Re: energy and mass

Liste des GroupesRevenir à sp relativity 
Sujet : Re: energy and mass
De : bill.sloman (at) *nospam* ieee.org (Bill Sloman)
Groupes : sci.physics.relativity sci.electronics.design
Date : 14. Mar 2026, 07:03:24
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <10p2tnr$3vn0a$2@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 14/03/2026 2:18 am, john larkin wrote:
On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 16:48:58 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
 
On 13/03/2026 4:18 am, john larkin wrote:
On Thu, 12 Mar 2026 11:51:39 +0100, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder) wrote:
>
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
>
On Wed, 11 Mar 2026 18:45:45 +0100, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder) wrote:
>
john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> wrote:
>
On Wed, 11 Mar 2026 10:01:37 +0100, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
wrote:
>
Am Dienstag000010, 10.03.2026 um 17:13 schrieb john larkin:
On Tue, 10 Mar 2026 08:56:33 -0700, Ross Finlayson
<ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
The complex numbers and quaternions and hypercomplex numbers,
about the geometric algebras or the Clifford algebras,
after deMoivre-Euler-Gauss with Argand and Wessel the
usual complex analysis with Hilbert space and modeling
of rotation planes and screw arithmetic, and rather distinctly
about Elie Cartan and models of reflections and rotations,
have seen a great development since it's piling on to the
usual notions already given of the Cartesian, which is
called the analytical setting since it makes an origin
as for a Cartesian space and the usual Cartesian attachment
of an origin to a Euclidean space, then as for parametric
forms and linear algebra and vector spaces and linear vector spaces,
is a great account and after trigonometry having the ready
forms of the wave equation and the periodic motion.
>
That's beautiful. I'll add it to my word salad collection.
>
>
What he apparently meant:
>
there had been several approaches to utilise hypercomplex numbers and
none had worked.
>
I wanted to express, that my system, composed of biquaternions and Pauli
algebra, looks quite promising.
>
Have a look yourself:
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Ur3_giuk2l439fxUa8QHX4wTDxBEaM6lOl
gVU
a0cFU4/edit?usp=sharing
>
The idea is called 'structured spacetime', which is meant as an
alternative to string theory.
>
>
TH
>
Maybe the universe is sufficiently complex that humans can never
understand it. Newton, Einstein, Feynman got us about as far as we
will ever go.
>
Given that, we don't need many theoretical physicists.
>
Yes. The grapes hang too high, and they are probably sour anyway.
>
No point in trying,
>
Jan
>
Since a very few people - if any - are smart enough to understand our
universe, we don't need many trying.
>
On the other hand, the world needs a lot of engineers.
>
Spreading the incompetence, eh?
>
Jan
>
There are lots of real-world engineering problems to solve. And most
get solved just fine.
>
If we never solve any more theoretical Big Physics problems (and maybe
we won't) life will go on.
>
What do you do? I design electronics.
>
 From what he posts on sci.electronics.design it looks as he evolves
circuits rather than designing them. My experience of the design process
has been that it involves quite a lot fleshing out alternative designs
and dumping them at the point where it becomes clear that they aren't
going to work well enough, and John Larkin never admits to having had to
back-track.
 The two main phases of electronic design are
  1.  Having a zillion crazy ideas
Having few potentially useful ideas is a whole lot better.

and
 2. Picking one to execute with enough discipline to get it right the
first time
You rarely know enough about the problem to be able to reliably able pick one that is still going to looks viable after you've dug deeper into the  more detailed design.

3. And be willing to sometimes loop back to step 1.
Most of the of the design work I've done included quite a few loops back - not always all the way. I may have been working closer to the cutting edge than you were, but that's hard to quantify.
Not many people are good at both, and even fewer are good at that last
step.
The fact that you don't boast about it when you do do it is indicative.
--
Bill Sloman, sydney

