Re: anti-gravity?

Liste des GroupesRevenir à se design 
Sujet : Re: anti-gravity?
De : alien (at) *nospam* comet.invalid (Jan Panteltje)
Groupes : sci.electronics.design
Date : 24. Apr 2024, 13:24:30
Autres entêtes
Message-ID : <v0aq5e$cc9m$1@solani.org>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
User-Agent : NewsFleX-1.5.7.5 (Linux-5.15.32-v7l+)
On a sunny day (Wed, 24 Apr 2024 11:04:01 +0100) it happened Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote in <v0aleh$28j7f$1@dont-email.me>:

On 24/04/2024 06:19, Jan Panteltje wrote:
PS
as to all that stuff, if you want a simple example of how 'length contraction' works:
Take a balloon, fill it with some air.
hold it in your hand, now push it forward fast
It will get flattened by the air pressure, BUT will also get wider (air must go somewhere)
>
This is exactly why mathematics is used to describe science. It is way
to easy to concoct some handwaving non-quantitative sounds right to me
cock and bull story and use sophistry to sell it to the credulous.

Simple example, simple experiment, simple conclusion
If that is too much for you then keep dreaming up numbers.

Space is NOT empty.,
>
On that we can agree. It is a very thin plasma of ordinary matter with a
smattering of virtual particles hopping in and out of existence on
borrowed energy from the quantum mechanics uncertainty principle. The
Casimir effect was measured back in 1997 to within 5% of the prediction.

I hope you see that does away with reality.
Neurons hopping in an out of existence?
Virtual particles? Oh man, you mean you did dream them up?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_effect


Natural language is not adequate for discussing these topics.

Rule is simple:
 'If you cannot describe your theory on a simple A4 format piece of paper it is likely crap.'


The equations are clear and unambiguous even if you refuse to accept them.

You can write equations for anything, those will NEVER describe nature in all detail.
Parroting Albert stonecounter is a dead end road, and has been for a long time.
His vote-on particle is crap :-)

Do not see that as personal attack.
Maaz is just about quantities for those who have not the neural net programmed to see beyond say 'abstractions'.


mamaticians claim anything
The guy who did see the lid of the kettle move when it was heated and decided to make it move some wheel did give us the steam engine
Not the endless mamamatics that came later.

I have a nice every day explanation for quantum action at a distance too...

SEE what happens, Connect what happens.
Forget the endless brainwash..

Math is just a game played by a small subset of neurons in the brain.




Date Sujet#  Auteur
21 Apr 24 * anti-gravity?50jim whitby
21 Apr 24 +* Re: anti-gravity?28jim whitby
21 Apr 24 i+* Re: anti-gravity?21Phil Hobbs
21 Apr 24 ii+* Re: anti-gravity?19John Larkin
21 Apr 24 iii+* Re: anti-gravity?15Phil Hobbs
21 Apr 24 iiii`* Re: anti-gravity?14Martin Brown
21 Apr 24 iiii +* Re: anti-gravity?12Joe Gwinn
21 Apr 24 iiii i+* Re: anti-gravity?2Phil Hobbs
21 Apr 24 iiii ii`- Re: anti-gravity?1Joe Gwinn
22 Apr 24 iiii i+* Re: anti-gravity?2John Larkin
22 Apr 24 iiii ii`- Re: anti-gravity?1Joe Gwinn
22 Apr 24 iiii i`* Re: anti-gravity?7Martin Brown
22 Apr 24 iiii i `* Re: anti-gravity?6Jeff Layman
23 Apr 24 iiii i  `* Re: anti-gravity?5Martin Brown
23 Apr 24 iiii i   +- Re: anti-gravity?1Jan Panteltje
24 Apr 24 iiii i   `* Re: anti-gravity?3Jan Panteltje
24 Apr 24 iiii i    `* Re: anti-gravity?2Martin Brown
24 Apr 24 iiii i     `- Re: anti-gravity?1Jan Panteltje
22 Apr 24 iiii `- Re: anti-gravity?1John R Walliker
21 Apr 24 iii`* Re: anti-gravity?3jim whitby
21 Apr 24 iii `* Re: anti-gravity?2Jeff Layman
21 Apr 24 iii  `- Re: anti-gravity?1Bill Sloman
22 Apr 24 ii`- Re: anti-gravity?1Clive Arthur
22 Apr 24 i`* Re: anti-gravity?6Martin Brown
22 Apr 24 i `* Re: anti-gravity?5wmartin
22 Apr 24 i  `* Re: anti-gravity?4John Larkin
22 Apr 24 i   +* Re: anti-gravity?2Phil Hobbs
22 Apr 24 i   i`- Re: anti-gravity?1John Larkin
23 Apr 24 i   `- Re: anti-gravity?1Martin Brown
21 Apr 24 +- Re: anti-gravity?1ehsjr
22 Apr 24 `* Re: anti-gravity? [OT]20Liz Tuddenham
22 Apr 24  +* Re: anti-gravity? [OT]3Jan Panteltje
22 Apr 24  i`* Re: anti-gravity? [OT]2Liz Tuddenham
22 Apr 24  i `- Re: anti-gravity? [OT]1Bill Sloman
22 Apr 24  `* Re: anti-gravity? [OT]16Phil Hobbs
22 Apr 24   +* Re: anti-gravity? [OT]5John Larkin
22 Apr 24   i+- Re: anti-gravity? [OT]1bitrex
23 Apr 24   i+- Re: anti-gravity? [OT]1Bill Sloman
23 Apr 24   i`* Re: anti-gravity? [OT]2Martin Brown
23 Apr 24   i `- Re: anti-gravity? [OT]1bitrex
22 Apr 24   +* Re: anti-gravity? [OT]6Liz Tuddenham
22 Apr 24   i+* Re: anti-gravity? [OT]2Phil Hobbs
22 Apr 24   ii`- Re: anti-gravity? [OT]1Liz Tuddenham
24 Apr 24   i`* Re: anti-gravity? [OT]3John Larkin
24 Apr 24   i `* Re: anti-gravity? [OT]2Martin Brown
24 Apr 24   i  `- Re: anti-gravity? [OT]1John Larkin
22 Apr 24   `* Re: anti-gravity? [OT]4Jeroen Belleman
22 Apr 24    +* Re: anti-gravity? [OT]2Joe Gwinn
22 Apr 24    i`- Re: anti-gravity? [OT]1Jeroen Belleman
23 Apr 24    `- Re: anti-gravity? [OT]1Jan Panteltje

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal