Re: Hobba's misconceptions

On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 23:52:25 GMT, "Bill Hobba" <rubbish@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

>"Aetherist" <TheAetherist@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>news:n8qjq195ml7uh7dkkfebuiv1t48jl8ivv5@xxxxxxxxxx
>> On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 19:11:27 +0100, "Harry" <harald.vanlintel@xxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>"Bill Hobba" <rubbish@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>>news:vNdqf.75823$V7.63787@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>
>>>> "Harry" <harald.vanlintel@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>>> news:43a94b8b$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> [Snip...]
>>
>>>>> By means of magical equations?
>>>>
>>>> Equations describe nature - they do not, and in principle can not,
>>>> answer all questions one can ask. You know as well as I do non
>>>> aether theories meet the gold coin of science - ie are in accord
>>>> with experiment. That and logical consistency is all that can be
>>>> asked - and even logical consistency is sometimes swept under the
>>>> rug. This implies they are valid - simple as that. It is you
>>>> that wishes to resort to terms like 'magic' when describing
>>>> aspects of equations you do not understand in terms of how you
>>>> nature should work or think requires deeper explanation without
>>>> first demonstrating such is required. Most simply accept them as
>>>> part of theories and if truth be told change their views of how
>>>> they think nature should work rather than clinging to ideas like
>>>> an aether. That most do that is an observed fact - not a conjecture.
>>>> Maybe they shouldn't. Maybe in the spirit of science they should
>>>> hold onto all ideas. But the arrogant attitude of most aetherists
>>>> that an aether must exist, if you don't believe in it you believe
>>>> in magic or some such rubbish, does not appeal to those of a
>>>> generally tolerant persuasion. I try to be tolerant and I know it
>>>> does not appeal to me.
>>>
>>> Bill, I don't believe in magic:
>>
>> Neither do I... Nor do I buy it just does, or, such gobbly-goob as:
>>
>> "Motion implied by the equations of EM."
>>
>> As if the equation of EM can endow or induce something to physically
>> move... Sheez! Ass-backwards...
>
> And I suppse mass times accleration does not do it either.

Nope... Mass times acceleration expresses the magnitude of the
'physical' process we call force but does NOT! in any way explain
the process(es). There are, in fact, many ways to get forces. But
this does clearly demonstrate for all your mentality...

>> And,
>>
>> "Those are found by carrying out the variation on the EM
>> lagrangian."
>>
>> Or,
>>
>> "That is another assumption one needs to make about the
>> fields for them to produce force - they are derivable
>> from the PLA."
>>
>> Which, of course, says NOTHING!!!
>
> The PLA is a very well verified physical principle. In fact all
> our fundamental theories are derivable from it (and other
> assumptions).

There exists in nature no 'principles'. There only exists
processes and properties. Hell Bill, you're suppose'ta'be a
programmer. Think of the universe as an 'object', all objects
have methods and properties.

However, what makes up the methods??? ;)

Certainly not magic!

> Learn the basics then repost.

I know the basics... The principle of least action comes about natural
from the processes of basic kinetic theory.

> Wait a minute - you have been given that advice many times and it
> has made no different...

Just as much as others, like Harry, trying to tell you that
mathematical expressions are not and can not manifest physical
properties... You're the pot calling the kettle black!

> ... so I suppose it is advice wasted. Just like replying to your
> posts.

Well Bill, I did tell Harry he was wasting his time :) Or
didn't you notice that the post was directed to him & others,
not you...

Paul Stowe


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Hobbas misconceptions
    ... >> And I suppse mass times accleration does not do it either. ... >> The PLA is a very well verified physical principle. ... Hell Bill, you're suppose'ta'be a ... >> Learn the basics then repost. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Hobbas misconceptions
    ... >> And I suppse mass times accleration does not do it either. ... Mass times acceleration expresses the magnitude of the ... >> The PLA is a very well verified physical principle. ... >> Learn the basics then repost. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: OO Design Debate
    ... | architecture problem by suggesting a pattern. ... My example of the MVP pattern was in order to demonstrate how separation of ... concerns (the principle) can involve, not only two classes, but sometimes ... | the basics, it would be best to start from there, and allow him to fully ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: Man denies dangerous driving
    ... sounding much like they were saying: ... Or do you _really_ not understand the very basics of legal ... In this instance, Mens Rea. ...
    (uk.transport)
  • Re: Request for Direction in demonstrating powersets.
    ... since the principle I just mentioned is inconsistent. ... membership, union, intersection, and complement. ...
    (sci.logic)
Quantcast