Date Sujet#  Auteur
23 Feb 26 * Re: energy and mass1090Ross Finlayson
23 Feb 26 +* Re: energy and mass1075J. J. Lodder
24 Feb 26 i`* Re: energy and mass1074J. J. Lodder
24 Feb 26 i `* Re: energy and mass1073Ross Finlayson
24 Feb 26 i  +- Re: energy and mass1J. J. Lodder
25 Feb 26 i  `* Re: energy and mass1071Bill Sloman
25 Feb 26 i   +* Re: energy and mass1069J. J. Lodder
25 Feb 26 i   i+- Re: energy and mass1Ross Finlayson
25 Feb 26 i   i+* Re: energy and mass2john larkin
26 Feb 26 i   ii`- Re: energy and mass1J. J. Lodder
26 Feb 26 i   i+* Re: energy and mass1026Bill Sloman
26 Feb 26 i   ii+- Re: energy and mass1Maciej Woźniak
26 Feb 26 i   ii+* Re: energy and mass4Gerhard Hoffmann
26 Feb 26 i   iii`* Re: energy and mass3J. J. Lodder
26 Feb 26 i   iii `* Re: energy and mass2Gerhard Hoffmann
26 Feb 26 i   iii  `- Re: energy and mass1Domingo Totolos
26 Feb 26 i   ii+* Re: energy and mass1019Ross Finlayson
26 Feb 26 i   iii+* Re: energy and mass527Maciej Woźniak
26 Feb 26 i   iiii`* Re: energy and mass526Ross Finlayson
26 Feb 26 i   iiii +* Re: energy and mass3Maciej Woźniak
26 Feb 26 i   iiii i`* Re: energy and mass2Maciej Woźniak
26 Feb 26 i   iiii i `- Re: energy and mass1Ross Finlayson
28 Feb 26 i   iiii `* Re: energy and mass522Thomas Heger
28 Feb 26 i   iiii  +* Re: energy and mass518Bill Sloman
1 Mar 26 i   iiii  i`* Re: energy and mass517Thomas Heger
1 Mar 26 i   iiii  i `* Re: energy and mass516Bill Sloman
3 Mar 26 i   iiii  i  `* Re: energy and mass515Thomas Heger
3 Mar 26 i   iiii  i   `* Re: energy and mass514Bill Sloman
5 Mar 26 i   iiii  i    `* Re: energy and mass513Thomas Heger
5 Mar 26 i   iiii  i     `* Re: energy and mass512Bill Sloman
5 Mar 26 i   iiii  i      +* Re: energy and mass10Jeroen Belleman
5 Mar 26 i   iiii  i      i`* Re: energy and mass9Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
6 Mar 26 i   iiii  i      i `* Re: energy and mass8Ross Finlayson
6 Mar 26 i   iiii  i      i  `* Re: energy and mass7john larkin
7 Mar 26 i   iiii  i      i   `* Re: energy and mass6Bill Sloman
7 Mar 26 i   iiii  i      i    `* Re: energy and mass5Ross Finlayson
7 Mar 26 i   iiii  i      i     +* Re: energy and mass3john larkin
7 Mar 26 i   iiii  i      i     i`* Re: energy and mass2Bill Sloman
7 Mar 26 i   iiii  i      i     i `- Re: energy and mass1Ross Finlayson
7 Mar 26 i   iiii  i      i     `- Re: energy and mass1Bill Sloman
5 Mar 26 i   iiii  i      +* Re: energy and mass5Ross Finlayson
5 Mar 26 i   iiii  i      i+- Re: energy and mass1Don
5 Mar 26 i   iiii  i      i+* Re: energy and mass2Don
5 Mar 26 i   iiii  i      ii`- Re: energy and mass1Ross Finlayson
5 Mar 26 i   iiii  i      i`- Re: energy and mass1Bill Sloman
8 Mar 26 i   iiii  i      `* Re: energy and mass496Thomas Heger
8 Mar 26 i   iiii  i       `* Re: energy and mass495Bill Sloman
10 Mar 26 i   iiii  i        `* Re: energy and mass494Thomas Heger
10 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         +* Re: energy and mass101Ross Finlayson
10 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         i+* Re: energy and mass77john larkin
10 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii+- Re: energy and mass1Ross Finlayson
10 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii+* Re: energy and mass5Jeroen Belleman
10 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         iii+* Re: energy and mass3john larkin
10 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         iiii+- Re: energy and mass1Ross Finlayson
11 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         iiii`- Re: energy and mass1Bill Sloman
11 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         iii`- Re: energy and mass1Bill Sloman
11 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii`* Re: energy and mass70Thomas Heger
11 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii +* Re: energy and mass62john larkin
12 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i+* Re: energy and mass12john larkin
12 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii ii+* Re: energy and mass5Bill Sloman
12 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii iii`* Re: energy and mass4john larkin
13 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii iii `* Re: energy and mass3Bill Sloman
13 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii iii  `* Re: energy and mass2john larkin
14 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii iii   `- Re: energy and mass1Bill Sloman
12 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii ii`* Re: energy and mass6J. J. Lodder
12 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii ii `* Re: energy and mass5john larkin
