Re: Maxwell's equation suggests absolute space and defy TWO Newton principales


guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Sue... wrote:
guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
PD wrote:
guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Due to permittivity & permeabiltiy being of small values (therefore
light very fast):


Higher velocities in space should INCREASE the permittivity &
permeability factors (let me finish):


People in a mach1 Concord plane would only ***SLIGHTLY*** notice this
(by the ***SLIGHT*** amount they notice they're traveling in curved
space) due to the still very small values of permittivity & permability
of space. Therefore their travel velocity can never be perfectly
straight (curved space, curves faster for them then at a slower
velocity) and can never be perfectly constant, velocity would spiral
down to a stop within a lengthy period of time (the higher the
velocity, the higher the deceleration although the complete stop period
would still be longer than a slower velocity): This would suggest an
absolute relavistic space.

Unfortunately, this is even more incoherent than usual.

Get some sleep and try again, please.

PD

Hey it's only a hypotheses.

OK! Here goes ***BUT*** someone must truly know the answer to the two
small questions below to clearly remove this hypotheses (and if the
answer AGREES with the hypotheses, it could very easily jump from
theory to ********LAW*********(read the question before laughing
please...ohhh too late, read anyway):

If they knew the answers, they would be the first to tell you. But
they don't,
so all they do is laugh at your questions.


Prelude: IMPERMEABLE (permeability) UMBRELLA means the rain traveling
through is impenatratable (likewise many locations permittivity is a
word linked to porosity of a material).

Question (all mediums have a permeability and permittivity):

No... the postal system and the library is medium.

Physics is not semantics. Use this:
<< D, Dielectric Constant, Electric Permittivity,
Electric Susceptibility, Ewald-Oseen Extinction Theorem,
Fresnel Equations, H, Magnetic Permeability,
Magnetic Susceptibility, Relative Permeability >>
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Dielectric.html

Bravo for your Fightback! stance! Some people here think
they know it all and so they commonly make gross errors in
their interpretations of what they read.

1. Does a LOW permeability(and permittivity) of a medium have the SAME
EFFECT but LESS then a medium with HIGH permeability (and
permittivity)?

Learn what a dielectric is.

Which means, obviously, "I don't know". To me, it's a good question,
but I don't know the answer either. Assuming that by "same effect"
you refer to the effect a medium has on a body or a wave moving
through it, it would appear that high p and p would have less of an
effect on them.

2. What effects occur for mediums with EXTREMELY HIGH PERMEABILITY (and
permittivity), does the uninterrupted velocity of the object(or
electron or photon) travelling through the medium decrease with time,
does the object burn-up (catch fire at specific high velocity) or the
does the medium itself break, melt or burn down?

Well, that is the $64k question, isn't it? You should remember that
matter and waves require a medium, so you are not just talking bout
objects. The answer to your question will depend on just precisely
what the medium is about and how it "handles" matter and waves.

If we accept Newton's 1st law of motion as-is, we assume that space
has the same p and p throughout the entire universe, and since the
sole object in his 1st law cannot be stationary wrt the universe, it is

in motion and it will continue indefinitely in motion. Your question
is
what will happen to it, and here we can probably guess that some-
thing will happen to it sooner or later, for sure.

The medium would have no cause to break down, in view of the fact
that water waves do not break down the water medium, they only
undulate it. Mediums are disturbed waves and matter; they are not
otherwise changed, AFAIK. Mediums react to the passing of objects
and wave through them, but they soon return to the states they were
in before they were disturbed. I don't know of an instance where a
medium is any more disturbed than that.

So what happens to the object? I happen to believe that a medium
acts to slow objects and waves, and thus, it is not a free ride. Some
energy must be expended for the motion involved. Newton believed
there is an inherent force in objects that cause them to continue in
motion when no other forces are acting upon them. Water waves are
given their impetus by their source and when that impetus is "used up",

the disturbance subsides. Em waves are distinct from other waves in
that they do not move due to the impetus from their source. There is
therefore another process that occurs in the motion of em waves, but
it is still motion in a medium.

For objects, however, even their inherent force will eventually be used

up, and then it will probably be transformed into something else. My
model suggests that "something else" is Dark Matter, which I define
as negative matter corresponding to Dirac's matter in an extraordinary
state. Assuming the loss of all energy in a mass transforms it into a
negative mass, the medium of light and matter is DM, which my model
suggests is what came out of the BB and filled absolute space to the
extent it defines the circumference of our universe.

Read the URL about dielectrics.

Again meaning, "I don't know".
..
Is this exactly the type of links you've been feeding me all along Sue?
No wonder I couldn't comprehend the garbage.

You think that STUPID link is supposed to expain what a dielectric is.
Those are only calculations on the forces on a dielectric, and let me
say giving this type of garbage to anyone would obviously confuse them.

I KNOW WHAT A DIELECTRIC IS.

You must learn that Sue is not alone in giving you lists of website
that
are a waste of time because they do not explicitly support the idea
that
the poster is purportedly supporting with those websites. Most of the
time, it is their way of admitting they don't know but don't want
others
to know they don't know. You see, that's important for people here,
and
they do everything they can to hide what they don't know.

(Example: a capacitor's dielectric may prematurely rupture only due the
amount of permittivity of it's dielectric, if so what are ALL the
causes: high voltage, high current, high velocity of electron, high
frequency, high kinetic energy, other....?)

No... Read the URL and associated links about dielectrics.

YOU ARE CRAZY SUE, 100% CRAZY, read your own stupid link, it's a bunch
of calculations is all it is.

Mebbe she is, but she's not in the minority here.

THERE ARE LINKS EXPLAINYING the principales a 100 times better then
your link.
I hope you never become a teacher.

I would guess she already is one. The College of Education does some
strong brainwashing of its own, mainly that students must be forced to
learn and that parents are to blame for their children's failures.
Combine
that with science and you have a distinct type of scientist who
believes
everyone but teachers know what's right and what's wrong.
Unfortunately,
that does not prevent them from behaving badly anyway at times.

You still won't be able to explain why a capacitor ruptures
but you might be able to explain how it works.

??? Your trying to push energy beyond the limits of the insulator.
duhhh.

You taught her something she evidently did not know, going by her own
statement above. Don't expect any thanks for that, though.

(We must be carefull that the effects are not due for other reasons
such as high density, since perhaps most mediums with high permeability
(and permittivity) also have a high density)

Interesting suggestion. It would follow that a high density of the
constituents of a medium, which are what facilitate the motion of
things through it, would make said motion easier the more of those
constituents in it per a given unit of it. If what you say about
mediums
with high p and p also have a high density, your suggestion is valid.

Chuck Yeager fell back to earth... so the sound theory of gravity
is an unsound concept. Forget it!
Charge a comb and learn some physics. :o)

Once again Sue, ask anyone the electric force is NOT A POPULAR theory
on curved space, only gravity force.

LEARN THE MAIN PRINCIPALES, and do not confuse people without
specifying these are your hypotheses on unfound science.

http://web.mit.edu/8.02t/www/802TEAL3D/teal_tour.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_integral
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/pseudo.html

Sue...

.

Relevant Pages
Loading