Re: new improved facts v013 annoyed

From: Paulps (paulpsremove_at_freeuk.com)
Date: 03/14/05 

Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 19:38:18 -0000

"Tom Roberts" <tjroberts@lucent.com> wrote in message
news:YesYd.8676$DW.6820@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
| Paulps wrote:

Tom Roberts snipped and sniped and wrote:
| > [... word salad omitted]

Paulps then wrote:
You start insultingly to denegrate my posts and the facts within them.

Tom Roberts then wrote:
| You still have given no clue about this:

Paulps wrote:
You claim I have no clue when I have been giving you clues all the time
which you have wilfully ignored. Trollingly?

Tom R. wrote
| > You keep _ASSUMING_ (and asserting) that "velocity with respect to
vacuum" has meaning.

Paulps wrote
It only has *no* meaning to those who have no understanding of anything
other than their fantasy world.

Tom R wrote
It does not until and unless you can display some method of _measuring_ it.
That means you must either:
| > a) describe how to measure the speed of this apparatus (any apparatus)
| > "relative to vacuum"

The SOL is independent of the speed of the source for the 10EZil times :-)
The
speed of the vacuum at that point in relation to the light is zero so that
the
constancy of c can be maintained. So if you measure the SOL and you get c
then you can be fairly sure that the equipment is at zero and then so would
be the vacuum to maintain the constancy of c.Got it ?
Or have you some other weird idea that the speed of vacuum changes to
accommodate the SOL?
You have no idea of how the vacuum works have you? your just parroting
without understanding some odd bits of antique data that you have picked up
haven't you? Is this to impress the natives? sad.
Cosmology does it every day so what are your reasons for asking an idiotic
question?

| > or:
| > b) describe how to measure the "speed of vacuum" relative to some
| > apparatus (any apparatus of your choosing).

Paulps wrote
You do need to get out more and look at some real equipment that is out in
the world before you ask such silly questions.
I personally have no access to Hubbell but if you have read any of my posts
you would have know that I understand the relationship between Hubbell and
the vacuum at the very least and questioning me about the same can only mean
that you don't understand that relationship.This is a sentence of mine that
explains it "The speculated state change should start to occur at the
space/partical/gravity boundry or in the case of space bound equipment at
the equipment
boundry of both the source and observer." which I have refered to many times
before.

| Tom R.
| Please describe how to do one of these, or admit you do not know how to
| measure "speed relative to vacuum".
|
|
| Tom Roberts tjroberts@lucent.com

Paulps wrote
I suggest that you admit you have no understanding and live in your fantasy
usage of Minowski space-time and SR as the following clip demonstrates.

Tom R. wrote in other post.
No, all an apparatus can determine from "deviation frequency (spectral
shift)" is its speed relative to the _SOURCE_ (I am ignoring gravitation
and cosmology here, and consider only the Minkowski spacetime of SR).

Paulps wrote
Perhaps you *really* do not know how the real world works and are actually
asking me for explanations for things that you *really* don't understand? or
are you really a smart troll ? I think the latter after your resent
performance. Dirk is of the same ilk but not as smart. So could the real Tom
Roberts please step forward and reply? Perhaps you would like to explain
your understanding of Minkowski spacetime of SR as well? but keep it short
and
concise.

I have been as polite as I am able under extreme provocation (not all your
doing Tom) please don't push me any further but you may ask coherent and
relevant questions to which I may not have the answer and so I will learn.
Thanks, but prove your not just a troll first and if you think this is a
salad then the next course may be very very very hot chilli.
Is that SubStanTial enough for you? LOL When the bell tolls for trolls it
tolls and
tolls :-)

Paul insert your own punctuation ps

Relevant Pages

  • Re: new improved facts v013
    ... Paulps wrote: ... You still have given no clue about this: ... > a) describe how to measure the speed of this apparatus ... measure "speed relative to vacuum". ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: the basis of relativity
    ... and this _ALWAYS_ happens in a vacuum region. ... > R^a_bcd (the Riemann curvature tensor) is what indicates the manifold is ... but I do recognize ambiguity ... No Tom, you're drifting to insult. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: New improved facts v0131
    ... | "paulps" wrote in message ... The speculated state change should start to occur at the ... |> boundry of both the source and observer. ... |> It is in no way meant to suggests that the SOL is not constant in vacuum ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: New improved facts v0131
    ... | "paulps" wrote in message ... |> Apologies for replying to others via you post Sue. ... |> The point I have been trying to get across by using the word vacuum. ... |> effort extracted every particle out of it and did the same with the ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: New improved facts v0131
    ... | "paulps" wrote in message ... |> | a post with some surprising insight into propagation modes. ... |> Did they include the fact that the vacuum is the actual thing and space ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)