Re: Division by Zero in Nature,
mensanator_at_aol.compost
Date: 01/01/05
- Next message: Dark Alchemist: "Re: Would someone be so kind as to help me with a math equation?"
- Previous message: John Savard: "Re: [OT] I hate being American"
- In reply to: Geert-Jan Uytdewilligen: "Re: Division by Zero in Nature,"
- Next in thread: deepkdeb_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Division by Zero in Nature,"
- Reply: deepkdeb_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Division by Zero in Nature,"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 1 Jan 2005 11:39:28 -0800
Geert-Jan Uytdewilligen wrote:
> It really isn't my calculation, it's Physics' theory.
> But no infinite values are measured.
And division by 0 doesn't produce a finite number.
So, therefore, the Physics' theory is wrong.
> As you know,
> infinite is not a number.
> Geert-Jan
>
> <mensanator@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1104602741.484953.95200@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Geert-Jan Uytdewilligen wrote:
> > > I wouldn't go that far to find division by zero in nature.
> > > if you mix water with milk in certain amounts,
> > > You will see a phenomena called "Anomalous dispersion".
> > > The imaginary part of the refraction index is dvided by zero.
> > > If we measure it, it becomes large but doesn't go to infinity.
> >
> > Doesn't that imply that your calculation is wrong?
> >
> > > The imaginairy part of n is a measure for absorption of
> > EM-radiation.(light)
> > > Geert-Jan
> >
- Next message: Dark Alchemist: "Re: Would someone be so kind as to help me with a math equation?"
- Previous message: John Savard: "Re: [OT] I hate being American"
- In reply to: Geert-Jan Uytdewilligen: "Re: Division by Zero in Nature,"
- Next in thread: deepkdeb_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Division by Zero in Nature,"
- Reply: deepkdeb_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Division by Zero in Nature,"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]