Jimmie D wrote:

...
Most of the points in theorectical physics are moot.



Jimmie:

True, VERY true. Indeed, before Einstein that same fact was true--but
still, good some men ignored that and continued ...

Regards,
JS

wrote:

...
Utter nonsense.

Time on Earth hasn't been based on the spinning of the Earth for
40 years.

You are about 300 years behind the times.

Take away movement and you take away our time ...

Utter nonsense.
...

Jim:

No man is an island, and no cesium atom is an island either.

The spinning of this earth is directly related to the vibration of the
cesium atom.

The exact same laws of math and physics which control the vibrating of
that cesium atom control the spinning of this earth.

Sheer logic is all which is necessary to know that ...

Warmest regards,
JS

On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 09:15:28 -0800, John Smith I
wrote:
You probably won't believe this, but I believe if I place a glass of
water in my microwave and nuke it, I affect the vibration plane of the
water molecules in there!!!

Sounds like the warm beginnings of a new religion if it didn't burn
your feet while out for a stroll.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Jim Kelley wrote:
Since everything we perceive is perceived with respect to
our own reference frame, we really need only concern ourselves with our
own reference frame.

That was the same argument used by Catholic Church
when they put Galileo under house arrest for the rest
of his life. Galileo talked about space. We are
talking about space-time - not much difference.
--
73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

wrote:
Using that standard, the age of the universe is what it is.
Use a different standard, you get a different answer. So what?

So why strive for more and more accuracy in the absolute
age of the universe if the time standard is arbitrary?
--
73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 12:45:29 -0800, Richard Clark
wrote:

Wow! From Hero to Zero in 12 minutes and 33 seconds.

Who woulda thunk that my observation of time would have been the
driving motivation to correspondence in this thread?

Jimmie, you could have waited the obligatory 12 days, 33 hours and 54
thousand seconds to discover there are no facts to be had that
1. Contradict ordinary-as-mud modeling;
2. Reveal theories that would astonish the multitudes;
3. Offer a revelation of how statics can perform what dynamics do
daily. And certainly
4. No evidence of the comprehension that statics are a mathematical
fiction. Life does not allow them, and they are completely unknown
outside of a book or a classroom.

This forecast still has ten days to run out, but history has born that
it will foretell with absolute accuracy. Take it to the bank.

Art cannot even explain how he obtained a 50 Ohm non-reactive feed
into his five assorted wires, non of which could have possible
supported a fifth of that value (and jacked up with so much reactance
as to reject all power).

This last observation has stood the test of time quite well. It may
find itself in the hall of records.

And to wrap this all into another thread NOT about antennas (just as
this thread never was), and more about personalities (which was all
that this thread started out to be) of the violin:
"Time Is" from "It's a Beautiful Day" by the LaFlammes

-Whew-

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

John Smith I wrote:
wrote:

...
The standard for time for human beings is based on a particular
property of cesium on a defined Earth.

Using that standard, the age of the universe is what it is.

Use a different standard, you get a different answer.

So what?


Jim:

No one can dispute your, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" argument.

That isn't my argument.

Anyone would be fool to throw away our present theories, equations, etc.

Nonsense.

Theories are constantly changed as better data is obtained.

Newtonian physics is good enough for designing bumper jacks but not
GPS systems.

However, your argument of, "I am only worried about what happens in my
backyard" would halt progress and advancement towards the real and
correct understanding of these things.

That isn't my argument.

But hey, if what we have right now is working, "Use it!" is my motto ...

Warmest regards,
JS

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

John Smith I wrote:
wrote:

...
Utter nonsense.

Time on Earth hasn't been based on the spinning of the Earth for
40 years.

You are about 300 years behind the times.

Take away movement and you take away our time ...

Utter nonsense.
...

Jim:

No man is an island, and no cesium atom is an island either.

Word salad.

The spinning of this earth is directly related to the vibration of the
cesium atom.

Nonsense.

The exact same laws of math and physics which control the vibrating of
that cesium atom control the spinning of this earth.

Nope.

Sheer logic is all which is necessary to know that ...

Wrong.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

wrote:
John Smith I wrote:
wrote:

...
Utter nonsense.

Time on Earth hasn't been based on the spinning of the Earth for
40 years.

You are about 300 years behind the times.

Take away movement and you take away our time ...
Utter nonsense.
...

Jim:

No man is an island, and no cesium atom is an island either.

Word salad.

The spinning of this earth is directly related to the vibration of the
cesium atom.

Nonsense.

The exact same laws of math and physics which control the vibrating of
that cesium atom control the spinning of this earth.

Nope.

Sheer logic is all which is necessary to know that ...

Wrong.


Jim:

On the above, we must agree to disagree ..

Regards,
JS

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 12:45:29 -0800, Richard Clark
wrote:

Wow! From Hero to Zero in 12 minutes and 33 seconds.

Who woulda thunk that my observation of time would have been the
driving motivation to correspondence in this thread?

Jimmie, you could have waited the obligatory 12 days, 33 hours and 54
thousand seconds to discover there are no facts to be had that
1. Contradict ordinary-as-mud modeling;
2. Reveal theories that would astonish the multitudes;
3. Offer a revelation of how statics can perform what dynamics do
daily. And certainly
4. No evidence of the comprehension that statics are a mathematical
fiction. Life does not allow them, and they are completely unknown
outside of a book or a classroom.

This forecast still has ten days to run out, but history has born that
it will foretell with absolute accuracy. Take it to the bank.

Art cannot even explain how he obtained a 50 Ohm non-reactive feed
into his five assorted wires, non of which could have possible
supported a fifth of that value (and jacked up with so much reactance
as to reject all power).

This last observation has stood the test of time quite well. It may
find itself in the hall of records.

And to wrap this all into another thread NOT about antennas (just as
this thread never was), and more about personalities (which was all
that this thread started out to be) of the violin:
"Time Is" from "It's a Beautiful Day" by the LaFlammes

-Whew-

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

The subject line is most appropriate