Re: Rigorous definition of Planck's Constant


"Uncle Al" <UncleAl0@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:47F95170.B8C70D6D@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Tom Potter wrote:

As some of my fans

null set

seem to be more interested in my views on physics,

like a plumber with a photoalbum of turds,

than my views on the human condition,

You lack boundary conditions

( What is more important, black holes or the human condition? )
I offer the following for their consideration.
[snip crap]

Consider a system composed of one electron and one proton.
[snip crap]

It's been done. 1.4204057517667 GHz

1. Let M(P) = the mass of the proton.
2. Let M(E) the mass of the electron.
3. Let C = a universal distance per time constant. ( The speed of
light. )
4. Two bodies interact about a common point in a common time.

No, stooopid. Quantum mechanics matters, paritcularly singlet and
triplet spin. If one body is relativistic its clock is ambiguous.

The common point is the center of mass of the system
[snip crap]

Bull*** - how do you propose to locate each contributor and then
still know its trajecotry?

and the common time is the period of the system.
[snip lots of crap]

Bull***. Relativity and moving masses.

4. I emphasized distances, rather than more fundamental times and angular
displacements, in order to more clearly show the relationships between
the common physical constants.

A relativistic universe has four distinct distances: luminosity
(inverse square), angular diameter, parallax, and proper motion. No
two of them need agree to maintain consistency. Clocks can only be
synchronized by being local.

Idiot.

I must point out to Uncle Al,
that in physics:

Equations talk.
Parroted bull*** walks.

An excerpt from my post follows below.
===========================
1. Let M(P) = the mass of the proton.
2. Let M(E) the mass of the electron.
3. Let C = a universal distance per time constant. ( The speed of light. )
4. Two bodies interact about a common point in a common time.
The common point is the center of mass of the system
and the common time is the period of the system.
Let T(C) = the common period divided by 2 times pi = L(C) / C

where L(C) is the distance light travels during one radian of
interaction of an electron-proton system.

5. Let K = a universal distance per mass constant.
K = 1.0585382 x 10^13 meters per kilogram

( K' = 9.4469901 x 10^-14 kilograms per meter )
( Potter's Constant )

6. I assert that fine structure(E) = ( M(P) * K / L(C) ) ^1/3

then fine structure(E)^0 * L(C) = 1 / ( 2 * Rydberg Constant )
and fine structure(E)^1 * L(C) = 2 * pi * Bohr Radius
and fine structure(E)^2 * L(C) = Compton's wavelength
and fine structure(E)^3 * L(C) = 2 * pi * classical electron radius
and fine structure(E)^3 * L(C) = M(P) * K
================
End of excerpt

As can be seen,
my post reveals an informative and useful pattern of Nature,
whereas Uncle Als' post is negative, random, parroted bull***.

I will be looking forward to seeing Uncle Al
post equally informative and useful patterns of Nature
using EQUATIONS rather than random, parroted, bull***.

I will give Uncle Al an "A" for effort
for his attempt to discredit, parrot, and obfuscate.

"like a plumber with a photoalbum of turds"
"[snip crap]"
"[snip crap]"
"No, stooopid"
"Bull***. Relativity and moving masses."
"Idiot"
"[snip lots of crap]"

Somebody remind me----
Who was it that left sci.physics and vowed never to return
because it was "A River of ***"?

--
Tom Potter

http://www.geocities.com/tdp1001/index.html
http://notsocrazyideas.blogspot.com
http://groups.msn.com/PotterPhotos

.

Quantcast