![]() |
![]() |
Back |
Joseph Edward Nemec wrote: > > > My dear Chirs, being an American, a country with an extremely low > unemployment rate, and actually having a work ethic [....] So now Joe Nemec is claiming to be an entire country, and one with an extremely low unemployment rate at that! Is there no end to the man's ego? Ian. -- Ian Paul Brawn "Electricity comes from other planets" Gentleman, Scholar and Acrobat -Lou Reed Ian.Brawn@cern.chReturn to Top
Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > > In article <32982FE5.3E3B@netcom.com> > Jim BalterReturn to Topwrites: > > > Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > > > > > Really quite simple. > > > > > > Peano Axioms > > > postulate 1: .. > > > postulate 2: .. > > > postulate 3: .. > > > postulate 4: Successor written as a SERIES > > > postulate 5: Mathematical Induction > > [...] > > > BUT, definition of P-adics is a SERIES > > > > > > therefore, substituting or replacement into the Peano Axioms are really > > > these postulates > > > > > > Peano Axioms > > > postulate 1: .. > > > postulate 2: .. > > > postulate 3: .. > > > postulate 4: p-adic SERIES > > > postulate 5: Mathematical Induction > > > > Yes, affirmation of the consequent is easy. Wrong, but easy. > > Bonehead sniping on the Net. > > What is your next bonehead snipe? Accepting a conditional is easy, > Wrong but easy. Or how about "Assuming the proof is easy, wrong, but > easy. > > I doubt you, Jim Balter knows the difference between replacement in > logic and that of substitution. These are distinct. I say this because > you obviously do not know what either one of them is. You do not know > what replacement is. And you do not know what substitution is. > If you knew what replacement or substitution were, well , Jim Baloney, > you would see that all I did was make a replacement above. I replaced > the Successor function which is the endless adding of 1 with the > identical Series, with that of the identical Series that is the > definition of p-adics. > > A simple replacement, that is all that was done above. Take a course > in night school, Jim , and learn how to "understand what you are > reading" before you make your dipstick comments. I can replace "Archimedes Plutonium" with "raving net lunatic" in any sentence containing the former, but that doesn't necessarily retain the meaning. --
Gordon Long: >>>>> First, let me ask you about the following: given A is based on B, >>>>>if B were different then A might be different also. Do you agree with >>>>>that? moggin: >>>> Sure. [...] Gordon: >>> For the sake of argument, let's assume he did import action-at-a-distance >>>from his hermetic studies (whether or not he actually did doesn't matter >>>to me). So, am I then correct in interpreting your statement above as >>>meaning that you think the gravitational formula is based on hermeticism? >>>Or are you making a distinction between "his work" and the gravitational >>>formula? moggin: >> If we say that Newton imported action-at-a-distance to physics from >>his hermetic studies (for the sake of argument), it follows that action-at- >>a-distance has its basis in a type of mysticism. I don't know how to make >>it any simpler than that. Gordon: >But this is exactly where I think you're wrong. .Given what you agreed >to above ("given A is based on B, if B were different then A might be >different also"), and given your statement "action-at-a-distance is based >on a type of mysticism", this would imply that, if it weren't for >mysticism, then the gravitational formula (aka action-at-a-distance) >wouldn't necessarily hold true. Again, sure -- but that's no disagreement. What you presumably want to attribute to me is the idea that "If it weren't for mysticism, then the gravitational formula (aka action-at-a-distance) would necessarily not hold true." But that's not implied by the statement I agreed to -- only (and somewhat distantly) by the proposition that "given A is based on B, if B were different, A would be different also." >This is obviously not the case; the gravatitional formula follows from >the physical behavior of the planets, and is completely independent of >hermeticism. In other words, the gravitational formula would necessarily >be just as accurate even if hermeticism never existed. So what? I never said that it would be inaccurate -- I claimed Newton brought the idea of action-at-a-distance to physics from his hermetic studies; for the sake of argument, we're assuming that's true. It follows that action-at-distance is at least partly based in a type of mysticism. You haven't refuted that claim -- it's not clear how you could, as long as you accept the premise. >Remember, I'm really talking about your statement "a part of physics >is based on mysticism". The physics is contained in the gravatational >formula itself -- not in Newton's motivations or in the source of his >inspiration. And this physics has no basis whatsoever in mysticism. I'm not talking about about either motivations or inspiration. Given Newton imported action-at-a-distance from hermeticism, his physics is at least partly based in mysticism, and your conclusion is false -- I'd remind you about Lew's suggestion that the premise oversimplifies things, but since we've agreed to take it as given, that doesn't matter here. -- mogginReturn to Top
In articleReturn to Top, Twisted STISter wrote: >In article , >DaveHatunen wrote: [...] >>Which brings me back to my pet peeve science error. The erroneous idea >>that the "centrifugal force" around the earth-moon center of mass is >>the cause of the tide on the side of the earth away from the moon. As I >>mentioned further back in this thread, this error has managed to find >>its way into virtually every science text used K-12, and into many >>encyclopedia. After looking at a lot of science texts, I became >>convinced that all of the authors crib their material from other >>science texts, rather than anything like an authoritative source. > >On my web page I have a lengthy description of the tidal effect which >I wrote because I saw so many incorrect answers to questions >about tides on sci.astro. This also inspired me to start a collection >of other myths in astronomy and try to correct them; thus my >"Bad Astronomy" page was born. > >The URL for the tide page is > > http://www.astro.virginia.edu/~pcp2g/tides.html Thank you. I have received several emails on this question from people who probably should have known better (one had "physics" as part of his domain name). The "centrifugal force" aspect seems to have pervaded a lot of places, and along with the web page cited above, I refer all and sundry to any physics book which discusses the tides; it will be seen that nowhere does any sort of centrifugal force or effect enter into the cause of the tides, nor does any form of rotation. The definitive explanation is to be found in Newton's *Principia*. As to the question as to whether some sort of centrifugal/centripetal efffect contributes further to the height of a tide, I have not made any calculations in that regard because this is not then a tidal effect, any more than increased tide due to hurricane storm surge. Any explanation of the tides should take the correct form; any discussion of heightening phenomena should be explained as an additional effect. A couple of the emailers suggested that the true explanation is too difficult, and the centrifugal concept is more useful pedantically. To them I say, piffle. -- ********** DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@netcom.com) ********** * Daly City California * * Between San Francisco and South San Francisco * *******************************************************
In article <57daks$lbp@forged.passport.ca>, Dan BrowneReturn to Topwrote: > >> At least you have the guts to take a fall gracefully. > >> Might be something to do with the British education perhaps. > > > >I suspect it has to do with a great deal of experience of Dunc falling > >flat on his face. After all, he is a Scotsman. > > > > You're a cheeky bastard Joe... he's english as far as I know. Get it > right. Yes indeed. Englishman born, but with a Scottish parent (hence Duncan Matheson...no shit) so I get to feel all teary eyed about my heritage, and the rolling highlands of Scotland. Braveheart posed quite the moral dilemma, as I came out of the film wanting to bash myself over the head with a large mallet. Cheers, Duncan. --
meron@cars3.uchicago.edu: >>>Since you seem unable or unwilling to answer a simple question, >>>I consider this conversation to be pointless. moggin@mindspring.com (moggin) >> It's pointless because you don't want to converse. And I won't >>insist that you do. You've got my answers, if you want to reply; >>if you don't, that's fine, too -- I didn't expect much, in any case. cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) >Notably absent among the flurry of postings, quoted repostings, and >posturings were any direct answer to the question mati asked, neither >"yes" nor "no" nor even "I haven't the foggiest and don't give a >shit". How utterly quaint. I gave several direct answers, including "It's irrelevant," which has "I don't give a shit" as a corrolary. My offer to Mati applies to you, too -- if you want to reply, I'll be glad to hear from you. And if you want to comment from the peanut gallery, then I offer you congratulations on a job well done. -- mogginReturn to Top
ZBA2410Return to Topwrites: >> >> The one other problem - how do you obtain enough energy to reach c let >> alone exceed it? >> >Who still thinks that nothing can travel faster than c??? C is just a >relative velocity, that's all. There are probably particles out there >travelling THROUGH our known matter at velicities 1000000x that of c! >(And we would never know because there is no way to prove it...) >It is possible to exceed c, but it would be easier by reducing the total >mass of the object in question - this would require less energy. >However, you face the problem of gravity wells and cosmic debri that >would - even sitting still - would render your FTL object destroyed. >There would have to be a way of avoiding hazards such as these, while >maintaining a course straight as possible... Been watching StarTrek again, eh? How much do you know about special relativity? If particles were going faster than the speed of light and do not react with normal matter, then by Occam's razor we can think of them as not existing. Besides, how can you possibly reduce the total mass of the object in question?
