Hi,
Can anyone share with me Quasar Jet Stream data, I can't afford it. I just want to develop an equation and test a hypothesis on super luminar (faster than light) motion from these quasar jet streams. There are excellent articles from nature but I'm not able to afford it.
Nature has the best articles http://www.nature.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL-fCWIUuDs
Please I just need the data, you can work on it with me if you like.
Thanks
Kevin
This "faster than light motion" intrigues me, do you have evidence of it?
Horse-crap.
I can't pay for the articles I'd like to read either, but this sort of trolling for garbage is pretty sad.
There are many articles available at no cost that debunk the 'superluminal' motion of galactic jets, but home-boy is either stupid or lazy.
Don't play.
I can't pay for the articles I'd like to read either, but this sort of trolling for garbage is pretty sad.
There are many articles available at no cost that debunk the 'superluminal' motion of galactic jets, but home-boy is either stupid or lazy.
Don't play.
QUOTE (Granouille+Oct 29 2009, 03:16 AM)
Horse-crap.
I can't pay for the articles I'd like to read either, but this sort of trolling for garbage is pretty sad.
There are many articles available at no cost that debunk the 'superluminal' motion of galactic jets, but home-boy is either stupid or lazy.
Don't play.
I will be honest I am so frustrated, I will disprove it my self, all I need is some current data on quasar jet streams FTL Super Luminar motion. People are yelling at me like I'm some crack pot, all I want to do is write a description of black holes creating space time as energy goes in to the BH. Does a person need a freaking PHD to ask a question?????
I am so frustrated. I remember 30 years ago in physics class a student came up with the concept of Solar sails, but me and the teacher put him on the correct path of not developing any ideas until he was educated further, "I mean come on how can some one even be allowed to think of an idea, UNTIL THEY have been indoctrinated and have there MAs or PHD". Today scientists are thinking of doing what he suggested, "It was this experience that opened my mind to other peoples ideas, NO MATTER HOW BIZARRE". TEST THE HYPOTHESIS before anything. That poor guy, wish I could apologize to him today. I will write it myself if I have to and I will not stop now just because of the resistance I have encountered, if people can be like jerks get ready cause here I come. I might have given up before but now it's personal. Can you please help me obtain data, I am not a leach if you can help me fine if not than go away. I really do understand a lot on Relativity and the thing I never liked about it is the creation of space time from the big bang and forced not to question it, by other scientists, I am afraid scientists have become what they hated most, it is just as powerful as a religion, just better at describing the universe than older religions like it. This is how frustrated I am.
Kevin
I can't pay for the articles I'd like to read either, but this sort of trolling for garbage is pretty sad.
There are many articles available at no cost that debunk the 'superluminal' motion of galactic jets, but home-boy is either stupid or lazy.
Don't play.
I will be honest I am so frustrated, I will disprove it my self, all I need is some current data on quasar jet streams FTL Super Luminar motion. People are yelling at me like I'm some crack pot, all I want to do is write a description of black holes creating space time as energy goes in to the BH. Does a person need a freaking PHD to ask a question?????
I am so frustrated. I remember 30 years ago in physics class a student came up with the concept of Solar sails, but me and the teacher put him on the correct path of not developing any ideas until he was educated further, "I mean come on how can some one even be allowed to think of an idea, UNTIL THEY have been indoctrinated and have there MAs or PHD". Today scientists are thinking of doing what he suggested, "It was this experience that opened my mind to other peoples ideas, NO MATTER HOW BIZARRE". TEST THE HYPOTHESIS before anything. That poor guy, wish I could apologize to him today. I will write it myself if I have to and I will not stop now just because of the resistance I have encountered, if people can be like jerks get ready cause here I come. I might have given up before but now it's personal. Can you please help me obtain data, I am not a leach if you can help me fine if not than go away. I really do understand a lot on Relativity and the thing I never liked about it is the creation of space time from the big bang and forced not to question it, by other scientists, I am afraid scientists have become what they hated most, it is just as powerful as a religion, just better at describing the universe than older religions like it. This is how frustrated I am.
