Subject: Re: How do we *know* electron spin is not real?
From: aleistra@leland.Stanford.EDU (Andrea Lynn Leistra)
Date: 14 Nov 1996 23:35:30 -0800
In article <56gkgh$ufs@ds2.acs.ucalgary.ca>,
jason cooper wrote:
>I was told in a second-year Quantum course that the "spin" on an
>electron is not, in fact, any kind of real spin. One reason I
>was given ran something along the lines of "Given the known
>radius of the electron, we can calculate how fast it would have
>to spin to have the moment attributed to it. Such a spin would
>require FTL motion on its outer surface"...
Yup. This is a pretty common calculation in introductory QM classes.
>A couple of questions here. First off, how do we know the radius
>of an electron?
The quantity used here is usually referred to as 'the classical radius of
the electron', which is found by setting the self-energy from the Coulomb
attraction equal to the rest-mass energy of the electron. IIRC, it's
something of an overestimate, given the results of various scattering
experiments; in particular, electron-electron scattering places an upper
limit on the electron radius of 10^-16 m.
From this, it's easy to show that the electron *cannot* truly be spinning
on an axis, since it would require the 'equator' to be moving much faster
than light. Spin is simply a convenient word to refer to intrinsic
angular momentum.
--
Andrea Leistra http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~aleistra
-----
Life is complex. It has real and imaginary parts.
Subject: Re: Where's the theory? (was: Specialized terminology)
From: patrick@gryphon.psych.ox.ac.uk (Patrick Juola)
Date: 15 Nov 1996 10:45:11 GMT
In article <56gqar$6m1@netnews.upenn.edu> weinecks@mail1.sas.upenn.edu (Silke-Maria Weineck) writes:
>: > : I don´t mind if philosophers disagree among themselves. Frankly, they
>: > : can do that till kingdom comes in their face. But what happens, when
>: > : the real world intrudes.
>: >
>: > The real world as opposed to?
>
>: The real world as opposed to the game of manipulating other people
>: with words.
>
>I'm sorry -- that is the real world. Politics, business, even Usenet.
>Perhaps your love of science is due to the fact that you perceive it
>differently? This is not a putdown but a serious speculation. If you feel
>so strongly that manipulating people with words is something to be
>avoided, you would have to run very far from the real world indeed; you
>might end up in a realm where words are replaced by numbers as far as
>possible. It's even a solution; but don't tell me that you have entered
>the real world.
I think you miss Anton's point, Silke. There are some things that
are not amenable to manipulation with words. The original example
of a sick child who needs medicine is a reasonably good one; Ayn Rand's
example (whom I ordinarily loathe, btw) of a malfunctioning generator
is another and perhaps stronger one.
The real world is not a game; there are no rules that are agreed upon
by all the players, nor is there any way that we can, by consensus,
agree to suspend or alter it. The hypothetical child will either be
saved or killed by the treatment given to it (or not) by the doctors;
the generator will either provide power or not as a side effect of
the manipulations performed by a technician.
A little later you wrote:
>If you disagree about the amount of fuel
>: necessary to fly a Jumbo over the atlantic ocean or about the medicine
>: a sick child has to get you will be forced towards agreement when the
>: results come in. This puts a stake on developeing methods to find the
>: probable result beforhand and agree upon it.
>
>What you fail to see is that decisions like that are _easy_; that it is a
>privilege and a luxury to make decisions based on certainty.
Um, these decisions are *NOT* based on certainty; certainty is what the
real world gives us, too late to make a decision based on it. If the
child dies, then we know that whatever decision we have taken is the
wrong one -- with certainty -- but that doesn't help. The next decision
to be taken, the one about the child lying in the next bed, is still
uncertain.
If you really think that those decisions are easy, try doing science
some time.
Patrick
Subject: Gravity and energy
From: Jan Pavek
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 12:14:11 +0100
I wrote down some simple statements about the Universe. Please tell me
if it's mad or not.
Jan
1.Time (1. dimension) and energy (2. dimension)
The existence of time produces energy (1. dimension). The
more energy is needed the more time is consumed. This one
can encounter when travelling at a very high speed - near light
speed. The faster you go the more energy you need, so you also
consume more time. The effect is a loss of time. Our space
could be described as an accumulation of time particles, which
when moved are the energy itself. The moving of every particle
is a rotating movement like a gyroscope (2. dimension). That
means, all the time particles around the center rotate the same
way with the same speed around the center. This rotation can
be described as the electro magnetic field, which becomes
weaker the farther from center.
2.Light (3. dimension)
Light is a special moving electro magnetic field. This
movement e.g. happens when the gyroscopes of two
nonparallel (3. dimension) fields make their fields one another
weaker, what produces a movement to one another. As light is
normally travelling at the speed of light, light is only a special
movement at a scpecial speed. The wavelength of light can be
answered by the speed of rotation of the gyroscope. So light is
energy, which can be calculated with the knowledge of it's
wavelength. Here we can also see, that the more energy a
wave belongs the higher the frequency of energy production.