12 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii ii  +- Re: energy and mass1J. J. Lodder
13 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii ii  `* Re: energy and mass3Bill Sloman
13 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii ii   `* Re: energy and mass2john larkin
14 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii ii    `- Re: energy and mass1Bill Sloman
12 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i+* Re: energy and mass13Bill Sloman
12 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii ii`* Re: energy and mass12J. J. Lodder
12 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii ii `* Re: energy and mass11Bill Sloman
12 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii ii  `* Re: energy and mass10J. J. Lodder
13 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii ii   `* Re: energy and mass9Bill Sloman
13 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii ii    `* Re: energy and mass8Bill Sloman
14 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii ii     `* Re: energy and mass7Bill Sloman
14 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii ii      `* Re: energy and mass6Maciej Woźniak
14 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii ii       `* Re: energy and mass5Bill Sloman
15 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii ii        `* Re: energy and mass4Bill Sloman
15 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii ii         `* Re: energy and mass3Bill Sloman
15 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii ii          `* Re: energy and mass2Maciej Woźniak
15 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii ii           `- Re: energy and mass1Bill Sloman
13 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i`* Re: energy and mass36Thomas Heger
13 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i `* Re: energy and mass35Bill Sloman
14 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i  `* Re: energy and mass34Thomas Heger
14 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i   `* Re: energy and mass33Bill Sloman
15 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i    `* Re: energy and mass32Thomas Heger
15 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i     `* Re: energy and mass31Bill Sloman
16 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i      +- Re: energy and mass1Bill Sloman
19 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i      `* Re: energy and mass29Thomas Heger
19 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i       +* Re: energy and mass27Bill Sloman
20 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i       i`* Re: energy and mass26Thomas Heger
20 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i       i `* Re: energy and mass25Bill Sloman
21 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i       i  `* Re: energy and mass24Thomas Heger
21 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i       i   +* Re: energy and mass14john larkin
21 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i       i   i`* Re: energy and mass13Ross Finlayson
21 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i       i   i +* Re: energy and mass10john larkin
21 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i       i   i i`* Re: energy and mass9Ross Finlayson
21 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i       i   i i `* Re: energy and mass8john larkin
22 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i       i   i i  `* Re: energy and mass7J. J. Lodder
21 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i       i   i `* Re: energy and mass2Bill Sloman
21 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i       i   `* Re: energy and mass9Bill Sloman
19 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii i       `- Re: energy and mass1Ross Finlayson
11 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         ii `* Re: energy and mass7Ross Finlayson
10 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         i+* Re: energy and mass5Ross Finlayson
11 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         i`* Re: energy and mass18Paul B. Andersen
10 Mar 26 i   iiii  i         `* Re: energy and mass392Bill Sloman
28 Feb 26 i   iiii  +* Re: energy and mass2Ross Finlayson
1 Mar 26 i   iiii  `- Re: energy and mass1Thomas Heger
28 Feb 26 i   iii`* Re: energy and mass491Thomas Heger
26 Feb 26 i   ii`- Re: energy and mass1Bill Sloman
28 Feb 26 i   i`* Re: energy and mass39Don
25 Feb 26 i   `- Re: energy and mass1Ross Finlayson
24 Feb 26 `* Re: energy and mass14Bill Sloman

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal