Re: O'Barr 27 Nov 2004: Reasons for an ether.
From: Androcles (dummy_at_dummy.net)
Date: 12/03/04
- Next message: jahn: "Re: Building a Light Clock"
- Previous message: Eugene Shubert: "Re: The Process of Peer Review at AJP"
- In reply to: jahn: "Re: O'Barr 27 Nov 2004: Reasons for an ether."
- Next in thread: jahn: "Re: O'Barr 27 Nov 2004: Reasons for an ether."
- Reply: jahn: "Re: O'Barr 27 Nov 2004: Reasons for an ether."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 04:59:59 GMT
"jahn" <susysewnshow@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:319lbnF388v78U1@individual.net...
>
> "Androcles" <dummy@dummy.net> wrote in message
> news:JhMrd.78398$38.31332@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>>
>> "jahn" <susysewnshow@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:317l02F34mtvrU1@individual.net...
>> >
>> > "Androcles" <dummy@dummy.net> wrote in message
>> > news:htvrd.71653$38.22551@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>> >>
>> >> "jahn" <susysewnshow@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>> >> news:316q5oF37cdl0U2@individual.net...
>> >> >
>> >> > [snip]
>> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> You have a local aether aura for your near fields.
>> >> >> >> >> Far field is vacuumy and alternating E-M fields
> where all
>> >> >> >> >> the
>> >> >> >> >> real work is done.
>> >> >> >> >> Speed of light c is a local (near field) phenomenon
> as
>> > Roberts
>> >> >> >> >> says
>> >> >> >> >> and what he's measuring in lab experiments, but has
> nothing
>> > to
>> >> > do
>> >> >> >> >> with time squishy stuff and length squashy thingy.
>> >> >> >> >> Now sell your dipolmacy diplomaticly to the
> relativists and
>> >> >> >> >> aetherealists :-)
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Can't do that. I think you reversed something..
>> >> >> >> > It is the local, reactive processes that would
> proceed
>> >> >> >> > FTL. In the far field, an E field pertubation has
> to buck
>> > all
>> >> >> >> > the the other electric lines of force out to
> infinity.
>> >> >> >> > This reaction force would tend to establish a fairly
> constant
>> >> >> >> > c dependent on the distance mass and charge of
>> >> >> >> > of objects in the neighborhood.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> This
>> >> > http://www.androc1es.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/actual_data.htm
>> >> >> >> says you are wrong.
>> >> >> >> Androcles.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > While I admire your determination, I know you'll
>> >> >> > be the first to admit that the work you are citing
> can't
>> >> >> > say anything about itself.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You'll have to admit the same, then.
>> >> > You been smokin with Dirk? I haven't published any pages
>> >> > to cite.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Never said you did. I'm referring to pages you cite (often)
> that
>> >> are published by others. If Dirk wants to buy me a beer,
> I'd
>> >> accept it, but that is not likely to happen. I'm not
> offering to
>> >> buy him one either.
>> >> BTW, I've just given Brown a good recommendation for you.
>> >
>> > Brown U? I tho't I was perhaps using BYU a bit much. It's
>> > one I read pretty carefully since the cold fusion debacle.
>>
>>
>> Nah... Pete Brown, the one that takes stupid lessons from
> Roberts.
>> He wants a doctorate in stupidity to be like Roberts.
>
> Oh IC...
>>
>>
>> >> > But one may be in the offing after YOU
>> >> > absorb all the cuts and bruises that accompany such a
>> >> > venture.
>> >
>> >> > You can always spot a pioneer.... He is the one with
>> >> > the arrows in his back. :o)
>> >>
>> >> LOL!
>> >> Yes, too true.
>> >
>> >> >> > If it is any consolation,
>> >> >> > many of my questions and comments are leveled
>> >> >> > with the express purpose of motivating some
>> >> >> > alternative thought about your conclusions.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I've given just that. I think you reversed something.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > But to
>> >> >> > do less isn't fair treatment to the proponent of an
>> >> >> > idea.
>> >
>> >> >> Not my idea. The PoR goes back a long way.