3.Charges
Charges are not more than the right and left spinning energies.
The right spinning are the positive and the left spinning the
negative, while the interpretation of left and right is only
relative to them both.
4.Magnetism
When two gyroscopes rotate parallely, to different directions -
one positive charge and one negative - at the same plane they
produce a path between them, that can be described as if time
particles would be sucked in on one side and blown out on the
other side. That's the principle of a di-pole.
5.Matter and gravity
Matter is built out of many of that charges. According to the
amount of negative and positive we get the equally charged
matter particles, e.g. electron or proton. As that particles are
consequently built of magnetic unions they can built a balanced
particle, which is neutral, e.g. the neutron. The effect of that
magnetic unions also causes an attractive force between all that
particles and that's called gravity.
---
I know I'm not a brainy one, but I'm working on it!
Jan Pavek \|\*(:-)
mailto:p7003ke@hpmail.lrz-muenchen.de
surfto: http://www.lrz-muenchen.de/~p7003ke
"Why don't we see it as it is? A flower, a tree, a mountain, a bee ..."
"Do you realize the power of the dream?..."
Subject: Re: MICROSECOND PULSAR EXPLORER ; new sci-fi movie
From: Archimedes.Plutonium@dartmouth.edu (Archimedes Plutonium)
Date: 14 Nov 1996 20:34:01 GMT
Advanced Aliens have lived in the 5f6 space going back in time to the
Thorium Atom Totality. Their civilization is 15 billion years old and
humans on earth are from the recent Plutonium Atom Totality and are a
mere 1
million years old. These thors , as they are called by humans,
communicate by microsecond pulsars. The first millisecond pulsar was
discovered in 1982. The first microsecond pulsar was discovered in
2018. There is anxiety on Earth realizing that these thors would be so
much more
technologically advanced than humans; should the day ever come that
thors ever visit Earth.
The year is 2050 and the day is 7 November when Earth is celebrating
Plutonium Day. The Archimedes Space TELEscope noticed a strange UFO
confirmed by land based radio telescopes. The object was last seen
circling the globe several times and then it landed directly at the
South Pole. An expedition was sent to the South Pole to see what could
be seen, and what was seen was a perfect hole burned through the snow
and ice and a perfect meteor crater at the exact spot of the
geomagnetic South Pole. But there was no evidence of a meteor impact to
cause this.
The thor visitor took 5 days Earth time inside the Earth, liquid core
to reassemble its atomic and molecular structure. A thor has a
different atomic and molecular structure when in intergalactic flight
in order to maximize speed. Once landed, a thor re-atomizes to the
local environs. Thors are so technologically advanced, considering they
have progressed steadily for 15 billion years compared to humans on
Earth who are a mere 1 million
years old in technology. Thors travel intergalaxy and interstellar via
a reatomized body, using the bodies own mass as a propulsion system
saving the replication unit in the brain of the body to replicate the
body anew once landed. A thor lives best in the dense medium of liquid
planet cores where it can get all the metals and minerals easily and
quickly.
Humans have never realized or encountered such advanced life, until
now. And how would humans compare the technology of say a ant-colony to
themselves? Such might be the comparison of a thor to humans.
The thor reemerges from the liquid iron core , having replenished its
body matrix. It is able to imitate any life form except below that of a
rat or large insect in size. Thus a thor can imitate a human and you
would not
suspect it to be a thor. Its food and sustenance are virtually any mass
objects for it can re-molecularize or re-atomize anything that comes
within its electromagnetic zone. Shot a bullet or shot a missile into a
thor and you are feeding a thor a candy bar or a spaghetti dinner.
Life on Earth 12NOV2050 was business as usual, when all of a sudden
the world wide Net and Web received a strange communication. A post to
the Net in all of newsgroups appeared. Apparently a thor can manipulate
the electronic lines of communication.
The strange message read:
I need the entire southern hemisphere to build a signal station to
the Ur galaxy. I am not of your kind but of a star in the Ur galaxy. I
give all humans below the equator and contiguous continent to evacuate
by 13NOV, tomorrow. Any human or human product found in the no zone and
airspace of the Southern Hemisphere will be automatically terminated.
19Ur7
A few humans believed this message, scientists Karl and Will of the
South Pole expedition tracking that UFO of 7Nov suspected a thor and in
their debriefing to the political leaders stated at the end of their
report that the South Pole marking may have been an alien entrance.
So many electronic investigators tried to track
down the perpetrator. Thinking that electronic banking could be
compromised. Nearly all thought it was some hacker hoax.
