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> kirjoitti viestiss=E4
news:y82dnSmiEMNmFWbeRVn-sg@comcast.com...
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:dtfs4k$hpc$1@leto.cc.emory.edu...
In article <loidnYGLEdId1GbeRVn-sw@comcast.com>,
If a source is 10 m away from you as it emits a crest of wavelength #=
1,
11
m
as it emits #2, and 12 m as it emits #3, the spacing between the crest
of
#2
and #3 will be 1 m longer than the spacing between the crest of #1 and
#2,
so
the wavelength will have become longer.
The relative wavelength change is still caused by the relative motion.
Again, you just refuse to look at the "actual cause"
There is physics outside relativity theories. Wavelengths do not change.
And what physics extrudes a wavelength to be a certain distance and no
other?=20
=20
Henry Haapalainen
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
22 Feb 2006 08:22:32 AM |
|
|
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140617879.585922.200960@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
And what physics extrudes a wavelength to be a certain distance and no
other?
What physical reason would wavelengths change physical length
for if traveling in vacuum?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd Parker" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
22 Feb 2006 03:54:00 AM |
|
|
In article <DsGdnas2qLAD7mHenZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@comcast.com>,
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140617879.585922.200960@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
And what physics extrudes a wavelength to be a certain distance and no
other?
What physical reason would wavelengths change physical length
for if traveling in vacuum?
Relative motion, you doofus! Pick up a damn textbook and read it!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
22 Feb 2006 09:34:52 AM |
|
|
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:dthtuc$pve$3@leto.cc.emory.edu...
In article <DsGdnas2qLAD7mHenZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@comcast.com>,
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140617879.585922.200960@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
And what physics extrudes a wavelength to be a certain distance and no
other?
What physical reason would wavelengths change physical length
for if traveling in vacuum?
Relative motion, you doofus! Pick up a damn textbook and read it!
That is not a physical reason doofus, that is an abtract reason.
The wavelength does not change "physically" because of relative
motion,.
Sheesh!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd Parker" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
23 Feb 2006 04:34:15 AM |
|
|
In article <xbadnWiDev8PGWHeRVn-pQ@comcast.com>,
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote:
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:dthtuc$pve$3@leto.cc.emory.edu...
In article <DsGdnas2qLAD7mHenZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@comcast.com>,
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140617879.585922.200960@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
And what physics extrudes a wavelength to be a certain distance and no
other?
What physical reason would wavelengths change physical length
for if traveling in vacuum?
Relative motion, you doofus! Pick up a damn textbook and read it!
That is not a physical reason doofus, that is an abtract reason.
I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to someone
incapable of reasoning.
The wavelength does not change "physically" because of relative
motion,.
Sheesh!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
23 Feb 2006 10:09:28 AM |
|
|
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:dtkkls$pqc$2@leto.cc.emory.edu...
In article <xbadnWiDev8PGWHeRVn-pQ@comcast.com>,
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote:
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:dthtuc$pve$3@leto.cc.emory.edu...
In article <DsGdnas2qLAD7mHenZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@comcast.com>,
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140617879.585922.200960@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
And what physics extrudes a wavelength to be a certain distance and no
other?
What physical reason would wavelengths change physical length
for if traveling in vacuum?
Relative motion, you doofus! Pick up a damn textbook and read it!
That is not a physical reason doofus, that is an abtract reason.
I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to someone
incapable of reasoning.
You don't have the time to prove me wrong on something
I am correct on is right.
Since it would take longer than inifnity to prove something
that is a correct statement as an incorrect statement.
:)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "PD" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
22 Feb 2006 10:06:55 AM |
|
|
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140617879.585922.200960@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
And what physics extrudes a wavelength to be a certain distance and no
other?
What physical reason would wavelengths change physical length
for if traveling in vacuum?
Wavelengths don't have physical length. Their length is defined the
same way that every length is defined, via a measurement.
If you think otherwise, what physics extrudes a wavelength to be a
distance and no other?
PD
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
22 Feb 2006 10:12:38 AM |
|
|
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140624415.210053.318400@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Wavelengths don't have physical length.
LOL
Lost in rubber ruler land still huh PD?
You must hate water!
LOL
Their length is defined the
same way that every length is defined, via a measurement.
If you think otherwise, what physics extrudes a wavelength to be a
distance and no other?
Who said they have to be a distance and no other.
wavelengths come in different lengths depending on what
"vibration" made them.
.
|
|
|
| User: "PD" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
22 Feb 2006 10:25:49 AM |
|
|
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140624415.210053.318400@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Wavelengths don't have physical length.
LOL
Lost in rubber ruler land still huh PD?
You must hate water!
LOL
Their length is defined the
same way that every length is defined, via a measurement.
If you think otherwise, what physics extrudes a wavelength to be a
distance and no other?
Who said they have to be a distance and no other.
wavelengths come in different lengths depending on what
"vibration" made them.
Right. Describe the physical process that dictates that a particular
*vibration* generates a wavelength of a particular length. That is, how
does the vibration extrude something that has a definite length? Please
explain.
PD
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
22 Feb 2006 10:30:59 AM |
|
|
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140625549.453170.6300@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Right. Describe the physical process that dictates that a particular
*vibration* generates a wavelength of a particular length. That is, how
does the vibration extrude something that has a definite length? Please
explain.
C,mon PD,
I know you are just going to play the relative motion game
and say the wavelengths are not "that wavelength" according
to observer so and so... etc.
Go play your relativity games with someone else,
I have had enough of your "rubber ruler game".
.
|
|
|
| User: "T Wake" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
22 Feb 2006 12:02:40 PM |
|
|
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote in message
news:uOydnZpPwIwkDGHenZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@comcast.com...
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140625549.453170.6300@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Right. Describe the physical process that dictates that a particular
*vibration* generates a wavelength of a particular length. That is, how
does the vibration extrude something that has a definite length? Please
explain.
C,mon PD,
I know you are just going to play the relative motion game
and say the wavelengths are not "that wavelength" according
to observer so and so... etc.
Go play your relativity games with someone else,
I have had enough of your "rubber ruler game".
Spaceman to English Translation Courtesy of the CRANKLATOR©®
"I cant answer the question so I will try to bluff my way out of it."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "PD" |
|
| Title: Re: Einstein Procrusteanizes Time Dilation |
22 Feb 2006 12:54:47 PM |
|
|
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140625549.453170.6300@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Right. Describe the physical process that dictates that a particular
*vibration* generates a wavelength of a particular length. That is, how
does the vibration extrude something that has a definite length? Please
explain.
C,mon PD,
I know you are just going to play the relative motion game
and say the wavelengths are not "that wavelength" according
to observer so and so... etc.
I'm not playing any game. I'm asking you a question. And you don't seem
to be able to answer it.
Go play your relativity games with someone else,
I have had enough of your "rubber ruler game".
I don't think I've ever mentioned "rubber rulers," though you seem to
think that's what I've implied somewhere. (I haven't.) Last time we set
up a length measurement, it was with marks on a rail. Hardly rubber
there.
Oh, and if you say something stupid, I might continue to take the
opportunity to point it out, whether you've had enough of it or not.
The way I'll know you've had enough is when you stop saying something
stupid on the newsgroup.
PD
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