Kevin
Just in case you are being honest. Don't become frustrated. Relax and chill out. This is a forum where people like to rip your face off. Now, if you are being dishonest, come back so we can rip your face off.
QUOTE (Beer w/Straw+Oct 29 2009, 03:10 AM)
This "faster than light motion" intrigues me, do you have evidence of it?
Yea http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v290/...s/290365a0.html but I can't get the article doh! Sorry but it does exist, it's always being described as an illusion, why can't we describe it as real, hay that's how new ideas are formed. Might not be right but hay what the hell, what's it going to hurtz? You in?
BTW thanks for your post above, yea I am being honest, I've been asking this question for off and on for the last 30 years, just recently I really decided to tackle it by giving it life than trying to tear it apart, then pick it apart with more recent empirical data.
Check it out the above link if you got access.
Peace
Kevin
Yea http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v290/...s/290365a0.html but I can't get the article doh! Sorry but it does exist, it's always being described as an illusion, why can't we describe it as real, hay that's how new ideas are formed. Might not be right but hay what the hell, what's it going to hurtz? You in?
BTW thanks for your post above, yea I am being honest, I've been asking this question for off and on for the last 30 years, just recently I really decided to tackle it by giving it life than trying to tear it apart, then pick it apart with more recent empirical data.
Check it out the above link if you got access.
Peace Kevin
See, you are going after one of the most tested theories in the history of science. Relativity. Now, you have to come up with some pretty funky stuff to debunk Einstein.
One thing to start your query, and I think I stand like a total fruitless fanboy cause I where it on my sleave, is HST or any other modern telescope that has studied quasars
I think that article was dated before HST was launched....
One thing to start your query, and I think I stand like a total fruitless fanboy cause I where it on my sleave, is HST or any other modern telescope that has studied quasars
I think that article was dated before HST was launched....
QUOTE (Beer w/Straw+Oct 29 2009, 05:14 AM)
See, you are going after one of the most tested theories in the history of science. Relativity. Now, you have to come up with some pretty funky stuff to debunk Einstein.
One thing to start your query, and I think I stand like a total fruitless fanboy cause I where it on my sleave, is HST or any other modern telescope that has studied quasars
I think that article was dated before HST was launched....
Radio astronomy is best to pick up quasars I did obtain some data from the VLR but I need a couple of people to help me work on it. I lost my computer month back all data is gone took me forever to get, my bad. You interested in helping let me know my weakness is math not reality so don't worry I'm not a flake, I just want to write a description from the data of the Very Large Array. Then submit it.
One thing to start your query, and I think I stand like a total fruitless fanboy cause I where it on my sleave, is HST or any other modern telescope that has studied quasars
I think that article was dated before HST was launched....
Radio astronomy is best to pick up quasars I did obtain some data from the VLR but I need a couple of people to help me work on it. I lost my computer month back all data is gone took me forever to get, my bad. You interested in helping let me know my weakness is math not reality so don't worry I'm not a flake, I just want to write a description from the data of the Very Large Array. Then submit it.
QUOTE (kevinmorais+Oct 29 2009, 05:31 AM)
Radio astronomy is best to pick up quasars I did obtain some data from the VLR but I need a couple of people to help me work on it. I lost my computer month back all data is gone took me forever to get, my bad. You interested in helping let me know my weakness is math not reality so don't worry I'm not a flake, I just want to write a description from the data of the Very Large Array. Then submit it.
I'm not a physicist, I'm only an undergraduate.
I'm not a physicist, I'm only an undergraduate.
QUOTE (kevinmorais+Oct 29 2009, 05:31 AM)
Radio astronomy is best to pick up quasars
I doubt that. There wasn't conclusive proof of black holes, aka quasars flinging crap, untill HST.
I doubt that. There wasn't conclusive proof of black holes, aka quasars flinging crap, untill HST.
QUOTE (Beer w/Straw+Oct 29 2009, 05:50 AM)
I doubt that. There wasn't conclusive proof of black holes, aka quasars flinging crap, untill HST.