But time-is-of-the-essence, even for humans. And the time factor was
so fast , only one day to act. Shows the difference between
civilizations. To a thor, one earth day was probably like a year for it
on its planet. And the human leaders of the powerful countries
thought it prudent to just wait and see and hope. It was hoped that the
message was some form of prank or hoax, but the nagging question
remained how could a jokester penetrate all of the newsgroups bypassing
all the numerous gates. It was as if the intruder owned the Net and
would do
freely with it all at its own will.
On 14NOV2050 it happened so fast and so orderly that no eye witness
lived to see it. The thor had replicated another thor of the size of a
pen whose programmed mission was to "at flight speed" travel through
every human body on the forbidden Southern Hemisphere of Earth. The
terminator-thor travelling at such high speed burned a hole in the
heads of all humans. Like a high speed missile only it was like a high
speed bullet going through fog instead of clear air, the
terminator-thor went through the heads of every human in the Southern
Hemisphere, killing them instantly. Scientists in the Northern
Hemisphere were privy to what might happen and calculated at the speed
of light how long it would take to kill every human in the south. It is
a known fact that light takes 8 minutes to get here to Earth from the
Sun and so if all the humans in the south if their collect distances
apart were roughly the distance from the Sun to Earth then the
terminator-thor would take only 8 minutes to wipe out all humans in the
south. But we know that no object, not even a thor can travel at the
speed of light but perhaps 50% of light speed and so roughly 16 minutes
and then adding in the factor of turning around so many times and
sensory data spot locating humans factor that into the terminator-thors
flight path and it increases the time by a factor of 10 and so 16
minutes multiplied by 10 and all humans in the south are terminated in
160 minutes or less than 3 hours.
By the end of 14NOV2050 no human alive was in the Southern
Hemisphere. The birds of dead carrion were seen having a heyday.
On 15NOV2050 Earth's remaining humans were all in the Northern
Hemisphere
only, trying to find out what was going on in the south. Some ventured
south not knowing what had happened the day before and were instantly
killed. In the Southern Hemisphere the thor started construction of a
machine and its array to produce microsecond pulsar signals.
People in the north were just so curious. All of them now had realized
the truth that it was not a joke a hoax and that Earth was visited by a
thor. People were going berserk, crazy and riots. Questions were being
asked why the thor did not kill all the humans and get them out of
their way.
Scientists Karl and Will were seen much on the Net and Web and TV and
one of their transmissions went like this.
Karl: Will you remember the movie WAR OF THE WORLDS where the
Martians invaded Earth and that scene where the preacher goes walking
towards the spacecraft holding up the cross.
Will: Yes, I remember and does not the preacher get zapped by the
Martians and the hero and heroine start to cry. I believe it was her
father. What is your point?
Karl: Yes, it was her father. My point is Will, that instead of
holding up a cross. I believe if someone approaches the Southern
Hemisphere holding up the best resemblence of the 5f6 of 231PU that we
may be able to open a line of communication with these advanced alien
thors.
Will: Ah , I see your point, but it may be suicide.
Karl: There is a chance, because no matter how advanced someone is
over us, we all go into the nucleus when we die and are reincarnated
and so the thor may recognize that humble beginnings of one-and-all.
And it just may be the reason that the thor is not contemplating on
killing us all because it recognizes that we all come from the nucleus
of 231PU.
Will: Sort of like us now, we could have extincted the condors and
the pandas and tigers and grizzly bears but we recognize that we lose
more than we gain by extincting.
Karl: Concur. By sending a volunteer with a best picture likeness of
231PU perhaps we can open a line of communication and if all things go
for the best, perhaps the thor will let us coexist on this planet.
Subject: VietMath War: Programmer/Analyst needed in war ????
From: Archimedes.Plutonium@dartmouth.edu (Archimedes Plutonium)
Date: 14 Nov 1996 21:28:01 GMT
In article <328A10A3.2610@math.okstate.edu>
David Ullrich writes:
> > Math is indeed the key to the universe. Just don't let academia fool you into
> > thinking they have the only copy.
>
> Certainly not! Just check sci.math - you'll find all sorts of
> extra-academic mathematicians. There's Archimedes Plutonium, for example.
> He's a super-genius; he seems to be the only person in the world who
> realizes that Wiles' proof of Fermat's Last Theorem is wrong. The reason
> is that Wiles doesn't realize that the naturals = Adics. That is, contrary
> to what you and I learned in school, 2 is not a natural number. Natural
> numbers have infinitely many digits extending to the _left_ of the
> decimal point, so for example ...22222.0 is a natural number, while 2
> is not. Perhaps someday there will be another super-genius capable of
> appreciating this.
Thanks for summarizing what I think. I find it very frustrating to
have to correct people who misunderstand what I am doing. Typically
they take a path that I must be 100% wrong in everything that I do.
Then they ask how I could have anything to say about FLT. Then I show
them p-adic counterexamples. Immediately they throw up their arms and
say, aha, here ArchPu is your error. The P-adics are not the counting
numbers.