Le Compte de Beaudrap wrote: > > It didn't work in the USSR, nor > > China, nor Vietnam, nor Cuba, nor North Korea, nor Central America, Latin > > America, Africa, or Europe...but by God there is SOMEWHERE on the planet > > Socialism will work! > > ...Massachusetts! -- *************************************************************** Dr. Albert P. Gerheim | Sonalysts, Inc. PO. Box 280 gerheim@sonalysts.com | 215 Parkway North 1 (800) 526-8091 X 218 | Waterford, CT 06385 ***************************************************************Return to Top
In article <3299F627.650ED260@mit.edu>, Joseph Edward NemecReturn to Topwrote: > > Finished my Masters degree, thanks very much. When are you done with yours > > Joe??? > > I finished it in October. It's my second. I did mean to get it done in > May, but my research for my Ph.D. was going so well that I delayed it. > Damnit. I've been one-upped again. Revert to plab B. Cheers, Duncan --
Tim Yates <100343.3644@compuserve.com> wrote: >I have been advised that critical phenomena is an interesting >area of physics ar present. I would very much like to learn more, >however cannot find anything on the subject that allows me to >understand what the subject is about or what the phenomena are. [Text snipped by relentless moderator - jb] Consider a liquid in equilibrium with its vapor phase in a container of constant volume. Start increasing the temperature. The liquid phase expands and becomes less dense, the vapor phase becomes denser as the vapor pressure of the liquid rises. At the critical point (singular pressure and temperature) the meniscus disappears and there is only a single phase fluid. Within an epsilon of the critical point, even nanoscopic disturbances propagate to macroscopic consequences - the system is remarkably sensitive to the tiniest perturbation. Thus the >gravitational gradient< through the height of the container can trigger critical opalescence as the system fluctuates from one- to two-phase behavior and back. Many physical and electronic systems perched at the edge of phase transitions can demonstrate such remarkable amplification of small disturbances. Chaos, turbulence, positive-feedback... all sorts of good stuff can be manipulated. And the mathematical modeling is really crappy at present, making it all publishable. -- Alan "Uncle Al" Schwartz UncleAl0@ix.netcom.com ("zero" before @) http://www.ultra.net.au/~wisby/uncleal.htm (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children, Democrats, and most mammals) "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net!Return to Top
In talk.origins glong@hpopv2.cern.ch (Gordon Long) wrote: >moggin: >> >> If we say that Newton imported action-at-a-distance to physics from >>his hermetic studies (for the sake of argument), it follows that action-at- >>a-distance has its basis in a type of mysticism. I don't know how to make >>it any simpler than that. > > But this is exactly where I think you're wrong. Given what you agreed >to above ("given A is based on B, if B were different then A might be >different also"), and given your statement "action-at-a-distance is based >on a type of mysticism", this would imply that, if it weren't for >mysticism, then the gravitational formula (aka action-at-a-distance) >wouldn't necessarily hold true. This is obviously not the case; the >gravatitional formula follows from the physical behavior of the planets, >and is completely independent of hermeticism. In other words, the >gravitational formula would necessarily be just as accurate even if >hermeticism never existed. > We could let this thread go on forever without resolution. However it is taking up precious bandwidth that could be available for spam ;-) So I will try to help you (both). Moggin is using different, but perfectly reasonable, meaning for based on. Think of is as has its origins in. And remember that he is more interested in Principia as text rather than Classical Mechanics as an approach to scientific understanding. Think of this example: Shakespear's "Julius Caesar" is based on Plutarch's "Lives". This statement is just like Moggin's comment on action-at-a-distance, and possible just as true. However, the "truths" in Shakespear's play are (relatively) independent of Plutarch, much like the "truth" of Classical Mechanics is independent of that which (intellectually) gave rise to it. These "truths" are dependant only on observation. Having said this I would like to take issue with Moggin's last line. I think Moggin could make it clearer if not simpler. I suspect that Moggin is aware that they are using the words in two different manners and is just playing. If not, then you are both making the same error. > Remember, I'm really talking about your statement "a part of physics >is based on mysticism". The physics is contained in the gravatational >formula itself -- not in Newton's motivations or in the source of his >inspiration. And this physics has no basis whatsoever in mysticism. > Matt Silberstein ------------------------------------------------------- Though it would take him a long time to understand the principle, it was that to be paid for one's joy is to steal. Mark HelprinReturn to Top
In response to a query by Tracy W, Alan (Uncle Al) Schwartz wrote: "The planetary carbon-14 background tripled...and tritium is now used as a marker for groundwater and aquifer percolation." The first statement is incorrect and the second is a _non sequitur_. The global inventory of natural C-14 is about 310 megacuries. Weapons testing (through 1963) added about 6.2 megacuries; if additional testing (French, Chinese, and underground testing by other nations) is considered, an upper limit number would be 7 megacuries. This would represent a 2.26% increase in C-14 in the biosphere (planetary) as opposed to the abovementioned tripling. Dietary C-14 contributes about 1 mrem per year to the average radiation dose to humans. The fraction of that dose attributable to weapons testing would thus be about 0.023 mrem, which is roughly equivalent to the incremental annual cosmic ray dose from changing one's altitude by 30 inches (upward). Since those of us living at altitudes several thousand feet above sea level have generally lower than average cancer rates, the 0.023 mrem attributable to weapons-generated C-14 should not provoke a mass evacuation from the mountain states to lower altitudes. Tritium _is_ used as a tracer for groundwater studies, but it is _added_ to the studied system. However, in contrast to the C-14 distribution, about 90% of the global inventory is associated with weapons testing. The tritium level should approach the natural steady-state levels, i.e., 70 megacuries, by the middle of the next century. Note that the annual dose commitment from tritium is lower than that of carbon-14. Mr. Schwartz continued: "Children born downwind of Nevada tests in Utah (sic) had tremendous rates of thyroid cancer and leukemia." Examination of National Cancer Institute data for the 35-year period from 1953-1987 does not support this claim. During this period, the childhood (ages 0-14) leukemia mortality rate for Utah was 7.3% below the U.S. average, 2.75 per 100,000 per year compared to the U.S. rate of 2.91. By contrast, childhood leukemia mortality in Washington, D.C. (somewhat removed from weapons testing fallout) was 92.8% higher than the U.S. rate. Other areas with significant elevations in childhood leukemia mortality were Nebraska, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, and Michigan, with most of the in-state excesses occurring in urban areas. No Utah county had a significant excess leukemia mortality for the 35-year period; none had a significant excess in any of the seven 5-year subdivisions of the period. Childhood thyroid cancer mortality is virtually non-existent; of the 59 cases in the U.S. during the 35-year period, one occurred in Weber County (northern Utah) in the 1963-67 pentad. Neither the leukemia nor the thyroid cases appear to constitute an elevation, much less a "tremendous rate." Mr. Schwartz also stated that "almost everyone" (in a movie company filming in Utah) "so exposed eventually died of cancer, including John Wayne". This somewhat apocryphal story appears to have a life of its own. John Wayne did die of cancer, but one might consider his smoking as a more probable cause. If "everyone" in the company died of cancer, they must have been filming near ground zero at the time of the testing. For reference, note that the cancer mortality increase observed over a 50-year period in the in-city survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings was 8%. Mr. Schwartz made the query, "One would be interested to see what is happening downstream of Hanford, WA, for instance..." Happily, that information is available, again from the NCI. The mortality from all cancer types in Washington is slightly (about 2.3%) below the U.S. rate. Within the state, all downstream counties have cancer mortality _below_ the state rate, as do all of the downwind counties. --------------- Carbon-14: half-life: 5730 years; decay: 0.157 MeV beta Tritium: half-life: 12.3 years; decay: 0.0186 MeV beta Potassium-40, a primordial radionuclide contributing about 19 mrem per year to our annual dose; half-life: 1.28E9 years; decay: 1.46 MeV gamma russ brownReturn to Top