Yea your right on the BH theory with the HST, but we've known about this FTL Motion for many years from the VLR and a BH has only just reciently been discovered in the center of the galixy with the HST, your right HST it is got to hit the hay, peace. You want to help with coming up with your own equation for this, I'll see about finding good data, you in? Think about it Peace
Yea your right on the BH theory with the HST, but we've known about this FTL Motion for many years from the VLR and a BH has only just reciently been discovered in the center of the galixy with the HST, your right HST it is
got to hit the hay, peace. You want to help with coming up with your own equation for this, I'll see about finding good data, you in? Think about it Peace
QUOTE (kevinmorais+Oct 29 2009, 06:13 AM)
Yea your right on the BH theory with the HST, but we've known about this FTL Motion for many years from the VLR and a BH has only just reciently been discovered in the center of the galixy with the HST, your right HST it is got to hit the hay, peace. You want to help with coming up with your own equation for this, I'll see about finding good data, you in? Think about it Peace
Just type in superluminal jets in google.
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari...=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
The explanation is very simple to understand. As predicted by relativity none of the jets are superluminal.
got to hit the hay, peace. You want to help with coming up with your own equation for this, I'll see about finding good data, you in? Think about it Peace Just type in superluminal jets in google.
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari...=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
The explanation is very simple to understand. As predicted by relativity none of the jets are superluminal.
QUOTE (brucep+Oct 29 2009, 07:17 AM)
Just type in superluminal jets in google.
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari...=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
The explanation is very simple to understand. As predicted by relativity none of the jets are superluminal.
I would have bought that but there adding to the complexity of the model, first it was the NA Model, now it is being described with very complex math along with the NA model, something to do with the Jet Cones getting funky, but I can't afford to see the theory! I question everything even myself, but I can't even read the full theory, need money to read the preists theory. I am not questing the NA Model, it makes sense but it doesn't work after 19 degrees. I'm saying are the Jets that are past 19 degrees, and the model just developed a short time ago to describe this is very complicated indeed something else is going on.
MYTH
Lonely existence a space varying abysses composed from a nugget forced from the gravity's of black suns create the illusion of a light faster than light
Candles ray fixed in a space and a time gliding with edges of endless emptiness in a blazing vacuum going nowhere never encounter
Seas rippling with infinite waves inside of countless oceans raging dusts twist slowly to the ancient rhythms of a chaotic harmony so hollow that timeless silvery echos chatter to them self's
Linear circles broken with a cosmic tangent a paradox inventing reality always change to the uncomplicated root
Myths describing a science an art, Myths explaining a scripture, munks in bleached robes harbor explinations, while artists in ivory smocks depecting with limited senses the abstract divinity so simple by feel sound sight smell and taste, subtracting the senses for a greater description of myth, the harmony created from thought
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari...=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
The explanation is very simple to understand. As predicted by relativity none of the jets are superluminal.
I would have bought that but there adding to the complexity of the model, first it was the NA Model, now it is being described with very complex math along with the NA model, something to do with the Jet Cones getting funky, but I can't afford to see the theory! I question everything even myself, but I can't even read the full theory, need money to read the preists theory. I am not questing the NA Model, it makes sense but it doesn't work after 19 degrees. I'm saying are the Jets that are past 19 degrees, and the model just developed a short time ago to describe this is very complicated indeed something else is going on.
MYTH
Lonely existence a space varying abysses composed from a nugget forced from the gravity's of black suns create the illusion of a light faster than light
Candles ray fixed in a space and a time gliding with edges of endless emptiness in a blazing vacuum going nowhere never encounter
Seas rippling with infinite waves inside of countless oceans raging dusts twist slowly to the ancient rhythms of a chaotic harmony so hollow that timeless silvery echos chatter to them self's
Linear circles broken with a cosmic tangent a paradox inventing reality always change to the uncomplicated root
Myths describing a science an art, Myths explaining a scripture, munks in bleached robes harbor explinations, while artists in ivory smocks depecting with limited senses the abstract divinity so simple by feel sound sight smell and taste, subtracting the senses for a greater description of myth, the harmony created from thought
What is wrong with you?