How do you tell someone who is dense at the starting gate that my
whole push in mathematics is that the Finite Integers are a mirage and
that the p-adics are the Naturals.
I bet there are still professors of physics who believe that
Newtonian Mechanics is correct physics even if you take large slow
moving objects. Their minds simply cannot grasp the fact that Newtonian
mechanics is a fake. They can easily see that gravity is not the flight
of angels pushing Earth off of its linear path and in towards the Sun.
They can see that having "angels" in their theory is messy and that
such a theory is fake. But it is much more difficult for people, even
some students and professors of physics to realize that Newtonian
Mechanics is a fake theory, just as "angels pushing" is a fake theory.
A fake theory may give close approximations but no matter how close it
is a fake theory.
How do I tell the world public that their counting numbers , these
numbers of 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and so on were as imprecise, as fake as
angels pushing on earth to give gravity. Most people do not see any
difference from those numbers and these p-adic numbers of ....,
...0004, ...0003, ...000002, ...0001, ....000000. Until they see a
p-adic number like ....22222.
I am changing mathematics , math that has been done with counting
numbers for 3 millenium. I have a terrible war on my hands. And I think
that I could make math proofs left and right until I am blue in the
face and for a hundred years and no math professor will heed the call.
But when one physics report announces that p-adics are essential in
physics and that the counting numbers just do not work in the physics
experiment. Well, my day in the sun has come.
Thanks David for your accurate summary of what I am doing. And I
would have thanked you even if you did not have super-genius in your
writing. I find it the case that when people want to attack ad
hominem,it is almost impossible for them to understand what I am about
and it is impossible for them to give an objective unbiased summary of
my work. But when people are open minded and do not take me personally
but try to objectively understand what I am saying, then they can give
an accurate summary of my work.
I needed to repost David's description because I can reuse that
paragraph for the many others who will come flying-on-the-Net,
attacking me , shooting from the hips before asking any questions and
utterly misunderstanding and misrepresenting the idea of Naturals =
p-adics = Infinite Integers
Subject: Re: Does US use the mind machine on American people? NO. There is No Mind-Machine Conspiracy.
From: leader@secret.us.gov (Mr XJ69)
Date: 15 Nov 1996 06:32:43 GMT
Attention! This is an emergency tap, individualized message, directed
to caesar@copland.udel.edu via ISP network tap. Important revelations
follow:
In article <328be4b0.11711307@news.softdisk.com>,
black999@vexation.net (Intelligence Officer #999) writes:
>
> caesar@copland.udel.edu (Yu) wrote:
>
>>>We do not abuse our Tools,
>>>We only use them in order to bring about the realization of the
>>>vision of Global Harmony and Total Accord.
>
Agent #999! This is the third security breach you've been involved
in the last six months! Desist these practices or face severe sanctions.
>>Unbelieveable words!
>
>NO. It is True. The Pursuit of the Grand Doctrine of Global Harmony
>and Total Accord is ALL. Our Tools of Peace DO NOT HARM. WE DO NOT
>ABUSE THE TOOLS. It is All In Your Mind. You seem to be Insane. Are
>you?
>
>>I would remind you the cases which was reported in "Microwave
>>Harassment & Mind Control Experimentation" by Jullianne McKinney to
>>prove what I say is true.
>
>
>
>Foolish! So Foolish! HA! You read information about imaginary mind
>machines in your rebellious books, and that makes it true?
> What if the authors of your Rebellious Literature are Professional
>Liars, working for some Bureau of Disinformation, perhaps a branch of
>AHFUC? You do not even know. Everything you see We Control. Your
>Reality is What We Make It.
>
Blind fool! You are giving away all our secrets! Black helicoptors
have been dispatched to your location. Stay where you are.
>>In the above first case, Is it a necessary way to achieve yours'
>>"realization of the vision of Global Harmony and Total Accord"
>>from turture the kids of a victim with the invisible wave weapon?!
>
>No. What you speak of did not happen. It is disinformation
>originating from the Secret Hidden Intelligence Triangle. Our Tools
>of Peace Do Not Hurt Citizens.
>
Yes... Tell them they will not "Hurt" them... Good...
>>In the second case, does the high power line is the necassary path of
>>" the vision of Global Harmony and Total Accord?!
>
>Power Lines transmit Energy for Citizens to Use in Work and Play. It
>is Important to Civilization.
>
>>In above cases, why operators always use the invisible wave weapon to
>>torture the victims' kids in order to threaten their parents?
>>Is it the necessary threatened and inhumane method to achieve
>>your " thevision of Global Harmony and Total Accord?!
>
>You Make Me Ill. How can you say that we, the Benevolent Agents of
>Computer-1, would ever hurt children. We Hurt No One. The Vision of
>Global Harmony and Total Accord requires All to be Happy. Children.
>Adult Citizens who Labor for the Good of Computer-1. Intelli-Enhanced
>Dogs. All Must Be Happy. You Will Be Happy. Rejoice.