On 22 Nov 1996, Mike Asher wrote: > Mr D.F. SteeleReturn to Topwrote: > > > > : Right on! November 7 is the 79th anniversary of the Great October > > : Socialist Revolution in Russia. It turned out to be a colossal failure, > > : too. > > > > The Revolution was by communists, not socialists. Try and learn that > there > > is a difference, and you might avoid witchhunts. > > Union of Soviet Socialists Republic..hmmm.... > > But I understand your argument quite well. It didn't work in the USSR, nor > China, nor Vietnam, nor Cuba, nor North Korea, nor Central America, Latin > America, Africa, or Europe...but by God there is SOMEWHERE on the planet > Socialism will work! No doubt -- if one looks at Europe, the welfare state is turning pinker and pinker by the minute. In Canada, Universal Health Care is a religion. Socialism/Communism didn't work when it started with a bang -- but being the better system flaw for flaw, virtue for virtue, societies will inevitably tend to eveolve in its direction. It is an idea whose time has come -- we just have to be careful not to rush it. Otherwise, instead of democratic socialism (the ideal form, IMO, of socialism, and the kind of socialism that is usually attributed to the word), we end with Stalinist Fascism -- and do not doubt it was a form of fascism. BTW, Mike, I find the quote in your sig. somewhat conflicting with what you said here. But, then again, I shouldn't talk -- look at what /I/ call myself. > > -- > Mike Asher > masher@tusc.net > > "A society that puts equality ahead of freedom will end up with neither > equality nor freedom." > - Milton Friedman > > > Le Compte de Beaudrap (Niel) ---------------------- jd@cpsc.ucalgary.ca
Point #1: Are Liquids Made Of Chunks? If energy flows zig-zag between adjacent atoms, then the size of melting face-centered cubic (FCC) structures could be deduced to be chunks 20 by 20 by 20 atom layers containing 8000 atoms per chunk. I offered an experiment that could easily determine if energy in FCC structures flows zig-zag. It requires seeing if a 100 oriented FCC structure in a single 5 cm by 1.5 cm crystal of aluminum takes 10 microseconds to go 5 cm or 14 microseconds (near the melting point). If it takes 14 microseconds, then the energy traveled between atoms in zig- zag manner. I marvel at the lack of discussion on this fundamental question of how energy flows through metal elements. ----------------------------------------------------------- Point #2: Where Does The Melting Energy Go? Most books say the energy that melts solids goes to break the bonds of the solid. I say that the energy that melt solids of pure substances goes mostly to rotate the atoms. What's your opinion? Who can explain why most of the melting energy must go into rotational energy of the atoms? If liquids are made up of rotational chunks, then what mechanical analysis could explain the tremendous viscosity change from 0 to 100 C? ----------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for joining this undertaking. Good luck on this exciting adventure to find useful projects to explore and the tools to empower and to succeed with. I offer this post to continue a useful discussion on many valuable ideas about atoms that could become meaningful projects for students and others to undertake. ____________________________________________________________ Thanks to those who have offered constructive criticism. C by David Kaufman, Nov. 26, 1996 Founder of the Cube Club For Collaborative Math, Science and Ethics Excellence. Be Good, Do Good, Be One, and Go Jolly. What else is there to do? -- davk@netcom.comReturn to Top
Is anyone aware of any upper level physics courses being offered on-line. Please e-mail me with any information you may have. Thanks.Return to Top
In article <57dbsf$ud4@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> Archimedes.Plutonium@dartmouth.edu (Archimedes Plutonium) writes: < < Question: to form Euclidean 3-Space, is Reals,i,j,k essential or is < Reals, i,j essential? < < Some future physics experiment will answer that above. At this very < moment I would pick Hamilton's Reals,i,j,k. I believe that Hamilton < tried just the Reals,i,j but they failed for him until he threw in the < k. It's impossible to define multiplication "sensibly" in 3-space. J. F. Adams proved in 1960 that the only real division algebras were reals, complexes, quaternions, and Cayley numbers. -- Jan Bielawski Molecular Simulations, Inc. )\._.,--....,'``. | http://www.msi.com San Diego, CA /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. | ph.: (619) 458-9990 jpb@msi.com fL `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' | fax: (619) 458-0136 #DISCLAIMER******************************************************************# +Unless stated otherwise, everything in the above message is personal opinion+ +and nothing in it is an official statement of Molecular Simulations Inc. + #****************************************************************************#Return to Top
In articleReturn to Topmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu writes: > Does calling a certain yellow metal "gold" amounts to putting a value > on it? How about changing the name to "Aurum", or "Zahav" or "Zloto"? I don't like any of those. David "In Europe, they aren't quite that bold yet; there are stone structures there and people have something to hold on to." -Dostoievski
In article <329920DF.2B1F@wam.umd.edu>, Nick CummingsReturn to Topwrote: >bflanagn@sleepy.giant.net wrote: >> >> On 21 Nov 1996, Lee Wai Kit wrote: >> >> > bflanagn@sleepy.giant.net: >> > : R, G & B are the colors to which the photopigments in our eyes are most >> > : responsive. > > Actually that model, the tri-chomatic model is not a complete >discription. Human eyes are sensitive to 3 sets of contrasts: >red-green, violet-yellow, and black-white if I remeber correctly. And >various combinations of these sets of contrasts can produce all the >colors we experience. > > Any other color (with the exception of violet, I believe) can >> > : be formed by superimposing R, G & B according to the laws of vector >> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> > : addition. This is interesting because the photons which excite our >> > ^^^^^^^^^ > > Either way, it's still correct that one can make all the colors humans >experience by combinations of those colors. > >Nick Cummings Not true. You can't combine red and green to get a fully saturated yellow-- in fact, unless your primaries are saturated you can't get any fully saturated colors at all. The best you can do is a mix between the very pure spectral color and white. You also can't get brown by combining red, green, and blue additively. To be honest, I don't understand brown myself. All I know is that it depends on spatial contrast in the visual field. There are a few other colors like that--olive, grey, I forget what else. Have fun, breed
In article <329B2D17.925@sonalysts.com>, Al GerheimReturn to Topwrites: |> Le Compte de Beaudrap wrote: |> > > It didn't work in the USSR, nor |> > > China, nor Vietnam, nor Cuba, nor North Korea, nor Central America, Latin |> > > America, Africa, or Europe...but by God there is SOMEWHERE on the planet |> > > Socialism will work! |> > |> > |> |> ...Massachusetts! |> |> Not working, but still trying. :) Paul
On 25 Nov 1996, Hywel Owen wrote: > On a similar track, I've heard that CERN can 'see' the earth return > current from passing TGVs from the magnetic field it generates. > Has this been published? [Moderator's Note : extraneous quoted material deleted. -WGA] I don't know if it has been published externally, but we certainly see the effects of the TGV, and of the tides. The TGV current is supposed to return to ground along the tracks. Some of the currsent, however, returns through the LEP ring, affecting the energy. The tides actually raise and lower the Jura mountains, which are very close to the ring, again, shifting the energy. There is also a third effect. This is caused by the raising and lowering of the level of Lac Leman (lake Geneva) with the changing seasons. Youcan probably find something about it in the CERN courier on the web. There is a searchable index at http://www.cern.ch/CERN/Courier/ Cheers, Anthony Potts CERN, GenevaReturn to Top
Tracy WReturn to Topwrites: > >How did nuclear testing affect environment deeply? It affected the environment. I am not sure what you mean by deeply. A simple example: After the Chernobyl reactor exploded, some experimenters here in Florida were able to detect the I-131 from the radioactive cloud during its first pass around the earth. They could not detect the Cs above the background remaining from nuclear weapons tests! That is, even though atmospheric testing ended around 1963 (so the shortlived Iodine isotopes are long gone), there are still significant amounts of long-lived isotopes floating around in the atmosphere. However, apart from short-term effects to those of us exposed to Sr-90 and the like and the contamination of particular places (worst of all the production facilities), the remaining effects are quite small compared to other natural sources of exposure. -- James A. Carr | "The half of knowledge is knowing http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~jac/ | where to find knowledge" - Anon. Supercomputer Computations Res. Inst. | Motto over the entrance to Dodd Florida State, Tallahassee FL 32306 | Hall, former library at FSCW.