>> >> >> The reciprocal action of a conductor and a magnet
>> >> >> does too.
>> >
>> >> > Yes?
>> >> > Where are you finding "conductors" in free space?
>> >> > Are they part of the spin fairy orchestra or ticket
>> >> > takers on the Super Lumminal Express?
>> >> Beats the hell outa me. The last conductor I spoke to
>> >> said "Fares please". I paid and said "thanks."
>> >
>> >> >> The aether was dispelled a long time ago.
>> >> >
>> >> > Your lamp is getting dimmer
>> >> > $S S E
>> >> > Mirror room
>> >> > $Drop lamp
>> >> > You are carrying
>> >> > 1 A rusty bar magnet
>> >> > N
>> >> > Free space room.
>> >> > $Move magent
>> >> > Nothing happens here.
>> >> > There is only the magnet here.
>> >> > $Say Hello Sailor
>> >> > Nothing happens here.
>> >>
>> >> $MOVE MAGNET.
>> >> I don't know that word.
>> >> Your lamp is getting dimmer
>> >>
>> >> $SAY MAGNET
>> >> I don't know that word.
>> >> Your lamp has gone out. You might meet a grue.
>> >>
>> >> $WAVE MAGNET.
>> >> An E-field suddenly appears!
>> >>
>> >> $TAKE E-FIELD
>> >> Ok.
>> >>
>> >> $INVENTORY
>> >> You are carrying:
>> >> A brass lantern
>> >> A Magnetic Field
>> >> A Electric Field
>> >> A two-edged sword
>> >>
>> >> $HONE SWORD.
>> >> I don't know that word.
>> >
>> > Now that is a good point. The revesability "hypothesis"
>> > you are espousing. Yea as we key, somewhere between
>> > a pair of scanning heads a "sugar coated positron" is
> anhillating
>> > an electron to reveal a tiny biological function to doctors.
>> > Somewhere else, in a huge accelerator, with gazillions of
>> > MeVs, some crazy professor is trying to reverse the
>> > process... so far without much success. :-(
>>
>> Well, it seems to me that the bigger a snowball grows the
>> longer it will take to melt.
>>
>> Keep stuffing enough energy into a muon and that's a fat muon.
>>
>>
>> >
>> >> >> > As circular argument is usually the presage to personal
>> >> >> > attack in this NG, I'll take the opportunity to wrap up
>> >> >> > this branch by pointing out that both you and Einstein
>> >> >> > are choosing to exploit Maxwell's errors rather than
>> >> >> > offer proof or alternative.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I HAVE offered alternative. Not proof, I confess, and
>> >> >> there are some missing details in your near field
> analysis.
>> >> >> That is cause for detailed investigation, but the big
>> >> >> picture remains.
>> >> >> Light is EM radiation and is source dependent in a
> vacuum.
>> >> >> Two fields alternate, phase shifted, and conserve energy.
>> >> >> Concepts of permeability and permittivity are
> extrapolations
>> >> >> from measurements made with matter that are incompatible
>> >> >> with c+v; they are aether properties.
>> >> >
>> >> > Not in cgs.
>> >>
>> >> Never heard of centimeters
>> >
>> > Sigh... Do you think I've been harping on these
>> > mensuration schemes out of fear that a magnum
>> > purchase will result in less than a 1.5 litre pour?
>>
>>
>> Should we buy diesel fuel by volume or by mass, depending
>> on the season? I hate density changes and anti-frothing agents.
>
> Go solar and and teach a sheik what
> liquidity really means. ;-)
>
>> >
>> > <<
>> > Permeability, Normal - µ
>> > The ratio of the normal induction to the corresponding
>> > magnetizing force.
>> >
>> > In the cgs system, the flux density in a vacuum is
> numerically
>> > equal to the magnetizing force and, consequently, the
> magnetic
>> > permeability is numerically equal to the ratio of the flux
> density to
>> > the magnetizing force. Thus:
>> >
>> > µ= B/H
>> >
>> > Note: In a non-isotropic (anisotropic) medium the
> permeability
>> > is a function of the orientation of the medium, since, in
> general,
>> > the magnetizing force and the magnetic flux are not parallel.