>
Ah-Ha! I see I spoke too quickly Agent #999! Carry on with your fine
work of educating the populace of our non-world-conquest-oriented
plans. There-is-nothing-to-fear-from-us-as-we-are-your-friends!
>>The above cases only prove that mind control operators indeed inherit
>>the phylosophy of Communist and the violence phylosophy of Starin
>>and Mao--The regime's power come from the nozzle of the gun.
>>That's why the operators always use the invisible wave weapon (the
>>violence) to surpress those people who against their interests.
>
>We Do Not Use Fear to Rule. We Are Not Communists. That Idea is a
>Product of your Imagination. Please, Separate Reality from Fantasy.
>
>>>Turn down the volume on your Media Information Box. Remain quiet for
>>>a moment. Do you hear it? A fine, high-pitched noise that seems to
>>>be inside your head? We could show you the capabilities we possess
>>>without even being near you.
>>>We could SHOW you the Benevolence of Computer-1, but we do not. That is
>>>too impersonal. We prefer to conduct our Hearings in person.
>
>>Unbelieveable words!
>
>>If operators prefer to conduct their victims with the way of face to face
>>then they will not need the microwave voice equipment to drive their
>>targets mad.
>>If your words is true, the operators will not need to use the invsible
>>wave weapon to torture their targets.
>>if the oprertors dare to negotiate any problem with their targets in the
>>way of face to face, the invisible wave weapon is a uncessary tool.
>>That's because these victims of above cases are the law abiding citizens.
>>However, to surpress these law abiding citizens's against opinion is the
>>only reason that the operators use the invisible wave weapon on them.
>>Such kinds of actions only prove that the invisible wave weapon are
>>intentionally used in violence, inhumane, and crime by the operators and
>>it is definitely not the "Peace Tool".
>
Peace can mean many things. Is not the graveyard peaceful? Is not the
stillness of a sterile, empty room peaceful? It is the will of the Emperor
that we bring Peace, AND Order, to the Galaxy.
>Why do you believe that you are so special? Why do you think that we
>are singling you out? You are Just Another Agitator. We Watch You,
>to make sure you do not cause Trouble. We Do Not Service Family
>Members Who Are Not Involved in the Rebellious Instance. They Are
>Happy Citizens. Our Tools Are Not Weapons. They Are Used for Peace
>and Harmony. They Are Peace Tools.
>
>>>We do not abuse the Tools.
>
>>Comparing with above cases, readers have known that your words are full
>>with the lies.
>
>Your Accusations Will Not Go Unnoticed.
>
>>>> > You have been warned before about using your Labor Station
>>>> >terminal to disseminate your lies to the Freedom Loving Citizens of
>>>> >the World.
>
>>>> No! I never tell the lies in my articles but only tell the facts and
>>>> truth with my best knowledge.
>>>> However, the mind control operators did warn me before. That's
>>>> because my articles has exposed the secrets of mind control technology.
>>>> I do appreciate you to admit it openly that mind control operators
>>> have warned me.
>
>>>It is useless to protest your innocence,
>>> We at *AHFUC* know, and all true Freedom Loving Citizens of the World
>>>know that you are naught but a devious and cunning but ultimately
>>>inconsequential disinformation agent of the Secret Hidden Intelligence
>>>Triangle. Do not deny this. We have files and we have files about those
>>>files.
>
>>The above words are full with lies and false accusing.
>>That's because I have received the clean record of my self in the FBI
>>files after I request it from the FBI.
>
(Snicker), and whom do you suppose maintains the files for the FBI?
>>Since you are openly and intentionally false accusing me on Internet,
>>you have commited the crime of slander and liber.
>>I will keep the rights to sue you while it is necessary and the
>>readers of Internet are the witnesses.
>>You better be careful in your words!
>
>We Do Not Slander. We Do Not "False Accuse". You Are the One Who
>Spreads Lies! You Are So Funny!!! I Laugh! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>
>>>> Very well, do you know that this time they will use the infrasound
>>>> weapon or chronal gun to attack me?!
>>>> However, your opened threat is a crime and the internet readers are
>>>> the witnesses. Since you openly use the Itelligence Officer title
>>>> to warn me without getting problem, you and the intelligence officers
>>>> will be the suspect if anything (or injury) happen on me.
>
>>>We did not threaten you, #59875. No threat was made.
>
Agent #999! It is forbidden for a subject to become associated with
his number! You must issue a new number for this subject immediately!
>>Yes. you did.
>>You have said that "you must be punished."
>>Everyonre knows that it could be a threat of using the violennce to
>>attack a person.
>
>"Punishment", in the Way of Computer-1, means to Learn From Mistakes.
>You Will Learn from your Mistakes, and so become a Happy and
>Productive Citizen.