In article <57f45p$1d1@dfw-ixnews12.ix.netcom.com>, Alan \"Uncle Al\" SchwartzReturn to Topwrites: >erg@panix.com (Edward Green) wrote: >>In article , wrote: >>> >>>Hey, don't let anybody confuse you with the "you need GR to understand >>>it" stuff, you really don't. And the above is fine, if you multiply >>>by the mass of the bulge and develop in series, you'll get something >>>proportional to >>> >>> m*dr/r^3 >> >>Hey, linear, 1/r^3... what's a few powers of r among friends?? >> >>>which is just the standard dipol field, with m*dr being the dipol >>>moment. To do it really right you've to use vectors and you get >>>scalar products, i.e >>> >>> m* (r /dot dr)/(abs(r))^4 >>> >>>but these are technicalities. And it doesn't even take a lagrangian >>>(though I can probably get you a used one, real cheap, slightly dented >>>but just put a new tranny in it, it'll run like new) >> >>Well, ok; throw in a full tank of gas and you got a deal. >> >>Hey... I smell a sci.fi short story here. The astronaut is trapped >>inside a spherical shell of matter, with one hole. The perturbation >>of cutting the hole out of the shell creates an effective repulsive >>field. How does he get out? Of course the inside is smooth, and >>his thrusters are broken... > > >He gets out in the usual manner. Male astronauts are naturally supplied >with a steerable thruster and a periodically refilling liquid propellant >tank. Female astronauts are not Mil-Spec. Thrust vectoring must be >accomplished through externally configured instrumentatility. > (Smacking forehead), That's it. Trust Uncle Al to provide a simple and elegant solution. Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool, meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
Gordon D. Pusch (pusch@mcs.anl.gov) wrote: : In article <57d6rq$o9f@ccshst05.cs.uoguelph.ca> devens@uoguelph.ca : (David L Evens) writes: : > Well, Pusch, if you want me to give you the USENet-wide killfiling : > you seem to want, just say so and I'll never deal with you again. : Evens, I wouldn't give a _frozen fig in Finland_ whether you killfiled : me or not. As far as I'm concerned you're just the reactionary flip-side : of Scott Nudds: all venom, with _NEAR ZERO_ information content. : I've yet to see you post ANYTHING that didn't consist almost : exclusively of calling whomever you've chosen to attack things like : "stupid," "ignorant," "moron," &c.;, &c.; The fact that you do not read my postings is NOT my problem. [Rest of silliness deleted.] -- ---------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Ring around the neutron, | "OK, so he's not terribly fearsome. A pocket full of positrons,| But he certainly took us by surprise!" A fission, a fusion, +-------------------------------------------------- We all fall down! | "Was anybody in the Maquis working for me?" ---------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- "I'd cut down ever Law in England to get at the Devil!" "And what man could stand up in the wind that would blow once you'd cut down all the laws?" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This message may not be carried on any server which places restrictions on content. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ e-mail will be posted as I see fit. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------Return to Top
Richard A. Schumacher (schumach@convex.com) wrote: : >Why not simply say that each observer uses clocks that are set : >out-of-true in proportion to his absolute speed ? : In that case you are implicitly defining the rod's rest frame : as "absolute". This serves no useful purpose. It's even worse than that: He's insisting that absolute is relative. (Follow it through: Observations are different due only to the difference in absolute motion. But the difference in absolute motion is only the relative motion. Clever trick, but one that also destroys the entire basis of his claims.) -- ---------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- Ring around the neutron, | "OK, so he's not terribly fearsome. A pocket full of positrons,| But he certainly took us by surprise!" A fission, a fusion, +-------------------------------------------------- We all fall down! | "Was anybody in the Maquis working for me?" ---------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- "I'd cut down ever Law in England to get at the Devil!" "And what man could stand up in the wind that would blow once you'd cut down all the laws?" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This message may not be carried on any server which places restrictions on content. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ e-mail will be posted as I see fit. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------Return to Top
On Tue, 26 Nov 1996, ZBA2410 wrote: > > > > The one other problem - how do you obtain enough energy to reach c let > > alone exceed it? > > > Who still thinks that nothing can travel faster than c??? C is just a > relative velocity, that's all. There are probably particles out there > travelling THROUGH our known matter at velicities 1000000x that of c! > (And we would never know because there is no way to prove it...) > > It is possible to exceed c, but it would be easier by reducing the total > mass of the object in question - this would require less energy. > However, you face the problem of gravity wells and cosmic debri that > would - even sitting still - would render your FTL object destroyed. > There would have to be a way of avoiding hazards such as these, while > maintaining a course straight as possible... > > -------------------=================**************C > > > I think it is possible for a particle to get a higher speed than light. But we need to wait at least a few decades before the beginning of the proof. I mean in few decades, some scientists will see particles moving with a velocity higher than C.Return to Top
In articleReturn to Top, singtech@teleport.com says... > >In article <568rnn$m70@agate.berkeley.edu>, tessien@oro.net (Ross Tessien) >wrote: > >>I get such a hypothetical system to have 3*3*2*2 = 24 degrees of freedom. > >Huh? 3*3*2*2 = 24? Pretty dumb error!!! Oh well, I guess that is what I get for just throwing stuff at the page and forgetting to double check the number. But that was not what my question was about (ergo the lack of paying attention to that multiplication). In any case, the question still holds despite the solution being 36 in the above. The question is, are the "Dimensions" of string theory in essence **degrees of freedom** of the system of strings, or are they physical dimensions in the sense of length and time? Ross Tessien
schumach@convex.com (Richard A. Schumacher) wrote [in part]: >>Why not simply say that each observer uses clocks that are set >>out-of-true in proportion to his absolute speed ? >In that case you are implicitly defining the rod's rest frame >as "absolute". This serves no useful purpose. It serves the very useful purpose of telling the truth. **Jones, B** bjon@ix.netcom.comReturn to Top
In articleReturn to Top, John E. Davis wrote: >You might try using gcc. For example, the following code > >#include >#include > >int main () >{ > __complex__ double z; > double z2; > > z = 3.0 + 4.0i; > > z2 = z * ~z; > > fprintf (stdout, "z = %f + i%f; |z|^2 = %f\n", > __real__ z, __imag__ z, z2); > > return 0; >} > >produces: > >z = 3.000000 + i4.000000; |z|^2 = 25.000000 Yes, but none of the standard math functions work correctly, and even worse, no errors or warnings are printed if you try: $ cat foo.c #include #include int main() { __complex__ z = 1.0i; printf ("exp(%gi) = %g + %gi\n", __imag__ z, __real__ exp(z), __imag__ exp(z)); return 0; } $ gcc -Wall foo.c -lm $ ./a.out exp(1i) = 1 + 0i It appears that exp() (and sin()) just take the real part of it's argument, ignoring the imaginary part. -- "Unix is simple and coherent, but it takes || Wayne Hayes, wayne@cs.utoronto.ca a genius (or at any rate, a programmer) to || Astrophysics & Computer Science appreciate its simplicity." -Dennis Ritchie|| http://www.cs.utoronto.ca/~wayne
lanterfReturn to Topwrote: > >Alan Yu wrote: >> From: black999@vexation.net (Intelligence Agent #999) >> Subject: Re: freedom of privacy & thoughts >> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 09:36:14 GMT >> Organization: Association for Happiness and Freedom Under Computer- >Dear Readers, ..... >Hello there, >................... > I hope this message reaches you all. Please help me, tell me more about >mind-control and how to fight it. OK! I will try to offer you some information about mind control with below article. (attachment) =============================================== "Why does our society have the mind control system?" As mentioned on many previous articles, after the Korean War, the United States develop its own mind control technologies and system based on the mind control technologies of Soviet Union during the 1950s. In 1973, the United States developed of the EMR mind machine (In Taiwan's Classified military documents, this machine is referred to as "psychological language machine") and sold it to many of its allies to locate communist spies and prevent the spread of communism. Unfortunately, since this type of technologies were originally developed in Soviet Union, the "free countries" was never able to use this technologies against the communists spies. This is because the communist spies were trained to counter this type of technologies (and not be discovered with mind machine -- since the Communist countries have these mind machine as well). This is why the KGB spy, Aldrich Ames (a former CIA agent) was never captured although he had worked for the Russians for more than ten years (He was finally captured because the Soviet Union had collapsed). I believe that Ames would still be living his double-agent life if the Soviet Union had not collapsed because the KGB would assist in protecting his "true identity". In addition, these "free countries" also found that this mind control system cannot help to capture criminals because these criminals have no fixed addresses, use stolen cars as transportation, use only cash (even without bank account), and sometime don't even have ID (illegal immigrants) or use fake ID while commite crime, etc. Therefore, the mind control system cannot track these people, "work" on these people, and predict when the criminals would commit crimes. This is why the crime rate has never been significantly reduced in our society. Finally, these security system officers know that this mind (machine) control system can only work on the law abiding citizens because they have fixed addresses, fixed working place, always carry their ID, drive their own car, etc.