If you want to try your hand at poetry you should learn grammar first.
If you want to try your hand at poetry you should learn grammar first.
I looked at the youtube video again. It is so stupid I'm stupider for conversing with you.
QUOTE (Beer w/Straw+Oct 29 2009, 04:50 PM)
I looked at the youtube video again. It is so stupid I'm stupider for conversing with you.
I admit I suck at making videos k? plus I was jonesing for a cigarette I had quit smoking, if it makes you feel better I will make a better video, when I get the resources. Please don't throw the baby out with the bath water, judge the idea not my crappy video, which by the way I agree with you once again, the video Sucks.
I don't want to waist your time, my time I don't care if I waist I don't want to annoy anyone, I just want to see if there is anything to the FTL Quasar Jet Streams.
I will make a better video, one where I am not freaking out for a bloody cigarette, you have my word.
Hang in there with me, please keep an open mind. I am not saying Black Holes create space time for real, I would be nuts to say that, just like some one who believes that the earth is still flat. I just want to describe the FTL motion from Quasar Jet Stream.
BTW thanks for letting me know how the video sucked and replying back and being honest. I will do my best to do a better video.
I admit I suck at making videos k? plus I was jonesing for a cigarette I had quit smoking, if it makes you feel better I will make a better video, when I get the resources. Please don't throw the baby out with the bath water, judge the idea not my crappy video, which by the way I agree with you once again, the video Sucks.
I don't want to waist your time, my time I don't care if I waist I don't want to annoy anyone, I just want to see if there is anything to the FTL Quasar Jet Streams.
I will make a better video, one where I am not freaking out for a bloody cigarette, you have my word.
Hang in there with me, please keep an open mind. I am not saying Black Holes create space time for real, I would be nuts to say that, just like some one who believes that the earth is still flat. I just want to describe the FTL motion from Quasar Jet Stream.
BTW thanks for letting me know how the video sucked and replying back and being honest. I will do my best to do a better video.
QUOTE (Granouille+Oct 29 2009, 03:43 PM)
What is wrong with you?
If you want to try your hand at poetry you should learn grammar first.
Do you want to contribute something positive?
If you want to try your hand at poetry you should learn grammar first.
Do you want to contribute something positive?
QUOTE (kevinmorais+Oct 28 2009, 07:58 PM)
Hi,
Can anyone share with me Quasar Jet Stream data, I can't afford it. I just want to develop an equation and test a hypothesis on super luminar (faster than light) motion from these quasar jet streams. There are excellent articles from nature but I'm not able to afford it.
Nature has the best articles http://www.nature.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL-fCWIUuDs
Please I just need the data, you can work on it with me if you like.
Thanks
Kevin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superluminal_motion
http://assets.cambridge.org/97805218/49609...609_excerpt.pdf
http://www.answers.com/topic/superluminal-motion
I think it's worth noting that the cost of individual articles is usually only about US $30-40. If you don't have the money to afford that, then I would suggest that you might better occupy your time seeking employment.
Do you want to contribute something positive?
I did, you stupid SOB. A few posts back when you were whining about not having the wherewithal to buy a document.
And so have other people here.
Are you going to be all unhappy until someone buys a PDF for your miserable ***? Or until your freaking therapist gives up and buys it for you?
Fool.
Can anyone share with me Quasar Jet Stream data, I can't afford it. I just want to develop an equation and test a hypothesis on super luminar (faster than light) motion from these quasar jet streams. There are excellent articles from nature but I'm not able to afford it.
Nature has the best articles http://www.nature.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL-fCWIUuDs
Please I just need the data, you can work on it with me if you like.
Thanks
Kevin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superluminal_motion
http://assets.cambridge.org/97805218/49609...609_excerpt.pdf
http://www.answers.com/topic/superluminal-motion
I think it's worth noting that the cost of individual articles is usually only about US $30-40. If you don't have the money to afford that, then I would suggest that you might better occupy your time seeking employment.