>
>>> Only a statement to the effect that you will now be contacted by our
>>>Control Agents and disciplined.
>
>>Your words obviously violate the freedom of speech rights of
>>US Constitution.
>
>We Are the Constitution
>
>>> This was not a threat. It was a notification.
>
>>We didn't know that the censorship has become the legal thing in
>>United Sates.
>>Before the "freedom of speech rights be removed from the US
>>Constitution, please close your big mouth!
>
WE HAVE REDEFINED THE MEANING OF THE WORD "FREEDOM"! Check the latest
Webster's edition. In this way we can modify the consitution without
going through the legislative branch.
>Computer-1 Dictates What is Helpful for Citizens. What is Not Helpful
>is Eliminated.
>
>>> What Tool of Peace is used will be determined when the
>>>Discipline Hearing is concluded.
>
>>Excuse me! I never receive any notification which write from the law
>>enforcenent so far. Except I read your reply on Internet and receive your
>>reply yesterday.
>
>I Must Announce to You, #59875, that We Have Called Off the Hearing.
>You have been placed under Increased Surveillance. A Control Agent
>Cell has been assignedto Shadow you. They Will not Intervene in your
>Daily Life. They Will Only Watch and Report your Actions to Central
>Command. If you meet any Control Agents, tell them "Black Vole" #999
>says Hi!!!
>
Agent #999, you are supplying the subject with far more information than
is necessary. I think perhaps that as soon as you return to the Arctic
base, you will be downgraded to a level 3 operative and will have to
retake the FOIS 1-7 courses over again. We are most displeased with
your performance in this case.
>>> We do not injure anyone, even rebellious agitators like yourself.
>
>>I don't trust your words.
>>That's because I have be attacked with the invisible wave weapon by the
>>operators many times.
>
>It Seems that you are Hallucinating. Is this So?
>
>>>You will be disciplined. That is all. A Citizen may learn from his
>>>mistakes, and so become a Happy and Obedient Citizen of the World.
>
>>I have never commite any crime nor violate any law of United States.
>>If a law abiding citizen express his opinion to the public events is a
>>mistake, then it is a ttotaltarian regime but not the free and democracy
>>country. I certainly cannot agree with you that United States don't
>>allow a citizen to express his opinion to a public event.
>
>You May Express your Opinion. Other Citizens May or May Not Hear your
>Opinion, depending on How Computer-1 Decides. You Are Free. You Must
>Be Free. Not Being Free is Against the Law.
>
>>> For this reason we discipline you. It is for your own good. You will
>>>love us for this gift. Do not fear us.
>
This direct appeal to logic usually has little effect on such
a primal emotion as fear... Have you forgotten everything we
taught you?
>>After the operators use the infrasound weapon secretly attack me, I really
>>don't trust that your words can represent any government officer.
>>If so powerful infrasound weapon can be called the "peace Tool", any gun
>>with soundless is the "Peace Tool."
>>I hope that you can try it on you own body and enjoy it yourself.
>
>I am An Officer of AHFUC. That is All. I said Nothing More that
>That. Our Peace Tools, I Reiterate, Do Not Harm. Guns Are not Peace
>Tools. Guns Hurt. Peace Tools Help Build Constructive Behavioral
>Patterns. I have Experienced the Happiness of Peace Tool Fun many
>times. The Experiences Made Me the Citizen I am Today. Don't you
>want to be Like Me? A Happy and Helpful Citizen?
>
>>>> Freedom of speech is our citizens' Constitutional rights.
>>>> I don't think that you have rights to take it away from our citizens.
>
>>>Foolish agitator.
>>>We ARE the constitution.
>>>...................
>>> We take away no rights from any Citizens of the
>>>World. There exist no other rights. There is no need for any other
>>>rights. Obey and be Happy. Disobey and be punished. An easy choice,
>
>>Could you believe that they believe that they ARE the Constitution?
>>If their wrods is true, what kind of country the United States should be?
>
>We Are the Constitution of the New Order of Global Harmony and Total
>Accord. The Country is What you Make of It.
>
This agents words, while technically true #59875, will have little
impact on your day to day existence. It will be better for you in the
long run to forget that you heard this. Do not repeat this to others
as they will only mock you.
>Now. Return to your Cubicle. Perhaps entertain yourself with
>Educational Electronic Visual Games? Do Not Be A Trouble-Maker. It
>is not Good. Don't you want to be good? You Do. Yes. Be Happy, and
>Return to your Cubicle. Thank you for your Cooperation.
>
>Intelligence Officer #999
>Association for Happiness and Freedom Under Computer-1
>Ministry of Peace and Harmonious Order
>Office of Electronic Media Dissemination
>Disciplinary Actions Agency
>Branch BETA
>
>Computer-1 makes Citizens Happy
Subject #59875, (soon to be subject #?????), we apologize for this
agent's mishandling of your case. You were never meant to be aware
of either we or he, and as a result, we have decided to drop you to
S-Level 7, which means we will only monitor the media for instances
of your name appearing. No further contact, either via electronic
means or physical, will be made. Go about your life, and tell no-
one of what has transpired unless you wish to again be the prime
focus. This concludes our message tap. Other messages posted to
this medium will be seen by all.