(they migh sincerely trust the security officers and law enforcement officers). Therefore, the mind control operators can easily track them and spy on them. On the other hand, general public always request more rights of freedom & democracy from the government. People eagerly want more freedom and hope their government can reduce its power to limit people's activities. However, the security system officers of a government want to control people more effectively. So people want more freedom but the security system's officers of the government need more powers to control people. In order to balance these two different opinions, therefore, some of the intelligence officers offered the politicians an intelligent option. Especially in the Vienant War of 1960s, there was lot of protester on the street to against the governmenal foreign policy. Some people also fought with the law enforcement officers on the street. Therefire, the security officers believe that the intelligence agents and the law enforcement officers should use more advanced technologies (mind machine and other mind control technologies which does not arousing people's attention and leaves no evidence of their crime) to investigate, spy, and control the people. Although people are guranteed rights from the law and Constitution (which promise to protect them and limited the government's powers), these rights are violated by the security system career officers and mind control operators (when they have access to state of art technology) without public's knowledge. Since these kinds of state of art technologies can be used to spy & control people's lives without people's knowledge, this means the operator cannot be held responsible by laws for their criminal actions of violating people's civil and human rights (because the publics are not aware of the operators' criminal actions and technologies allow them to leave no evidence). So you can also say that these corrupted srecurity system's officers have betrayed the trust of law abiding citizens on them. Under such kind of situation, the mind (machine) control system can be secretly built in these freedom & democratic countries. Mow I would show readers some information to support my words. As early as 1970, Zbigniew Brzezinski, later National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter, predicated a "more controlled and directed society" would gradually appear, linked the technology. This society would be dominated by an elite group which impresses voters by allegedly superior scientific know-how. Unhindered by the restraints of traditional liberal values, this elite would not hesitate to achieve its political ends by using the latest modern techniques for inflencing public behavior and keeping society under close surveillance and control ( it is also a tip that mind control technologies has made remarkble success and can be use in our society). Technical and scientific momentum would then feed on the situation it exploits. Brzezinski predicted (see page 200 on _Angels Don't Play This HAARP_). In August 1971, there is a entire nation surveillance security system program proposal submitted to the President Nixon. It proposed to "wire" every "house", "car", and "boat" in America. The plan included a blueprint for a government- operated propaganda system via a TV network that would have linked every state, city, and home. (See page 181 on the"Uncloaking the CIA") Although this program wasn't accepted At that time. It did prove that they did have this plan and should have the technology to accomplish it for a long time. How could they propose to "wire" every house, car and boat in American? It must use the radio wave or low radiation wave to network these objects (house, car, boat, etc.), otherwise, they cannot achieve this goal. This program has proven that these security officers have the technology to use the low radiation wave or radio wave to "wire" the house, car, boat, etc. (via a TV network that would have linked every city, state, home) since 1971. In 1980, the US Senate passed the Intelligence Oversight Act of 1980. This Bill include establishing no standards for covert operations or employment of academics, clergymen or journalists as spies or informers and no penalty for the public disclosure of agents working for the US. (See page 73 on "CIA"-by Brian Freemantle) The above Bill already prove that the Intelligence Agencies were allowed to build the entire nation surveillance system ( as the entire nation surveillance system plan of the former President Nixon) if they could operate it covertly ( the surveillance suystem operating way please see my previous article--The surveilliancre system in US). After the Red Russia collapsed, US has acquired more technologies by purchasing mind control equipments from Russia. This will increase the security system officers' powers and abilities to invade people's privacy, influence their thoughts, and manipulate their lives. (attachment) =============================================================== NEW WORLD ORDER E.L.F. PSYCHOTRONIC TYRANNY By: C.B. Baker YOUTH ACTION NEWSLETTER ISSUED DECEMBER 1994 -------------------------------------------------------------- The 3\1\93 issue of Time Magazine reported: "American and Russians are discovering common interest...MIND CONTROL TECHNOLOGY. The Jan. 11-17, 1993 issue of DEFENSE NEWS reported that U.S. political and military officials are obtaining Soviet mind-control technology. The Soviet KGB "capability, demonstrated in a series of laboratory experiments dating back to the mid-1970's, could be used to suppress riots, CONTROL DISSIDENTS, demoralize or disable opposing forces and enhance the performance of friendly special operations teams, sources say." The 4\94 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN reported that Janet E. Morris and her husband Christopher C. Morris "have been involved in promoting a psycho-correction' technology, developed by a Russian scientist, that is INTENDED TO INFLUENCE BY MEANS OF SUBLIMINAL MESS AGES EMBEDDED IN SOUND OR VISUAL IMAGES." In 1993, "the Morrises organized a meeting in which the technology was demonstrated for U.S. scientists and officials by its Russian inventor." (Infrasound mind machine--Alan Yu note) Defense news reported that on Dec. 15, 1992, Janet Morris stated that she and the Richmond, Virginia-based International Health-line Corporation "have briefed senior U.S. intelligence and Army officials about the Russian capabilities, which Morris said could include hand-held devices for purposes of special operations, crowd control and anti-personal actions." Morris reported that this particular weapon (Infrasound mind machine--Alan Yu note) creates "BONE-CONDUCTING SOUND WAVES that cannot be offset by protective gear These devices appear to work at the Very Low Frequency (VLF) spectrum, the same frequency range as generated by the sinister U.S. Gwen (Ground Wave Emergency Network) system of transmitters. DEFENSE ELECTRONICS reported that a Richmond, Virginia firm, Psychotechnologies (believed to be closely tied to the CIA and the FBI) has purchased the American rights to the Soviet mind-control devices. The 3/23/94 WASHINGTON POST reported: "The Pentagon and the Justice Department have agreed to share state-of-the-art military technology with civilian law enforcement agencies, including exotic 'non-lethal' weapons." "In March, 1993, the National Institute of Justice [NIJ]--(an office of Justice Department), issued a report titled: "NIJ Initiative On Less-Than-Lethal Weapons." The Department is now encouraging local and state police organizations to utilize Soviet-KGB psychotronic, electromagnetic and mind control weapons against their local citizenry. Targets for these KGB weapons include "domestic disturbances" meaning that mind-control devices are even to be utilized against family arguments." The reports [the NIJ report] stated: "Short-term research will be completed TO ADOPT MILITARY TECHNOLOGIES TO USE BY DOMESTIC LAW ENFORCEMENT...including LASER, MICROWAVE, AND ELECTROMAGNETIC" WEAPONS. DEFENSE ELECTRONICS reported that a Richmond, Virginia firm, Psychotechnologies (believed to be closely tied to the CIA and the FBI) has purchased the American rights to the Soviet mind-control devices. ========================================================= Although our Constitution still guarantee people's privacy & rights, the above information has proven that security agents and law enforcement officers have enough mind control eqipuments to use on unawared people (leave no evidence of violating the law). Therefore, consiracy indeed exists in our society. The below report shows that FBI has used the mind control weapon at Waco. ======================================================= The 7\93 issue of DEFENSE ELECTRONICS discussed the FBI's use of Soviet KGB psychotronic devices against the Branch Dividians at Waco, Texas. There is strong evidence that such weapons were used. After the Feds launched their mass-murdering, flame-throwing attack, some members of David Koresh's church attempted to flee the burning building, but soon as they got outside, they suddenly turned around and ran back INTO the fire--which demonstrated an extreme mental disorientation of the type created by psychotronic mind control weapons. The few victims who survived the fire were visibly confused and unable to talk coherently or move. Prior to the massacre, the Feds targeted the church building with a night and day acoustical barrage (that included the sounds of dying animals and low frequency sound devices). The Feds also utilized a super-strobe light show (pulsed at ELF frequencies). =============================================== The religion of David Koresh and his followers might not be true Christianity, and anyone can disagree with him. However, these people are still protected by our Constitution. The above information proves that the mind control equipments indeed has been abused on our civilians. To reduce crimes & keep our country in safety is not the only duty of security officers, but also the wish of general publics. However, it still need to be achieved through legal way, especially when these kinds of mind control system are used on law abiding citizens. Therefore, these kinds of activities CANNOT violate CONSTITUTION. Otherwise, it is not reducing the crimes but increasing the crimes if the security officers violate the law first. Unfortunately, current security officers do not have such kind of idea while they enforce the law. What's the worse, most of them believe that they are the law. So, the law can only be interpreted by them and they believe that their interpretation is the correct interpretation. NO! THIS IS ABSOLUTELY WRONG! In order to enforce the law, one must follow the law first. If one doesn't follow the law, then their action is not enforcemnt of the law but violation of the law. Example: If a male police officer is checking if a female is carrying a weapon, does the law allows the police officer to intentionally sexually harass the female by touching private body (when he is enforcing the law)? I must emphasize that this mind (machine) control system is mostly used on the law abiding citizens. These corrupted officers don't confront the robbers, felons, etc. who carry the guns to threaten the police officers' lives on the streets. Since these corrupted officers and carreer mind control operators are not facing emergency situation (life and death) when they are using mind machines on law abiding citizens, these officers CANNOT be allowed to use "invisible wave weapons" (chronal gun, infrasound, and microwave weapons) to injure the people. Unless these corrupted security officers can also follow the law & Constitution while they enforce the law, their activities are the same as criminal crimes. Unfortunately, current mind control operastors (including these corrupted officers) have seriously violated law (See mentioned cases later) Under these circumstances, if law abiding citizens believe that the CONSTITUTION AND LAWS can protect them, then these people would be "betrayed" by the corrupted security officers (those officers who believe they are the law or above the law). This is because the law and Constitution will protect the people when it is properly enforced. Since these corrupted officers do not properly enforce the law, these mind control operators have abused their powers to harass the people. Such kinds of case have been reported in "Microwave Harassment & Mind Control Experimentation" by Jullianne McKinney. (attachment) =========================================================== One dividual (driven to extremes of stress by ongoing electronic harassment focusing on her children) killed one child in an effort to protect her from further pain. Another individual, during a telephone conversation, was told by an employee of a local power company that , if she value the lives of her children, she would drop the her opposition to the company's installation of high power lines. Since receiving that threat, the individual 11-year-old daughter has been reduced to extrrement of illness which cannot be diagnosed. It's now also apparent to this invidual that her three-year-old son is on the receiving end of externally induced auditory input. (DoE figures prominently in this case.) ================================================================= What's the worse, when unawared people bring such kinds of cases to authorities, they might be accused as "mentally disturbed" persons. This kind of situation has been reported in "Microwave Harassment & Mind control expermientation" by Julinna McKinny. (attachment)--Page 10 =============================================================== FBI spokesmen do acknowledge that they have received a large number of requests for assistance from those people who believe that they are "zapped by (invisible) waves" and/or "hearing voices." ================================================================= According to above report, these cases have been dismissed and these persons are only treated as "mentally disturbed." Why? Accoring to their orignal design of using advance technologies to investigate people and violate their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS without people's knowledge, they would deny the existence of such technologies if any victim becomes aware of the harassment. Also, accusing the victims (who complaint of being zapped by invisible waves, etc.) as insane is the best way to deny and misled the publics into dismissing these cases. So, the general publics would not become aware of the situation. These corupted security system's officers believe that if they can keep people from knowing of being spied upon and manipulated their lives through the state of art technology, the corrupted officiers can have unlimited powers to surveiliant and control people. In order to protect their "unlimited" power to surveillant and control people, these corrupted officers would kill anyone who find out their secrets of criminal mind (machine) control system. By doing so, it will also hide the crimes of these corrupted officers and the mind control system from being discovered. Furthermore, since the United States mind control system and technologies was first learned from Soviet Union (in the 1950s), the U.S. has inherited the evil philosophies of Stalin and Mao: The regime's power comes from the nozzle of the gun. They don't allow anyone to live normally (or even stay alive) if one is aware of these illegal mind machine (spy and control lives) system unless this person is a member of mind contol operators. The corrupted officers should have assured themselves or their partners that they won't be arrested because some of them are also the law enforcers. Therefore, the mind control operators have never be arrested even when they killed law abiding citizens (with invisible wave weapons). In determining the people's lives and health, these mind control operators have incredible power. Their criminally acquired power is greater than that of the Judge or even the President of the United States of America. This is because the Judge must follow the law in order to order an execution and only the criminal can be executed. The President of United States only have the power to pardon individual and do not have the power to order execution. Yet, these corrupted officers can executed even law abiding citizens with invisible wave weapons without following the law! The President of the United States of America is the highest office of the executive branch of America, this officer does not have the power to order execution. I would like to ask, who granted these corrupted officers their unlawful power?!! So the most terrible thing under the circumstance is that the mind control operators (few individuals) can determine the law abiding citizens' lives and health without due process of law (see examples in cases reported in Microwave Harassment). Since the corrupted security officers prepare to use the state of art technology (invisible wave weapon) to illegally supress the awared people, it has showed that these corrupted officers and career mind control operators are fully prepared to commit crimes to cover-up their criminal actions. Therefore, the current conspiracy in our society exist as below. When people are aware of the mind control system and the crimes of corrupted officers (violation of civil and human rights), these corrupted officers would commit more serious crime on the aware people to suppress these people. It means that the mind control operators would use invisible wave weapons to torture awared people, or their children, or even kill the law abiding citizen in order to supress them and avoid having their criminal actions exposed. Furthermore, the currepted security system's officers will openly deny that they are involved in these cases of mind control victims. These operators will not admit their crimes or just remain silence believing in that their state of art technologies would not leave any evidences. Also, from the indirect way, the recurilted scientists will mislead our society and assist these