QUOTE
I remember 30 years ago in physics class a student came up with the concept of Solar sails, but me and the teacher put him on the correct path of not developing any ideas until he was educated further, "I mean come on how can some one even be allowed to think of an idea, UNTIL THEY have been indoctrinated and have there MAs or PHD".
This is stereotypical crank rhetoric. It's meaningless, and worthless except to evince your own inability to understand the concept of methodological naturalism.QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| I remember 30 years ago in physics class a student came up with the concept of Solar sails, but me and the teacher put him on the correct path of not developing any ideas until he was educated further, "I mean come on how can some one even be allowed to think of an idea, UNTIL THEY have been indoctrinated and have there MAs or PHD". |
This is stereotypical crank rhetoric. It's meaningless, and worthless except to evince your own inability to understand the concept of methodological naturalism.
You interested in helping let me know my weakness is math not reality so don't worry I'm not a flake, I just want to write a description from the data of the Very Large Array.
You interested in helping let me know my weakness is math not reality so don't worry I'm not a flake, I just want to write a description from the data of the Very Large Array.
If you can't do the math, you can't write a description.
QUOTE (kevinmorais+Oct 29 2009, 03:03 PM)
Do you want to contribute something positive?
I did, you stupid SOB. A few posts back when you were whining about not having the wherewithal to buy a document.
And so have other people here.
Are you going to be all unhappy until someone buys a PDF for your miserable ***? Or until your freaking therapist gives up and buys it for you?
Fool.
QUOTE (Granouille+Oct 29 2009, 08:36 PM)
I did, you stupid SOB. A few posts back when you were whining about not having the wherewithal to buy a document.
And so have other people here.
Are you going to be all unhappy until someone buys a PDF for your miserable ***? Or until your freaking therapist gives up and buys it for you?
Fool.
I was going to say something but then I realized it is just you, you mean nothing to me, go away
And so have other people here.
Are you going to be all unhappy until someone buys a PDF for your miserable ***? Or until your freaking therapist gives up and buys it for you?
Fool.
I was going to say something but then I realized it is just you, you mean nothing to me, go away
QUOTE (MjolnirPants+Oct 29 2009, 08:26 PM)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superluminal_motion
http://assets.cambridge.org/97805218/49609...609_excerpt.pdf
http://www.answers.com/topic/superluminal-motion
I think it's worth noting that the cost of individual articles is usually only about US $30-40. If you don't have the money to afford that, then I would suggest that you might better occupy your time seeking employment.
This is stereotypical crank rhetoric. It's meaningless, and worthless except to evince your own inability to understand the concept of methodological naturalism.
If you can't do the math, you can't write a description.
Thanks for the links, I had something similar from Cambridge but there is very little data. I appreciate you taking the time to offer to help. As to getting a job I can't work, had an accident and am trying to get disability, the 30-50 bucks for articles is not an option, as of yet.
Kev
EVERYONE please follow this link...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor
Remember this in grade 10 physics, it's one of the first things they teach in science and today it appears to be the last thing we remember, yes that goes for your Great Prophet's with the PhD's aka University Professors, Don't question, take it in faith, use the force, and keep your job.
All I need is Quasar Jet Stream Data please help so I can write the description and I will, please help, and my video sucks big time I know...
http://assets.cambridge.org/97805218/49609...609_excerpt.pdf
http://www.answers.com/topic/superluminal-motion
I think it's worth noting that the cost of individual articles is usually only about US $30-40. If you don't have the money to afford that, then I would suggest that you might better occupy your time seeking employment.
This is stereotypical crank rhetoric. It's meaningless, and worthless except to evince your own inability to understand the concept of methodological naturalism.
If you can't do the math, you can't write a description.
Thanks for the links, I had something similar from Cambridge but there is very little data. I appreciate you taking the time to offer to help. As to getting a job I can't work, had an accident and am trying to get disability, the 30-50 bucks for articles is not an option, as of yet.