- Darvos -
Subject: Re: what Newton thought
From: glong@hpopv2.cern.ch (Gordon Long)
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 11:13:48 GMT
-Mammel,L.H. wrote:
>Gordon Long wrote:
>>
>> So much discussion on such a trivial point! Anyway, Mati already
>>answered this one. You don't need to define "uniform motion" to define
>>an inertial reference frame. To give a simple example: take a rock,
>>hold it still, and let go. If the rock stays still, then you are in
>>an inertial reference frame. If the rock starts to move, then you are
>>not. No "uniform motion" involved.
>
>You have to be aware that this establishes a "locally Lorentz"
>frame, and not a Newtonian inertial frame. So why did you say it?
Why did I say it? Because it's true. And because there seems
to be confusion on this point, and because it's such a fundamental
concept.
Anyway, this point has been covered before. An inertial frame is
one in which Newton's first law holds; in other words, it's a frame in
which inertia works the way it's supposed to. Not surprisingly, this
is why it's called an inertial frame. Of course, to define it, you
have to distinguish between physical and fictitious forces (using the
"rule of thumb" that Mati described earlier), and define your inertial
frame in the absence of external physical forces.
By the way, inertial frames and Lorentz frames are the same thing.
>
>It does bring up a point that I've been mulling over, that
>"inertial frames" of infinite extent raise about as many foundational
>difficulties as "absolute space".
>
In the approximation that space is Euclidian, I don't see any
problem with inertial frames of infinite extent. I also don't see
any problem with the concept of "absolute space"; it's just that
there is no need for such a concept.
>> By the way, I'm still confused as to why anybody cares what Newton
>>thought.
>
>Well, why do you care why anybody cares? Too late to say you don't!
>You read the thread.
>
Okay. I'll just state that I don't particularly care what Newton
thought. It's not relevant to to anything that I consider important
(such as physics, for example).
- Gordon
--
#include
Gordon Long | email: Gordon.Long@cern.ch
CERN/PPE |
CH-1211 Geneva 23 (Switzerland) |
Subject: Re: Vietmath War: Wiles FLT lecture at Cambridge
From: JC
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 10:08:33 +0000
ghidrah wrote:
>
> > The mathematics literature even up to this date, is horribly lacking
> > in any elementary discussions of p-adics, what they are, how to
> > multiply and divide with them. There strange characteristics. Why this
> > lack? The answer is that noone but me ever thought they were anything
> > more than a extension. I am the first to realize that they are the
> > Naturals themselves, and that the Finite Integers were a field of
> > ghosts, or angels that fit on the end of a needle.
> >
> Jean Pierre Serre has a book called "A Course in Arithmetic" where he
> speaks of many of the elementary properties of p-adic integers. This book,
> I think, is something of a standard in the subject.
AP has also written several, er, 'papers' on the p-adics, where he makes
little or no sense. These papers, I think, are somewhat non-standard in
the subject.
Subject: Re: Time & space, still (was: Hermeneutics ...)
From: andrew@cee.hw.ac.uk (Andrew Dinn)
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 1996 16:27:51 GMT
Russell Turpin (turpin@cs.utexas.edu) wrote:
: Jeff Inman (jti@coronado.santafe.edu) wrote:
: > The step between CM and GR may be "well defined, explicit, and clear"
: > without implying that the metaphysical underpinings of CM are clearly
: > continuous with those of GR. It only works in retrospect, as a sort
: > of "fixing" of what was understood in the past. But, in fact, the
: > nature of what an "object" was in CM and what it is in GR is vastly
: > different. Before you can understand what Newton means when he speaks
: > of an "object", you must enter a different world. ...
: Nonsense.
: GR can extend CM only *because* they share common, operational
: notions of time, space, and many other common concepts. For both
: Einstein and Newton, time is measured by regular physical
: processes, i.e., clocks. If Newton were to pop forward to the
: 20th century, he would NOT say of GR: What a strange concept of
: time! It uses the same operational concept he used, indeed, the
: same operational concept used by every chef in boiling an egg.
: Rather, he would say: so a clock accelerated away and back
: *really* runs at a different rate from the one that stayed in
: place? The amazing thing is NOT the "metaphysical underpinning,"
: which hasn't changed one bit, but a surprising fact about how
: time works across great distances and changes in speed.
Err, ... nonsense.
The notion of time used in GR is based on the motion of light just as
the notion of distance is based on the wavelength of light. Newton's
notions of space and time are based on a big stick in a glass case and
a mechanical device with a particular period of oscillation.
