Re: Laser ranging to moon begs questions

On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 13:21:17 +1100, "Peter Webb"
<webbfamily@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


I wasn't taking the piss. I didn't know what you meant.

That must local jargon, very local. Why would you clip out my
informatonal comment and save all the persiflage?



"Taking the piss" = "Mocking someone" in Australian. Sorry.



But if you mean that you are hoping that somebody who actually works at
one
of these facilities reads this ng, you are probably out of luck.

No, an informational paper with the details. In the Pioneer program
there were all kinds of diagrams, and remarks that some data batches
were 5 days long.


Craig posted references to a whole lot of papers. Have you looked at them?



You could
just phone one of the observatories or visit one in person; I am sure that
they would be tickled to have somebody display an interest in what they
do,
and would be very helpful.

Actually, one of the OP's on this thread, who earlier was quite
voluble in the opinion that processing single photons was a "piece of
cake", who should be able to shed light.

Why? Did he work at one of the observatories? If he didn't, I would think
you would be far better off listening to Craig, who obviously has a lot of
knowledge on the subject (and, I suspect, rather more than someone who
described single photon capture as a "piece of cake").


I thought it would be
interesting to hear more.

If the answers you want are not in the papers that Craig has referenced, and
Craig or myself can't answer them, then its pretty easy to call or visit one
of these observatories and ask them about how the equipment works, if you
really want to know.


At least we're still on topic, "begging the
question".

I don't see that. I can't see what "question has been begged". I cannot see
what question you have asked which has not been answered. The only
substantive question I have seen is "why doesn't my calculation give the
correct observed value for the return photon count". Many answers have
already been given for this. Have you any other questions?

Perhaps you would be better off going through the calculations in the papers
provided - which do supply the correct numbers - and see how the return
photon count is calculated. You can then modify your calculation to match
the parameters in the papers, and you should be able to find the error in
your calculation yourself.

If there is anything you can't understand in the papers, you can ask for
clarification here. If I can help, I will (although whilst I know a lot
about EM radiation and information theory, I know nothing about the details
of the experimental setup. Craig does seem to know a lot about the
experimental setup as well; if you ask nicely, I am sure he will help you

understand the papers if I can't.)

And, as I said, as a final resort ring the authors of the papers, or the
observatories, or visit one yourself. I doubt this will be necessary, but
that option always exists.

So, what don't you understand in the papers that Craig has referenced?


This thread is tougher than the kudzu vine that grows up my pool
screen. You can cut it and chop it, you just can't kill it. There's so
little in the way of firm data available it would be useless to
continue.
Your condescending tone is totally misplaced, as you continue to drone
on ala "You can then modify your calculation to match
the parameters in the papers, and you should be able to find the error
in your calculation yourself".
Here's your chance to redeem yourself in a half dozen terse lines.
Write down all the parameters you boast of and we can go from there.
Also post your estimate of the final number of photons per pulse, per
second, per week, your choice (so I can peek as I try to fashion a
suitable solution).
Meanwhile this thread is taking time from my solution to the dark
matter problem.
John Polasek
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Laser ranging to moon begs questions
    ... Did he work at one of the observatories? ... If he didn't, I would think you would be far better off listening to Craig, who obviously has a lot of knowledge on the subject. ... If the answers you want are not in the papers that Craig has referenced, and Craig or myself can't answer them, then its pretty easy to call or visit one of these observatories and ask them about how the equipment works, if you really want to know. ... You can then modify your calculation to match the parameters in the papers, and you should be able to find the error in your calculation yourself. ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Laser ranging to moon begs questions
    ... Craig posted references to a whole lot of papers. ... Did he work at one of the observatories? ... You can then modify your calculation to match ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Errors in loop quantum gravity entropy calculations
    ... >>that try to claim that all previous calculations of the black hole entropy ... >>entropy is dominated by the punctures of the smallest minimal spin. ... >>the new papers are correct, ... > check the details to make sure Meissner's new calculation is correct. ...
    (sci.physics.research)
  • Re: I dont get this thing about quantum erasure
    ... way disturbs the photon and the same phenomenon ... photon depending on which slit is traversed is certainly "disturbing ... The tendency to "exaggerate" in quantum eraser type papers is strong. ... In ERP one considers a thought experiment on correlated spin 1/2 ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: The size of a photon
    ... The proof of also implies that the size of the photon is actually ... Not even close for most photons wrt the spatial distribution of their ... any speed the kinetic energy density of an electron is proportional to ... Quantum Vacuum Charge papers; ...
    (sci.physics)