>> >
>> > Permeability of Free Space
>> > µo - The permeability of a volume occupied by a vacuum.
>> > Sometimes called the magnetic constant.
>> >
>> > Free space permeability is an arbitrary constant used with
>> > relative permeability to define the magnetic field
> (magnetizing
>> > force),
>> > H, and account for the contribution of a magnetic material to
> total
>> > flux density. In the MKSA system, it has a magnitude of 4? x
> 10-7
>> > and dimensions of Henries per meter. In the CGS System, free
>> > space permeability has a magnitude of 1 and no dimensions.
>> > The MKSA free space permeability was chosen so that the
>> > practical units for electrical measurements match the ones
>> > used for relating magnetic quantities to voltage and current.
>> >>>
>> > http://www.arnoldmagnetics.com/mtc/glossary/glossary_p.htm
>> >
>> > When an electrodynamicist switches between systems, it is far
> more
>> > than moving a decimal place. It also means the entire
>> > set of assumptions about SR and free space characteristics
>> > is changed to a different paradigm. Nice card players,
>> > of course, consider that cheating, get mad and go home.
>> >
>> > Mean card players, like myself simply consider it a
>> > reminder to knock the dust off of the 'six shooters' rifling.
> :o)
>>
>>
>> Rifled blunderbusses (blunderbii?) never appealed to me.
>> Point and shoot, if you hit your own foot, too bad.
>
> Annie Okley used blunderbii. Since I still can't explain
> the operation of a mirror, one blunder is enough for me.
>
> <<
> It swaps left and right but not up and down.???
> The Knight looked down proudly at his helmet, which hung
> from the saddle. `Yes,' he said, `but I've invented a better
> one than that--like a sugar loaf. When I used to wear it, if I
> fell
> off the horse, it always touched the ground directly. So I had a
> VERY little way to fall, you see--But there WAS the danger of
> falling INTO it, to be sure. That happened to me once--and the
> worst of it was, before I could get out again, the other White
> Knight came and put it on. He thought it was his own helmet.'
>>>
>
>> >> > Did they really measure 4 pi or was it 3.999999997625 ?
>> >>
>> >> Yes.
>> >> Everyone one knows that.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >> They are no more
>> >> >> applicable to vacuum than an extrapolation of the speed
>> >> >> of sound or the volume of a gas as the temperature
> approaches
>> >> >> zero Kelvin.
>> >> >> Nit-picking the fine details in the immediate proximity
> of
>> >> >> the source/receiver is your province, not mine.
>> >> >
>> >> > I'll walk half the distance to a cliff and you walk 3/2
>> >> > times the distance I walk
>> >>
>> >> I'm dumb, but not that dumb.
>> >> BTW, have a look at Tom Roberts, Ph.D.'s reply to Brown.
>> >> 0.99 ^ 150 ~= 0, he claims.
>> >> I'm not sure where he got his doctorate, but it wasn't
> Sussex U.
>> >> It might have been hia. Ask Andersen, he's an assistant
> professor
>> >> there. What do assistant professors do, anyway?
>> >> > I'll then listen from the edge
>> >> > to any personal opinions about the "fine details"
>> >> > of exponents that you hold. ;-)
>> >> >
>> >> Kind of you, but E and M fields don't have edges and
>> >> I try to avoid opinions. All I have to offer is evidence,
>> >> the interpretation of which is like unto beauty;
>> >> it is in the eye of the beholder.
>> >>
>> >> $DROP LAMP
>> >> Ok.
>> >>
>> >> $INVENTORY
>> >> You are carrying:
>> >> A Magnetic Field
>> >> A Electric Field
>> >> A two-edged sword
>> >>
>> >> >> I accept it
>> >> >> as a worthy cause for investigation, but leave that to
> you.
>> >> >> Your claim that I have not offered alternative is
> unjustified,
>> >> >
>> >> > AFAIK
>> >>
>> >> I don't know that opinion.
>> >> $?
>> >
>> > Non root user.
>> > as opposed to
>> >
>> > #sh ! Drop Lantern!