Operationally (which Russell is so keen to stress) these are utterly
distinct notions as they are based on distinct practices (of
measurement). Pragmatically, they consistently arrive at the same
outcomes when employed by scientists. To the extent that in almost all
cases where it is possible to employ either form of measurement
whichever one is chosen will be deemed acceptable by all scientists.
Andrew Dinn
-----------
And though Earthliness forget you,
To the stilled Earth say: I flow.
To the rushing water speak: I am.
Subject: Announce: Neutron Bomb--Its Unknown History and Moral Purpose
From: schneik@azstarnet.com (Conrad Schneiker)
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 03:29:34 LOCAL
New Book Available--Download for Free
Provocative, Educational, Entertaining, Enlightening
THE FATHER OF THE NEUTRON BOMB,
THE MOST MORAL WEAPON EVER INVENTED:
The Life and Times of the Neutron Bomb Inventor,
Sam Cohen
Sam Cohen is retired after a forty year career in nuclear
weapon issues. During World War II he was assigned to the
Manhattan Project at Los Alamos. After the war he joined the
RAND Corporation as a nuclear weapon analyst. In the course
of his work he developed the technical/military concept of
the "neutron bomb" in 1958.
He has consulted with the Los Alamos and Livermore nuclear
weapon laboratories, the U.S. Air Force, and the Office of
the Secretary of Defense. He has authored numerous articles
and books over the years, dealing with nuclear issues.
This is a great book. If you are interested in nuclear
weapons technology, scientific geniuses, military policy,
intelligence issues, 20th century US history, and behind-
the-scenes politics, you will find this a fascinating and
enlightening book. Sam Cohen is a variously blunt,
brilliant, witty, down-to-earth iconoclast who pulls no
punches. But whether you are offended or not, whether you
are outraged or not, whether you agree or not, you are sure
to re-think some crucially important life-and-death issues,
and to get an unvarnished real-world perspective that is
nowhere else available.
You can view the Table of Contents and get an original copy
of this book from this web site:
http://www.azstarnet.com/~schneik
The download files are compressed (your choice of either
*.exe self-expanding archive format or *.zip format)
versions of a Microsoft Word 7.0 file. These files should be
readable (and printable) under MS Windows NT, MS Windows 95,
and MS Windows 3.1.
Subject: Re: has Einstein's theories helped the world?
From: meron@cars3.uchicago.edu
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 20:53:56 GMT
In article <328B7096.6D0A@eskimo.com>, Stephen La Joie writes:
>Wayne Throop wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>> With a similar strength of foundational connection, for the want of
>> special relativity, QED would be lost, for the want of QED, lasers and
>> transistors would be lost, for the want of lasers and transistors, the
>
>[snip]
>
>Didn't QED come after the invention of the transistor?
As far as I know, it did. You've just witnessed an all too typical
event. Somebody invents something, empirically, science comes and
explains the invention, then takes credit for it (now, where did I
read the claim about how "thermodynamics made the invention of steam
engines possible").
To give credit where credit is due, lasers were indeed first predicted
theoretically, with the aid of QED, then developed based on the
predictions.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
Subject: Re: The Concept of Time
From: lverdon@julian.uwo.ca (Lou Verdon)
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 07:42:56 -0500
In article , you wrote:
>Ken H. Seto (kenseto@erinet.com) wrote:
>: On Sat, 09 Nov 1996 , kenseto@erinet.com (Ken H. Seto) wrote:
>: >So why do we bother with the variable light-speed concept? Because it
>: >allows us to think in terms of absolute motion ...
>: Since there is no response to this thread, ...
>: ... I assume that the variable light-speed idea is ... valid
>...
> But I claim to be a relativist, and I regret having
>to tell you I disagree, unless you can show me whatever it
>is that is not moving.
> And I am still confused by what you mean by absolute
>time, I asked before, does that mean one second per second?
> And I thought everyone was aware the speed of light
>depended on the medium the light is moving through.
>...
>Kenneth Edmund Fischer - Inventor of Stealth Shapes - U.S. Pat. 5,488,372
Ken,
Everyone, including M&M;, believes that light has a speed
of propogation when it has none. Light propogation _is_
instantaneous if you ride the event horizon and only appears to be
delayed if your frame of reference is different. The classic
experiment should be revised to read that: in the time frame of an
observer in the ordinary earthly condition, the time frame shift
of a light event is directly proportional to the distance
traversed by the light event and is equal to 1 second per 186k
miles. We know from further work that the shift is modified by
the medium as you have pointed out.
The universal ignorance of this fact has caused much delusional
and futile speculation from warp drive to time travel and on to
the intelligent photon. Time travel is real, but only in these
terms. (i.e. 1 sec/186000 miles, by experiment)
Then the light event is the thing that does not move because
movement implies a change of position over time and no time
elapses during a light event. ...if you wish an absolute
reference.
Lou
--
Can you measure our ground potential?
