Re: O'Barr 27 Nov 2004: Reasons for an ether.

From: jahn (susysewnshow_at_yahoo.com.au)
Date: 12/07/04 

Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 09:43:21 -0500

"Androcles" <dummy@dummy.net> wrote in message news:rzitd.124045$38.102370@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
> "Sue..." <suzysewnshow@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:1102418926.451482.259480@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Androcles wrote:
> >> "jahn" <susysewnshow@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> >> news:31jvemF3afe3eU1@individual.net...
> >> >
> >> > <globarr@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:1102356015.491043.274400@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> >> >> In <31es65F390pfeU1@individual.net>
> >> >> "jahn" <susysewnshow@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> >> >> > . . .
> >> >>
> >> >> Gerald L. O'Barr <globarr@yahoo.com> comments:
> >> >> Let us try a picture:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Here is an This is a
> >> >> object plane! curved mirror
> >> >> (points 1 - 5) (a, b, c, etc.)
> >> >>
> >> >> \
> >> >> \
> >> >> 1 *------------------------------\a
> >> >> - - #
> >> >> 2 * - - \
> >> >> - - #
> >> >> 3 * - - |b
> >> >> - # #|
> >> >> 4 * - # |
> >> >> - |
> >> >> 5 * # # -|c
> >> >> #/
> >> >> # # #
> >> >> #
> >> >> E * # # #
> >> >> D *
> >> >> C * ###
> >> >> B * ##
> >> >> A *
> >> >>
> >> >> This is the projected
> >> >> image ( A - E),
> >> >> the focus points for the object plane
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> (To view this picture, you must use a constant width
> >> >> font, such as 'Courier New.' If your reader is not
> >> >> set to a constant width font, then save this e-mail,
> >> >> and later bring it up into your word processor and
> >> >> change its font, for all letters and spaces, etc.)
> >> >
> >> > Yes Fixdsys and Courier seems to work.
> >>
> >> LOL. Ever been patronized? :-)
> >>
> >> >
> >> >> This is of course a very poor rendition of an
> >> >> object, represented by the numbers 1-5, which stands
> >> >> in front of a curved mirror (a, b, c, etc.), which
> >> >> focuses an image of the object at the points lettered
> >> >> A-E. I have tried to show three rays of light
> >> >> leaving 1 as '-' lines, and three reflected rays
> >> >> leaving the mirror as '#' lines, arriving at the
> >> >> letter, A.
> >> >
> >> > Gerald says:
> >> > 1-->a
> >> > 2-->b
> >> > 3-->c
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Rays from the number 2 would all end up
> >> >> at B, and 3 at C, and 4 at D, and 5 at E.
> >> >
> >> > Sue says:
> >> > 1--> abc
> >> > 2--> abc
> >> > 3--> abc
> >>
> >> LOL, I should hope so!
> >> This was the best applet for the teacher I found.
> >> http://www.bekkoame.ne.jp/~kamikawa/lens/lens_e.htm
> >> It includes a virtual image when the object is moved.
> >> When I was in flight simulation we'd find the focus of the mirror
> >> by superimposing the virtual image on the real theodolite, which is
> >> placed
> >> at the theoretical pilot's eye point. Theoretical pilots are only
> >> allowed
> >> one eye, of course.
> >
> > Real pilots keep *both* eyes closed.
> > http://www.pattywagstaff.com/images/other/RibbonKolasa_thumb.jpg
> > ...and rosaries tightly clinched.
>
>
> LOL!
> Yep. I was never a real pilot, and when the simulator simulated upside
> down
> I had been staring at a rolled image for so long it just looked like a
> rolled image.
> We theoretical pilots can crash a plane and walk away unharmed every
> time.
> The only time I ever actually hurt was when I taxied a Harrier halfway
> up a
> simulated ski-jump at the bow of a simulated Invincible
> http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/static/pages/148.html
> and turned through 90 degrees. The motion platform
> http://www.cadsoftusa.com/~kls/fltsim/platform.jpg
>
> http://wwwrobot.gmc.ulaval.ca/~ricard/Articles/Delft_ceas_95/img5.gif
> responded to the confusion in the software and give me a rough bounce,
> hitting my head on the cockpit canopy. I was bouncing around
> so much I couldn't pull the ejection pin, a colleague hit the E-stop.
>
>
>
> >> >> This
> >> >> results in an inverted image!
> >> >
> >> > If the curvature results in a focal point
> >> > between abc & ABC
> >> > then that would be true.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> I hope this is about
> >> >> right, and that you can see how this all works.
> >> > Aparently not. For 123 to ABC, I have 9 paths
> >> > you have only 3.
> >>
> >> Perhaps light isn't scattered in all directions :)
> >
> > It isn't.
>
> > http://dept.physics.upenn.edu/courses/gladney/phys151/lectures/images/near_field_dipole_pattern.gif
> >>From big page:
> > http://dept.physics.upenn.edu/courses/gladney/phys151/lectures/lecture_apr_07_2003.shtml
>
>
> Oh yes it is.
> http://www.star.ucl.ac.uk/~apod/apod/ap041204.html

What kind of science is that? You're offerering a view on
one axis as proof of what does or does not happen on the
other two axes. That's as bad as Gerald obscuring parts
of the mirror that don't suit his pleasure.