corrupted officers to deny that these kinds of technologies can be invented and employed currently. Why? These security officers might know that general public do not trust them because low creditibilities. Thus, not only are these kinds of victims' lives not protected by law (without external injuries evidences to bring their cases to court) but authorities will also accuse these victims as "mentally disturbed" persons if these victims bring their cases to the authorities. Since the local law enforcement are the basic unit of mind control, it means that these law enfircement officres won't arrest any mind control operator for people. That's because these operators are either themselves or their partners (under-cover agents & civilian career operators--most are female). And this is why the law enfircement officers have never captured a mind control operator till now, although a lot of businesss stores have used the mind machine and microwave voices equipments on people before 1981 (According to the information of the 1981 House Representative Hearing"). Some peopple might confuse that how the law enforcement officers direct these civilans career operators to play the mind control? I would further explain it to you. The local (county or city) mind control central station should be under the administration of local enforcememnt officers. These career operators (most operators work at night) work together with these law enforcement officers everyday. So these officer can direct them to use these equipments or use which kind of tactics to play a mind game. When the mind game are played on the outside (shopping center or mall, bussiness stores, etc.), the siren of police car, fire truck, or ambulance can be used as the signals to notify the local cooperators to stop the game or change the role. That's because people will believe that the car accidents, the traffic violations, or fire can happen in anytime. So these kinds of siren will not be surprise them or attract too much attentions from unawared people. So when people hear the sounds of the siren of police car, fire truck, or ambulance but didn't see any car accident, traffic violation, or fire, then they might be playing the mind games on a target in this area. Since Red Russia collapsed, the security officers of US has purchased more effective mind control equipments for these mind control operators, people should know how to protect their constitution rights. That's because people's privacy rights has been invaded, people's lives has been threatened (people's lives can be maipulated without knowing) by the operators with the state of art technology (please read my previous article to see the detail---"People's (American) dreams is only a illusion if they are not the member of mind control operators). Dear citizens, I would repeat that I tell the truth & facts with my best knowledge in God's name. I would be responsible for my words to the God because I know it is true. Since this mind (machine) control system (surveilliance & manipulation people's lives system) neither can find the spy nor can reduce the crimes, it means this system can only produce more priviliges for corrupted security officers (intelligence agents, law enforcement officers, etc.) and offer the privileges for civilian career mind control operators to spy, injure, and kill unawared law abiding citizens. If you disagree with such kinds of situation, why we don't change it?! >Can you also tell me about medicines that they can use to influence my >way of thinking. It is called LSD. >This is a serious message. Don't try the LSD, it is a serious message. >Bart =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Alan Yu The first objective of mind control organization is to manipulate people's lives in order to eliminate their opponents or enemies secretly (die as if natural cause). The mind (machine) control system is the national security system of Taiwan from late of 1970s and should be the same in US or lots free countries. Accusing other as insane without evidence is the "trademark" of mind control organization. (If any law enforcement officer declare anyone as "insane" and the social security department do not put these individual in the welfare program as diable person, then it only represent a kind of political suppression or false accusation to discredit someone. That' because the local law enforcement is the basic unit of mind control) The shorter the lie is, the better it is. So, the liar can avoid inconsistency and mistakes that other people can catch. Only the truth will triumph over deception and last forever. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Jim Carr wrote: | | Peter DiehrReturn to Topwrites: | > | >You cannot derive Planck's constant from Maxwell's equations. | | True, but you can get it if you apply the principles of | statistical mechanics to those equations. Mikko Levanto writes: > >What combination of constants of these two theories >is equal to Planck's constant? I should have been clearer that I was talking about the discreteness of the quanta. More importantly, your question made me realize that I don't remember the relation between the Wien density and classical electromagnetism, which is the key step leading up to the application of stat mech to treat that as a density of particles rather than of waves. -- James A. Carr | "The half of knowledge is knowing http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~jac/ | where to find knowledge" - Anon. Supercomputer Computations Res. Inst. | Motto over the entrance to Dodd Florida State, Tallahassee FL 32306 | Hall, former library at FSCW.
In article <57dbsf$ud4@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> Archimedes.Plutonium@dartmouth.edu (Archimedes Plutonium) writes: < Clifford Algebra is essential to Dirac Equation. < < Dirac Equation is more general than the Schroedinger Eq. Plus the Dirac equation is relativistic, the Schroedinger equation isn't. < In the < Schroedinger Eq. the particle is a point, whereas in the Dirac Eq. the < particle has internal parts; these internal parts are described by < these gamma matrices. Not parts; more like extra degrees of freedom. -- Jan Bielawski Molecular Simulations, Inc. )\._.,--....,'``. | http://www.msi.com San Diego, CA /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. | ph.: (619) 458-9990 jpb@msi.com fL `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' | fax: (619) 458-0136 #DISCLAIMER******************************************************************# +Unless stated otherwise, everything in the above message is personal opinion+ +and nothing in it is an official statement of Molecular Simulations Inc. + #****************************************************************************#Return to Top
Michael Zeleny wrote: > > rafael cardenas huitlodayo writes: > >Silke-Maria Weineck wrote: > > >>Who's arguing from authority now... I'm reasonably conversant with this > >>stuff, and you haven't answered my questions. The value "of truth" isn't > >>even touched by these theories; even if _some_ truth-finding is > >>_conducive_ to survival, that doesn't mean "the value of truth is > >>implicit in our best biological theories." > > >Surely _if_ we treat the organism as an entity capable of making > >decisions and > >seeking goals, and we assert that its 'goal' is (or appears to be) > >'survival', then on a standard sub-Aristotelian teleological ground the > >value to it of 'truth', i.e. a correct appreciation of its environment > >which enables it > >to avoid mistakes, is indisputable. As g*rd*n pointed out much more > >succinctly in > >a parallel thread. > > > >The problem, however, is how a science which in some form admits only > >efficient > >causes (e.g. physics since the 17th century) can establish the > >reality of final causes. We can say that the organism functions 'as if' > >it seeks > >goals, but that is only one step removed from saying that the > >evolutionary process, > > or inanimate systems and bodies, function 'as if' they seek goals, > >which both biology > >and physics deny. > > Not really. Monod's book on chance and necessity is most typical of > biological acknowledgment of apparent final causality, which has been > since vulgarized in the pop genre by Dawkins et alii. Assuming that 'Not really' refers to 'which both biology and physics deny', it doesn't cover the point: Dawkins illustrates very clearly the dichotomy above, since he attributes final causation to the 'gene', but not to the evolutionary process (e.g. 'climbing mt. improbable'.) But if we deny one, how can we accept the other? And if we accept final causation for physical objects, what price traditional scientific methodology? > >>Vlastos is hardly the last word on Socrates... it's on the same level as > >>Nehamas on Nietzsche. In any case, you have, once again, failed to > >>address the question: how can you argue to have access to Socrates "the > >>historical person" as opposed to Socrates as presented by Plato or Xenophon? > > >He can't be _certain_, can he? > > As Descartes noted, I can be certain morally, if not metaphysically -- > just as I am certain about external reality and other minds. Doesn't follow at all in the case of critical argument about the texts of P. It takes as given the traditional view that Plato starts as reporter and ends as inventor of his Socrates: but if he is prepared to invent, how can we be sure that we are not dealing simply with 2 or more kinds of invention, and no reliable reportage? (It would not surprise me to discover that critical ordering of the texts of P. sometimes assumes the hypothesis that it sets out to prove: the same problem arises in the typology of many other kinds of artifact. Has anyone subjected the dialogues to e.g. cluster analysis or correspondence analysis?). -- rafael cardenas huitlodayo Swarfmire College, Goscote, UKReturn to Top