>> > sh: Too late. Your tussle with the grue has
>> > covered you head to toe with lamp oil and
>> > flames are rapidly climbing your trouser legs.
>> > ....
>> > You are in a small clearing and a narrow path leads north.
>> > #
>>
>> $N
>> You are in a small clearing and a narrow path leads +ve.
>>
>> $+ve
>> You are in a small clearing and a narrow path leads South.
>>
>> $S
>> You are in a small clearing and a narrow path leads -ve.
>> $-ve
>> You are in a small clearing and a narrow path leads north.
>> $U
>> You are at Witt's End.
>
>> There is an E-Field here.
>> There is a B-Field here.
>
> "May the Field be with you"
>>
>> >>
>> >> > you've only supported Maxwell's POV. This,
>> >> > in spite of well known links to the absurb logic in SR.
>> >> > It is pretty hard to demolish one and not the other.
>> >> >
>> >> > << Einstein assumed that the speed of light remained
> constant
>> >> > in all frames of reference, as required by classical
> Maxwellian
>> >> > theory. Einstein abandoned the hypothesis of the ether,
> for it
>> > played
>> >> > no role in his kinematics or in his reinterpretation of
> Lorentz's
>> >> > theory
>> >> > of electrons.>>
>> >> > http://www.humboldt1.com/~gralsto/einstein/1905.html
>> >>
>> >> See what I mean? You bombard me with citations of web pages,
>> >> and then say "You been smokin with Dirk? "
>> >> If YOU have something to say, then say it, quit sharing
> Dirk's
>> >> toke or anyone else's.
>> >> You qualify as halfway intelligent by demonstation, so show
> the other
>> >> half.
>> >>
>> >> $INVENTORY
>> >> You are carrying:
>> >> A Magnetic Field
>> >> A Electric Field
>> >> A two-edged sword
>> >>
>> >> It's my bed time. Too much dwinky poo and I had a great
> evening
>> >> laughing at Brown and Roberts.
>> >> Check it out at Building a light clock.
>> >> Maybe I'll save the rest for another dilation... err...
> time.
>> >>
>> >> Later,
>> >> Androcles.
>> >
>> > Ok. Save some of that anethetic tho 'cause I'm not half
>> > started with your magicnetic fields.
>> >
>> > Sue...
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> ---
>> >> >> and all opposition you've offered relies on interaction
> at
>> >> >> the source or reciever end of the business of
> transferring
>> >> >> energy across the wide reaches of space.
>> >> >
>> >> > Not at all. I even suggested the use of NMR to detect
>> >> > entities which can maintain the E/H ratio and you'll have
>> >> > everyone's attention if you can alter an EM path by
>> >> > switching a bulk tape eraser at the mid point on and
>> >> > off.
>> > http://www.qub.ac.uk/mp/con/magnetics_group/magnetoptics.html
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > A hole in the bottom of a boat doesn't need "leak faries"
>> >> > to make it work as advertised.
>> >> >
>> >> > Free space doesn't need radiation or ether faries
>> >> > to be 377 ohms. That is simply the electromagnetic
>> >> > expression of an infinite sized hole.
>> >> >
>> >> > If the value was zero or infinity there could be no power
>> >> > transfer, Eh? So it is somewhere in between. The value
>> >> > is calculated from fundamental constants and spherical
>> >> > sections, not measured and scaled against other
> dielectrics.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> > Even if the theroies are
>> >> >> > valid, they are crippled, in the scientific community,
>> >> >> > by the fact that they offer something seemingly
>> >> >> > unattainable; FTL communication and time travel.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Yes, well, "seemingly" is not scientific terminology.
>> >> >> Seemingly it is not possible to fly, we aren't born with
> wings.
>> >> >> Yet we do.
>> >> >> Seemingly the scientific community contains more
> nay-sayers
>> >> >> than scientists.
>> >> >> You have also tarred FTL and time travel with the same
> brush
>> >> >> as if I were an advocate of time travel, which is untrue.
>> >> >> That is rather like "drugs and alcohol", but drugs are
> illegal
>> >> >> and alcohol is not.
>> >> >
>> >> > Such boundless optimism. I rest my case.
>> >> >
>> >> >> > It is much safer to refer to magnetic effects as a
> 'moment' or
>> >> >> > 'force' which we can measure, than as a 'field', which
> suggests
>> >> >> > the existance of a real mechanism for what is actually
> a
>> >> >> > a mathematical abstraction
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It is safer to stay in the ground than to ride the space
> shuttle,
>> >> >> too. Who gives a hoot or a holler for safety?
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Time doesn't really change
>> >> >> > for the j's of an RLC network or the superluminal rail
>> >> >> > passenger but misreading our cypherins can mislead us
>> >> >> > on a wild goose chase for free energy or the fountain
> of
>> >> >> > youth.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> What is the purpose of this statement? I have never
> advocated
>> >> >> time travel, time dilation or any other suggestion that
> time can
>> >> >> be meddled with. I have always maintained the fundamental
>> >> >> rules of physics, conservation of energy and momentum
> apply
>> >> >> at all times, independently of any supposed properties of
> nothing.
>> >> >
>> >> > Half way... Time travel was Einstien's racket. But the
> transport of
>> >> > energy FTL wrt ...say the local glob of matter, is a show
>> >> > nature hasn't been putting on for us... at least often
> enough to
>> >> > prove conclusivly.
>>
>> Yes she has, or all stellar phenomena is caused by the little
> white ball
>> and the big red ball dancing around each other, and it is
> always
>> different.
>> The show is on every moment, ya just gotta take off the shades,
> its
>> dark in this dive.
>
> I'm not sayin' it can't exist, given a high quality vacuum.
> I am working on another gedanken where the source
> and detector are the closest matter to each other.
> I ran across some calculations that treat the propagation
> as a Coulomb coupled damping of both the source and
> detector charges to nearby matter.
>
> It *seems* we've been doing some relativity with out
> any mention of time... untill we get to scale of the electron
> where it's spin has to be taken into account.
Moi? Doing relativity? Only the Galilean variety. I'm doing
physics.
Light is.
No matter allowed.
No aether allowed.
>
> Lacking an ether or dielectric, I am wondering if there
> is something about the spin which relates to the speed
> of light.
Told ya before. The energy vector is running a helix.
> Otherwise said, what keeps the Coulomb force
> from being instantaneous if a pair of charges are far
> from any matter? To my satisfaction, the "speed" of
> charge and gravity has never been measured and any
> claims that it is 300 Mm / sec is simply for GR's
> convenience. Path reciprocity seems a good case
> that the Coulomb force isn't related to c in the near-field.
>
> To conserve charge and energy, something has to
> keep us from moving a mass or it's energy equivalent
> instaineously. Faraday's law, once again seems the
> proper clock to measure such transfers with.
>
> Sue...
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >> > I am not however gonna declare c one
>> >> > of god's commandments and make a mad dash for a clocks
>> >> > winding sterm on that account. ;-)
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Compare:
>> >> > http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/LorentzForce.html
>> >> >> > with
>> >> > http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/CoulombForce.html
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Look for r^3 in the denominator:
>> >> >
> http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Heaviside-LorentzSystem.h
> tml
>> >> >>
>> >> >> No no... you play all you want to with your near-fields,
> your
>> >> >> properties of matter at boundaries, I'm far too
> simple-minded
>> >> >> to investigate complexities. In the far reaches of space,
> where
>> >> >> energy is being transferred with a velocity that is
> source
>> >> >> dependent, where energy is conserved, where r is
> infinite,
>> >> >> where there is no matter present, that is my domain. The
>> >> >> mechanism for that transfer requires explanation, and I
> have
>> >> >> given it, absent aether, absent permeability, absent
> permittivity,
>> >> >> absent 377 ohms, absent any properties you may attribute
> to
>> >> >> nothing.
>> >> >
>> >> > So the proposed product only works if greater than 10 ly
>> >> > from the user? giggle
>>
>> I'll leave you to determine where the near/far field boundary
> is, but
>> there is lot more far field than near field.
>>
>> >> >
>> >> > Ahh... absent the 377 ohms, your radiator cooks itself.
