Re: Math & physics.


"Androcles" <Headmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:Ze45m.115995$Eq6.69175@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Solar cells work, but they are not built by schoolmarms.
ISS has "almost an acre of solar panels to power its 6 laboratories"
It is up to engineers to cherry-pick the bits of theories that make
sense and leave out those that do not.
Schoolmarms write papers, engineers make the world go round.
Engineers are not too interested in prophecies. If it works, SELL it.
If it doesn't, back to the drawing board.
That's the engineering method; you can keep your prophecies,
predictions, horoscopes and palm-reading scientific methods.



I was an aerospace engineer for 22 yrs. I worked on synthetic aperture radars (SARs). There is a mathematical development of radar
theory that relies completely on analytical (complex-valued) signals. In this theory, a signal is mathematically represented by a
complex number at a point in time with an "in-phase" (real) component and a "quadrature" (imaginary) component. In this theory,
"point targets" reflect an EM signal transmitted by the radar (and then the radar goes into receive mode to receive the
reflections). When a *point* target reflects the EM, the radar maniacs I worked with (and in fact, apparently the entire "radar
community") think the analytic signal vector (complex-number) gets rotated (phase shifted) by an amount that has nothing to do with
the radar nor its distance from the point target. Also, this is a *point* doing the reflection, so there is nothing like "bouncing
around inside and then back out of cavities that are small relative to the wavelength," which would lengthen the overall path the
signal takes to-and-from the radar, and cause a phase shift. A point does not have any cavities, as I pointed out about a billion
times to these insane people. And the rardar maniacs agree, this specific phase shift is not at all "small cavity-driven." The
rotation occurs because the radar maniacs think a *point* target (reflector) in the exterior world has an *innate* "complex-valued
reflectivity," which, when added to the incoming signal, instantaneously rotates the incoming signal, causing a phase shift. They
completely assume the external world is innately complex-valued, just like the QM maniacs. When I found this out, I almost puked. In
fact, there is an old 1940s paper by a man named Gabor that derives radar theory using the *exact* same equations as QM. The paper
even shows the radar theory's "uncertainty principle," which has exactly the same form as QM's UP. The use of the sqrt(-1) is a
great mathematical tool, it can provide many mathematical shortcuts, but *there is nothing in a real-valued physical external world
that is physically complex-valued.* I completely disagree with assuming an innate complex-valued reflectivity exists "out there" for
point targets. Yet we can make radar images. Even though the complex-valued theory is, imo, strictly incorrect, it comes close to
what I think really happens, close enough for us to make excellent radar images using it. I don't know about you, but I still want
to very much understand the truth, even when an application of a theory "does well enough" to sell it.

In the Heisenberg picture of QM, position and velocity are complex-valued. Can anyone tell me where the imaginary part of this
position is at in physical space? I know where the real part is at, but exactly where is this "imaginary" part of a particle's
position? And then please explain what is the *physical* interpretation of the *imaginary* part of a complex-valued velocity vector.
Like I said, I know what the real part is, but what the hell is an "imaginary" velocity? It might be quite telling that the word
"imaginary" is used - it's really refers to the made-up nonsense of QM, all in their minds, all imaginary. All of this nonsense
happens because QM *cannot* be developed *without* the use of the sqrt(-1). That right there should have told the original QM
maniacs that they themselves were just imagining things.

Steve Bell


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Math & physics.
    ... engineers make the world go round. ... There is a mathematical development of radar ... theory that relies completely on analytical signals. ... maniacs that they themselves were just imagining things. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Math & physics.
    ... engineers make the world go round. ... relies completely on analytical signals. ... transmitted by the radar (and then the radar goes into receive mode to ... (we use shorthand mathematics to describe magnetic and electric fields) ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Mass and Point
    ... statistical assumptions behind radar transmitter/receiver theory. ... phase of this complex-valued reflectivity comes from, ... Both signals are real. ... You are mistaking clutter for reflections. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Mass and Point
    ... I will condescending suggest you study more and suggest the well know text "Spotlight-Mode Synthetic Aperture Radar: A Signal Processing Approach" by C. Jakowatz et. al. ... *You* tell me where the phase of this complex-valued reflectivity comes from, ... You do realize, don't you, there is an entire branch of stochastic process theory called "time series analysis in the frequency domain" that is the *exact* statistical modeling of SAR? ... I was and have always been referring to modern sophisticated receiver circuitry that performs a downconversion to baseband with the I and Q signals then digitized and downloaded to the ground. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Mass and Point
    ... I will condescending suggest you study more and suggest the well know text "Spotlight-Mode Synthetic Aperture Radar: A Signal Processing Approach" by C. Jakowatz et. al. ... I was and have always been referring to modern sophisticated receiver circuitry that performs a downconversion to baseband with the I and Q signals then digitized and downloaded to the ground. ... Then you should not have misunderstood the reflectivity issues. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)