In article <57di51$p5o@pulp.ucs.ualberta.ca> Tim Yates <100343.3644@compuserve.com> writes: >I have been advised that critical phenomena is an interesting >area of physics ar present. I would very much like to learn more, >however cannot find anything on the subject that allows me to >understand what the subject is about or what the phenomena are. [Moderator's Note - extraneous quotation snipped. -WGA] In brief, critical phenomena are those properties of matter (or mathematical models) which emerge in the vicinity of continuous phase transitions. There are _lots_ of books on this subject, at a variety of levels. Assuming your background includes physical thermodynamics and the fundamentals of statistical mechanics the books by H. Eugene Stanley, Julia Yeomans, and Nigel Goldenfeld should be accessible. Martin Gelfand Dept of Physics, Colorado StateReturn to Top
Tim Yates (100343.3644@compuserve.com) wrote: : I have been advised that critical phenomena is an interesting : area of physics ar present. I would very much like to learn more, : however cannot find anything on the subject that allows me to : understand what the subject is about or what the phenomena are. : Any explanation or guidance would be much appreciated. an excellent introduction into this field (it's interesting indeed) is the book by gene stanley, `introduction to phase transitions and critical phenomena', clarendon press, orxford, 1971. an easy go would be these ideas applied in percolation theory, best is: dietrich stauffer, introduction to `percolation theory', taylor & francis, london, 1985 cheers, ralf. -- ralf metzler, dept. of math. physics university of ulm, d--89069 ulm/donau, germany metz@physik.uni-ulm.de http://www.uni-ulm.de/~rmetzlerReturn to Top
Hywel Owen wrote: > > Jay Backof wrote: [Questions on tidal effects and TGV schedule on LEP] > Has this been published? Yes - in CERN's 1995 annual report. For detailed information contact the CERN press office! At http://www.fys.uio.no/~bor/doc/lep.html I found In 1992 CERN physicists in collaboration with SLAC and the University of Lausanne discovered variations in LEP's beam energy due to minute deformations of the Earth's crust by the moon. So one can actually measure the gravitational pull from the moon on earth at LEP! However, even after correcting for this effect some fluctuations remained. It wasn't until autumn 1993 that the solution was found: During a period of very bad weather with lots of rainfall the beam energy varied widely! The water swelled the ground and distorted the LEP tunnel enough to give fluctuations in the beam energy. Recent measurements show that there is even a correlation between the nearby lake of Geneva and the energy fluctuations of the beam. And the latest effect one has taken into account is the train table: During the fall 1995 it was discovered that the LEP beam energy had some strange fluctuations which turned on at 4AM and off at midnight. People started to investigate all kinds of electrical equipment, the nearby Geneva airport was a suspect. But it wasn't until November when it was suggested that the french TGV (train) could be responsible that the solution was found. It turned out when measuring the electric potential in the ground, near the rails, that the time dependent variation exactly matched the energy variation at LEP! So at LEP one can now very precisely measure the gravitational pull from the moon, how much rain came down in the latest thunder shower, what the water level is in the Geneva lake and you can check that the TGV left Geneva on time !!! -- + Dr.-Ing. Erk JENSEN mailto:Erk.Jensen@cern.ch + + CERN PS/RF http://www.cern.ch/ + + CH-1211 Geneva 23 Tel.: +41 22 76 74298 + + Switzerland Fax.: +41 22 76 78590 +Return to Top
David Kaufman (davk@netcom.com) wrote: : : Point #1: Are Liquids Made Of Chunks? : : If energy flows zig-zag between adjacent atoms, then : the size of melting face-centered cubic (FCC) structures : could be deduced to be chunks 20 by 20 by 20 atom layers : containing 8000 atoms per chunk. : : I offered an experiment that could easily determine if : energy in FCC structures flows zig-zag. It requires seeing : if a 100 oriented FCC structure in a single 5 cm by 1.5 cm : crystal of aluminum takes 10 microseconds to go 5 cm or 14 : microseconds (near the melting point). If it takes 14 : microseconds, then the energy traveled between atoms in zig- : zag manner. : : I marvel at the lack of discussion on this fundamental : question of how energy flows through metal elements. : : ----------------------------------------------------------- : Point #2: Where Does The Melting Energy Go? : : Most books say the energy that melts solids goes to : break the bonds of the solid. : : I say that the energy that melt solids of pure : substances goes mostly to rotate the atoms. : : What's your opinion? : : Who can explain why most of the melting energy must go : into rotational energy of the atoms? : : If liquids are made up of rotational chunks, then what : mechanical analysis could explain the tremendous viscosity : change from 0 to 100 C? : : ----------------------------------------------------------- : Thanks for joining this undertaking. : : Good luck on this exciting adventure to find useful : projects to explore and the tools to empower and to succeed : with. : : I offer this post to continue a useful discussion on : many valuable ideas about atoms that could become meaningful : projects for students and others to undertake. : : ____________________________________________________________ : Thanks to those who have offered constructive criticism. : : C by David Kaufman, Nov. 26, 1996 : Founder of the Cube Club : For Collaborative Math, Science and Ethics Excellence. : : Be Good, Do Good, Be One, and Go Jolly. : What else is there to do? : : : -- : davk@netcom.com But David: What if I don't want to Go Jolly? MelReturn to Top
Silke-Maria Weineck wrote: > > rafael cardenas (raf379@bloxwich.demon.co.uk) wrote: > : Silke-Maria Weineck wrote: > : > Who's arguing from authority now... I'm reasonably conversant with this > : > stuff, and you haven't answered my questions. The value "of truth" isn't > : > even touched by these theories; even if _some_ truth-finding is > : > _conducive_ to survival, that doesn't mean "the value of truth is > : > implicit in our best biological theories." > > : Surely _if_ we treat the organism as an entity capable of making > : decisions and > : seeking goals, and we assert that its 'goal' is (or appears to be) > : 'survival', then on a standard sub-Aristotelian teleological ground the > : value to it of 'truth', i.e. a correct appreciation of its environment > : which enables it > : to avoid mistakes, is indisputable. As g*rd*n pointed out much more > : succinctly in > : a parallel thread. > > Lots of ifs, Rafael. Even Dawkins says it's nonsense to assume that the > same organism that makes decisions would be the one seeking survival. Not > to speak of truths not conducive to survival. The point, rather, is that ignorance or false perception in relation to the organism's environment is at best neutral for it, whereas truth is at worst neutral for it. Thus truth has value to the organism. To demonstrate that truth had no value to the organism, you would need to show a) that some truths were necessarily _damaging_ to the organism's survival, and b) that the number and incidence of such truths exceeded the number and incidence of cases of ignorance/error in which it would have been better for the organism to possess correct awareness. r. -- rafael cardenas huitlodayo Swarfmire College, Goscote, UKReturn to Top
[ Article crossposted from sfu.general ] [ Author was Tatiana Nickolaievna Teslenko ] [ Posted on 26 Nov 1996 20:23:40 GMT ] * Very experienced Tutor/Teacher in Modern Physics (120) available * Yes, we can study Quantum Mechanics and the rest of physics, too. * Please call Andy@454-9293 or E-mail to tnteslen@sfu.caReturn to Top
mmcirvin@world.std.com (Matt McIrvin) writes: > >Furthermore, for many purposes the actual card isn't necessary at all, just >the credit card *number*, which makes *all* physical forgery-prevention >methods useless, including photos and "tamper-proof" signature strips. Note that, as was shown when a systematic scam was exposed locally, fraud using the number alone usually requires the implicit cooperation of the merchant in this crime. They are not to accept charges without the card physically present, and there are restrictions on how it is to be used (like shipping destination) via phone orders. -- James A. CarrReturn to Top| "The half of knowledge is knowing http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~jac/ | where to find knowledge" - Anon. Supercomputer Computations Res. Inst. | Motto over the entrance to Dodd Florida State, Tallahassee FL 32306 | Hall, former library at FSCW.
nuclear physics -- I have a piece of very good book on nuclear physics. Can somebody tell me which book is this (I only have a copy of 12th, 13th and 14th chapter): The titles of chapters are: Chapter 12: Single-Particle Models Chapter 13: The Deformed Shell Model-the Unified Model Chapter 14: Proton-Neutron Hydrodynamics Thanks, ____________________________________ | | | Branimir Dolicki | | | | bdolicki@tel.hr | | bdolicki@ifs.hr | | Support radio 101 ! | http://r101.cro.net | | ------------------------------------Return to Top