Kev
EVERYONE please follow this link...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor
Remember this in grade 10 physics, it's one of the first things they teach in science and today it appears to be the last thing we remember, yes that goes for your Great Prophet's with the PhD's aka University Professors, Don't question, take it in faith, use the force, and keep your job.
All I need is Quasar Jet Stream Data please help so I can write the description and I will, please help, and my video sucks big time I know...
If your accident resulted in some cognitive dysfunction or aphasia that prevents you from posting here coherently, I apologize from my true heart.
In the meantime, I imagine that your accident occurred because you stepped off the curb in a pontifical fog, and a bus just 'happened to be there'.
In the meantime, I imagine that your accident occurred because you stepped off the curb in a pontifical fog, and a bus just 'happened to be there'.
QUOTE (Granouille+Oct 29 2009, 09:22 PM)
If your accident resulted in some cognitive dysfunction or aphasia that prevents you from posting here coherently, I apologize from my true heart.
In the meantime, I imagine that your accident occurred because you stepped off the curb in a pontifical fog, and a bus just 'happened to be there'.
Hay share with me an original idea you had, come on I dare you, I won't slam you
In the meantime, I imagine that your accident occurred because you stepped off the curb in a pontifical fog, and a bus just 'happened to be there'.
Hay share with me an original idea you had, come on I dare you, I won't slam you
QUOTE (kevinmorais+Oct 29 2009, 04:11 PM)
Thanks for the links, I had something similar from Cambridge but there is very little data. I appreciate you taking the time to offer to help. As to getting a job I can't work, had an accident and am trying to get disability, the 30-50 bucks for articles is not an option, as of yet.
Kev
Then you have much better things to do than sit around thinking about physics.
Oh, and for the record, I know of no-one who can use a computer, but can't work. You may qualify for and even deserve disability, but you could always look for work in data entry, data mining, CAD drafting, systems administration, etc, etc, etc.
Granouille is being short with you because you're being pretentious, ignorant and unoriginal. Your claims to be attempting to do actual physics is an insult to everyone here who's taken the time out of their lives to learn some level of physics, and knows how much effort it takes to actually get to a level where you can do physics.
Kev
Then you have much better things to do than sit around thinking about physics.
Oh, and for the record, I know of no-one who can use a computer, but can't work. You may qualify for and even deserve disability, but you could always look for work in data entry, data mining, CAD drafting, systems administration, etc, etc, etc.
QUOTE
EVERYONE please follow this link...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor
Remember this in grade 10 physics, it's one of the first things they teach in science and today it appears to be the last thing we remember, yes that goes for your Great Prophet's with the PhD's aka University Professors, Don't question, take it in faith, use the force, and keep your job.
All I need is Quasar Jet Stream Data please help so I can write the description and I will, please help, and my video sucks big time I know...
This is yet more empty, unoriginal, untrue and blatantly ignorant crank rhetoric. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor
Remember this in grade 10 physics, it's one of the first things they teach in science and today it appears to be the last thing we remember, yes that goes for your Great Prophet's with the PhD's aka University Professors, Don't question, take it in faith, use the force, and keep your job.
All I need is Quasar Jet Stream Data please help so I can write the description and I will, please help, and my video sucks big time I know...
Granouille is being short with you because you're being pretentious, ignorant and unoriginal. Your claims to be attempting to do actual physics is an insult to everyone here who's taken the time out of their lives to learn some level of physics, and knows how much effort it takes to actually get to a level where you can do physics.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| EVERYONE please follow this link... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor Remember this in grade 10 physics, it's one of the first things they teach in science and today it appears to be the last thing we remember, yes that goes for your Great Prophet's with the PhD's aka University Professors, Don't question, take it in faith, use the force, and keep your job. All I need is Quasar Jet Stream Data please help so I can write the description and I will, please help, and my video sucks big time I know... |
This is yet more empty, unoriginal, untrue and blatantly ignorant crank rhetoric.