Set up two more telescopes on y and z axes and you'll
see right away that very few atoms have the same brightness
on all three telescopes. (you can see individual atoms
with those great big mirrors, can't cha ? ) ;-)

 Isotropic EM radiators can't exist absent magnetic
monopoles and ObieWan has 'em all locked up with
the ship's Purser.
An apple shaped pattern is about as close as you can
get to a spherical pattern. A lopsided circularly polarized
"dog bone" is probably a good starting point to
visualize an atomic emission.

http://yakko.pharm.kumamoto-u.ac.jp/KH/mol_calc/9.jpg
From:
http://yakko.pharm.kumamoto-u.ac.jp/KH/mol_calc/molcal.html

>
>
> >>
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Now if the mirror were perfect, and you placed
> >> >> yourself at A, and looked at the mirror, you would
> >> >> see an image of the light leaving point 1 only!
> >> >
> >> > You mean when I go to a ball game I have to specify
> >> > which player I want to watch and they assign me an
> >> > appropriate seat?
> >>
> >> Yeah... or watch it in a shaving mirror, upside down. You
> >> can always stand on your head. :-)
> >
> > Exactly what I did. Hang my own photo adjacent a
> > mirror on the wall and compare points as you move.
> >
> > Standing on your head does nothing here.
> > Water trickles from the open bottle soaking
> > the brown sack.
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >> If 1
> >> >> were a solid object, radiating light in a normal
> >> >> uniform pattern in all directions, then the whole
> >> >> mirror would be seen as this one color and intensity
> >> >> as this one point was doing.
> >> >
> >> > This might be true for the focal point. which you
> >> > did not indicate on your illustration. Since you claim
> >> > an inversion, I assume it is about the first # after the E.
> >> >
> >> > < This is what I was
> >> >> trying to express to you in the last post I sent.
> >> >> Now of course if 1 is not a solid object, but is
> >> >> merely an open point in space, then the view at A
> >> >> could be an image.
> >> >
> >> > I dunno, I've never seen an "open point in space".
> >>
> >> Ah... well, the image of the virtual object is a real object, you see
> >
> >> :-)
> > Beacuse all the light paths are faithfully routed.
> > It's called "faith based optics" for nucular injuneers.
> >>
> >> >
> >> >> The image would be the image
> >> >> contained behind 1 (to the left), as subtended by the
> >> >> mirror. If the detector at A were finite (not just a
> >> >> point, or as you said, a pixel, which would average
> >> >> its covered area as if it were just a point), but
> >> >> had some width, such as an eye with a lens) you would
> >> >> also see more than just a point no matter what
> >> >> conditions were at 1. So what I was describing to
> >> >> you in the last post was correct, and we should
> >> >> understand this before we continue.
> >> >> If at point 1 there were a laser, and thus the
> >> >> light leaving 1 was not radiating uniformly into
> >> >> space, but was directed exactly at 'a' on the mirror,
> >> >> then only 'a' needs to be in place to have the full
> >> >> laser beam arrive at A.
> >> >
> >> > How is a laser different than a satellite transmitter?
> >>
> >> Frequency, I think. :-)
> > A+
> >>
> >> > Both have a Gaussian spatial distribution.
> >> > http://laser.physics.sunysb.edu/~matt/beam_report/
> >> >
> >> >> The mirror at b and c could
> >> >> be removed with no change in the light arriving at A.
> >> >> If we agree to this, then we can continue with the
> >> >> more important points that we should be
> >> >> considering!
> >> >
> >> > We don't agree but there are some URLs below
> >> > you might consider.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks for reading.
> >> >> Gerald L. O'Barr <globarr@yahoo.com>
> >> >>
> >> >> P.S. I am the inventor of 3-D viewing, not the trick
> >> >> of fooling the eyes or the brain, but in actually
> >> >> reproducing the electromagnetic signal as made by a
> >> >> real 3-D object. You won't see my name anywhere,
> >> >> because the company I worked for held it as just a
> >> >> private disclosure between me and them. They did not
> >> >> want to patent it where it would be seen by all their
> >> >> competition.
> >> >> I got very little money from such an approach
> >> >> (none?) but I do know for myself what can and is done
> >> >> by systems using lens and mirrors. I do not know
> >> >> everything, but I know enough, as Reany says, as to
> >> >> be successful! This real 3-D is needed for the
> >> >> screens of air controllers, and actually for
> >> >> everyone! It will eventually be used!
> >> >
> >> > Ya don't have to know electrodynamics to invent optical
> >> > devices... but it helps explaining how they work.
> >> > And good luck cashing in on your idea. I am all
> >> > for "techies" gettin' paid.
> >> >
> >> > Kind regards,
> >> > Sue...
> >> >
> >> >
> > http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/teacher_resources/space_astronomy/page49.html
> >> Not such a good one as the williamson-labs below. Prolly what O'Barr
> > has
> >> in mind.
> >>
> >> > http://scikits.com/HFacts.html
> >> That should make O'Barr wonder why the second reflector
> >> doesn't block the light and make a shadow, huh? LOL!
> >
> > And what of the hole in the middle? 8o)
> >
> >>
> >> > http://www.williamson-labs.com/optical-body.htm
> >> Gotta just love that "shinny" surface. If it was vertical it might be
> >
> >> hard to shin up.
> >> LOL.
> > You wouldn't be laughin' if UK ranked 15th in
> > math and science.
> > Sue...
>
> All the smarty pants went to the USA for the money.
> Androcles
They seem to be having some sucess.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4027587.stm

Sue...

>
>
>
>
> >>
> >> Androcles.
> >
>
>

Quantcast