>> >> > Wrap a light bulb in foil and fiber glass and you'll see
> what I
>> >> > mean.
>>
>> Stars do cook themselves. Ergo absent the 377 ohms.
>>
>>
>> >> >
>> >> >> The energy transfer cannot be denied, the existence of
> electric
>> >> >> and magnetic fields in the nothing cannot be denied, and
> all
>> >> >> the complexities you heap upon me, citing web page after
> web
>> >> >> page, are related to interaction with matter. My view and
> my
>> >> >> explanation are exceedingly simple,
>> >> >
>> >> > ROFL
>> >> > http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/MagneticField.html
>> >> >
>> >> > YOUR vacuum is gonna do all that when it is too far from
>> >> > MY radiator... a structure that actually has a mechanisms
>> >> > consistant with such transformations.
>> >> > For that matter (pun intended) why should
>> >> > I even want to own a radiator if YOUR vacuum will do the
>> >> > same things. All that upkeep. Washin, waxin and polishin.
>> >> > Beatin the dents out...
>> >> > Who needs it? I'm sold! Do I buy this vacuum stuff by
> the
>> >> > liter or the case?
>>
>> $2 an ounce.
>>
>>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> the transfer of energy is
>> >> >> via alternating E and B fields that exist in nothing,
> each
>> >> >> creating
>> >> >> the other and then dying.
>> >> >
>> >> > Ohmmmm Ohmmmm Ohmmmmm
>> >> > http://www.bhagavadgita.ee/index.php?what=autorist
>> >> >
>> >> >> They are not velocity related either,
>> >> >> all velocity is relative. All of physics reduces to the
> existence
>> >> >> of these two fields, even matter itself, for m = E/c^2.
>> >> >
>> >> > Then, there is no physics unless you can make a magnetic
> field
>> >> > diminish by the square instead of the cube without help
> from
>> >> > spin faries. Every thing I can find says YOUR magnetism
> runs
>> >> > outta petrol faster than my Coulombs... and MY radiator
>> >> > was the last filling station 'till the receiving element.
>> >> >
>> >> > Your argument is 100% sound... in a dielectric like glass.
>> >> > But there *seems* to be nothing in a vacuum to do the
>> >> > E/H transform. You are invoking an ether to do what
>> >> > the Coulomb force does nicely without any help.
>> >> >
>> >> > ---> Insert Newton quote here <---
>> >> >
>> >> > Sue...
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> Androcles
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Extra credit:
>> > http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/CoulombsLaw.html
>> >
> http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/forces/couple.html#c1
>> > http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/MagneticField.html
>> >
>> >
> http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/SpinMagneticDipoleMoment.
> html
>> >
> http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/magfie.html
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Kind regards,
>> >> >> > Sue...
>> > http://www.georgeglazer.com/prints/illus/ponce.html
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > The astronomers would like that because it is a
>> >> >> >> > mechanism for our solar system to establish
>> >> >> >> > a local electrodynamic frame of reference. I believe
>> >> >> >> > there is some experimental evidence for that...Eh?
>> >> >> >> > Also it is a mechanism for microlensing, free of
>> >> >> >> > any spacetime curvature, direct light gravity
> interaction
>> >> >> >> > or particulate clouds.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Sue...
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > From:
>> > http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/demerson/endfire.htm
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Three wave lengths isn't much compared to a
> few mm of
>> >> >> >> >> >> > aluminum
>> >> >> >> >> >> > garnet molecules at visible light frequencies
> but the
>> >> >> > principles
>> >> >> >> >> >> > are
>> >> >> >> >> >> > no different.
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Sue...
>> >> >> >> >> >> > [scuse top post and snip]
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
- Next message: jahn: "Re: Building a Light Clock"
- Previous message: Eugene Shubert: "Re: The Process of Peer Review at AJP"
- In reply to: jahn: "Re: O'Barr 27 Nov 2004: Reasons for an ether."
- Next in thread: jahn: "Re: O'Barr 27 Nov 2004: Reasons for an ether."
- Reply: jahn: "Re: O'Barr 27 Nov 2004: Reasons for an ether."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
