Re: If it ain't broke...

On Dec 22, 7:47 pm, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
Eric Gisse wrote:
On Dec 21, 1:29 am, "TomPotter" <tdp1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[snip]

Thank you for the reminder that TomPotterhas nothing to contribute
to a newsgroup about physics.

Except he bases his "physics" web page on the way he thinks.  To
point out that he has no capability of thinking might give a hint
that his physics web site is also flawed.  He hasn't fixed those
errors yet and it's been 5, maybe 8 years, since the corrections
were handed to him.

/BAH

I would like to thank BAH
for asking for an update to my views on physics.

I will be looking forward to her reading this update,
and suggesting valid "corrections".

The essence of physics is Dimensional Analysis.

Maxwell observed that a measurement consisted of two parts:
a "standard unit",
and the number of these units involved.

Physical properties are defined by the "standard units" used
to measure or define them.
( Masses are measured in terms of some standard mass.
times are measured in terms of some standard time, etc.)

Maxwell then attempted to find the smallest number of
"standard units" he could use as "pointers" to all of the
known measurable properties.

He selected mass, time and a three-dimensional vector ( del operator )
as his "standard units". There were numerous standard units
for mass, time and distance at the time.

With these he was able to "point to" all of the known mechanical
properties
such as momentum, energy, pressure, area, volume, etc.

but in order to point to the emerging electric and magnetic
properties
that were being discovered and organized by Faraday,

he used the "electric constant" (Permittivity)
to equate the force between "electric units" (Standard charges)
and mechanical force,
and
he used the "magnetic constant" (Permeability)
to equate the force between "magnetic units" (Standard magnets)
and mechanical force.

As it turns out,
he could have equated mechanical force
to both the electric and magnetic forces using only one constant,
the impedance of space.

As is well known,
Einstein's "rigid rods" are nasty beasts,
that can be contaminated and
are affected by pressure, temperature, acceleration, etc.

and the most fundamental "standard unit" for distance
is the time interval of some stable wavelength
associated with some atomic or nuclear process.

All physical properties can be defined in terms of
the "standard wavelength"
and seven harmonic "orthogonals",

one time, three spaces, one electric, one magnetic, and one
"quantum" of "mechanical, such quantum being
best represented by units of "spin" (Angular momentum).

Inductance is the most obvious magnetic equivalent of space.
inductance = length * permeability,

but more fundamentally
inductance = "fundamental time interval" * impedance of space * N

and

capacitance is the most obvious electric equivalent of space.
capacitance = length * permittivity

but more fundamentally
capacitance = "fundamental time interval" * admittance of space * N
capacitance = "fundamental time interval" * N / impedance of space.

To answer your question,
"what is fundamental"

is the wavelength used to define all of the other properties,

and all else are the constants used to equate orthogonal
properties to the fundamental wavelength,
and several orthogonal dimensions that standing and traveling waves
exist and change in.

In other and simpler words:
1. Your most basic "standard unit" is FUNDAMENTAL.
2. These fundamental units can be used to quantize other properties.
3. Once you have quantized ANY property by comparing it
harmonically with the standard, you can express the measurement in
other units
simply by multiplying by a constant.

Of course, what is normally done is to quantize properties
by comparing them to some politically determined unit
such as a King's foot length, stride, weight,
or the number of seeds in a mass or a volume,

and then (eventually) seeing how
this quantization compares to the most
FUNDAMENTAL "standard unit"
which (At present) is a stable wavelength.

Note that angular momentum is NOT orthogonal to
the time and three spaces dimensions,
but that angular momentum times time^3 is.

Also note that momentum is NOT orthogonal to
the time and three spaces dimensions,
but that momentum times time^4 is.

As can be seen, energy, mass, momentum,
angular momentum, etc. are NOT fundamental
degrees of freedom, but are composites of
more fundamental degree of freedoms
that are contaminated by time.

Complex conjugation is sometimes used to
remove the "contamination" of composite properties,
for example remove the "bumps" along a transmission line,
and get a system following a linear time time.

The bottom line is that:

1. Physical measurements are made by comparing
a variable to N steps of some fundamental unit.

2, All physical measurements should be referenced to
ONE FUNDAMENTAL "standard unit",

and the best standard to use would be the
wavelength (Or frequency) associated with the oscillating system
that has the best auto-correlation property.

3. The degrees of freedom of a point particle
introduce new sets of properties.
( x, y, z, t, angular momentum, momentum, etc. )

4.. An indicated above, constants such as "c", permeability,
permittivity,
Planck's Constant, etc. give rise to politically based constants,
and obscure the fact that ALL physical properties can be,
and should be, expressed in terms of an integer,
a degree of freedom, and N units of the
ONE FUNDAMENTAL "standard unit".

I suggest that it is okay to use x,y,z, and t for the
obvious degrees of freedom,
and that the next two degrees of freedom
should be referenced as "d", and "p".

NOTE:

Maxwell used a three dimensional vector operator "del"
to link two points in three orthogonal dimensions.

I suggest that a seven dimensional vector operator "potter"
be used to link two points in seven orthogonal dimensions.

( This ought to keep the bitch busy for a while.)

--
Tom Potter (t,d,p)

http://www.geocities.com/tdp1001/index.html
http://notsocrazyideas.blogspot.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/
http://tdp1001.wiki.zoho.com
http://groups.msn.com/PotterPhotos
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/dingleberry.htm
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: If it aint broke...
    ... wants more contributions about physics from me. ... Physical properties are defined by the "standard units" used ... best represented by units of "spin" (Angular momentum). ... and several orthogonal dimensions that standing and traveling waves ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Seven dimensional vector operator explains physics
    ... This post explains how a seven dimensional vector operator ... The essence of physics is Dimensional Analysis. ... and the number of standard units involved. ... several orthogonal dimensions that standing and traveling waves ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: If it aint broke...
    ... Except he bases his "physics" web page on the way he thinks. ... and the most fundamental "standard unit" for distance ... best represented by units of "spin" (Angular momentum). ... and several orthogonal dimensions that standing and traveling waves ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: If it aint broke...
    ... wants more contributions about physics from me. ... and the most fundamental "standard unit" for distance ... best represented by units of "spin" (Angular momentum). ... and several orthogonal dimensions that standing and traveling waves ...
    (sci.physics)
  • This Weeks Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 277)
    ... This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics ... When the wiggles are waves that are moving along, ... steps are called "particles". ... For example, the atoms may have an angular momentum, ...
    (sci.math.research)