Granouille is being short with you because you're being pretentious, ignorant and unoriginal. Your claims to be attempting to do actual physics is an insult to everyone here who's taken the time out of their lives to learn some level of physics, and knows how much effort it takes to actually get to a level where you can do physics.
Hay share with me an original idea you had, come on I dare you, I won't slam you
Granouille is being short with you because you're being pretentious, ignorant and unoriginal. Your claims to be attempting to do actual physics is an insult to everyone here who's taken the time out of their lives to learn some level of physics, and knows how much effort it takes to actually get to a level where you can do physics.
Hay share with me an original idea you had, come on I dare you, I won't slam you
1. You misspelled "Hey." Misspelling a three-letter word does not speak highly about your intelligence.
2. Granouille has had quite a few original ideas, and shared quite a few of them freely. The difference is that he knows his limits, and doesn't pretend to exceed them, which is what you're doing here.
2. Granouille has had quite a few original ideas, and shared quite a few of them freely. The difference is that he knows his limits, and doesn't pretend to exceed them, which is what you're doing here.
QUOTE (MjolnirPants+Oct 30 2009, 12:26 AM)
Then you have much better things to do than sit around thinking about physics.
Oh, and for the record, I know of no-one who can use a computer, but can't work. You may qualify for and even deserve disability, but you could always look for work in data entry, data mining, CAD drafting, systems administration, etc, etc, etc.
This is yet more empty, unoriginal, untrue and blatantly ignorant crank rhetoric.
Granouille is being short with you because you're being pretentious, ignorant and unoriginal. Your claims to be attempting to do actual physics is an insult to everyone here who's taken the time out of their lives to learn some level of physics, and knows how much effort it takes to actually get to a level where you can do physics.
1. You misspelled "Hey." Misspelling a three-letter word does not speak highly about your intelligence.
2. Granouille has had quite a few original ideas, and shared quite a few of them freely. The difference is that he knows his limits, and doesn't pretend to exceed them, which is what you're doing here.
???
Can anyone please give me data, I guess not...
Oh, and for the record, I know of no-one who can use a computer, but can't work. You may qualify for and even deserve disability, but you could always look for work in data entry, data mining, CAD drafting, systems administration, etc, etc, etc.
This is yet more empty, unoriginal, untrue and blatantly ignorant crank rhetoric.
Granouille is being short with you because you're being pretentious, ignorant and unoriginal. Your claims to be attempting to do actual physics is an insult to everyone here who's taken the time out of their lives to learn some level of physics, and knows how much effort it takes to actually get to a level where you can do physics.
1. You misspelled "Hey." Misspelling a three-letter word does not speak highly about your intelligence.
2. Granouille has had quite a few original ideas, and shared quite a few of them freely. The difference is that he knows his limits, and doesn't pretend to exceed them, which is what you're doing here.
???
Can anyone please give me data, I guess not...
QUOTE (kevinmorais+Oct 30 2009, 01:04 AM)
???
Can anyone please give me data, I guess not...
I t seems you might think the scientific community is involved in some type of coverup wrt to these measurements. Look at this:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Rela...perluminal.html
In essence the velocity of the jets are being measured using a clock in the laboratory frame [this case the earth frame] so the velocity being measured is the proper velocity. There is no limit for proper velocity. When you transform to the rocket frame [this case the jet frame] velocity will always be < c. The other component is the geometry of the measurement. This can change the number but the measurement remains for proper velocity.
Can anyone please give me data, I guess not...
I t seems you might think the scientific community is involved in some type of coverup wrt to these measurements. Look at this:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Rela...perluminal.html
In essence the velocity of the jets are being measured using a clock in the laboratory frame [this case the earth frame] so the velocity being measured is the proper velocity. There is no limit for proper velocity. When you transform to the rocket frame [this case the jet frame] velocity will always be < c. The other component is the geometry of the measurement. This can change the number but the measurement remains for proper velocity.
QUOTE (brucep+Oct 31 2009, 01:37 AM)
I t seems you might think the scientific community is involved in some type of coverup wrt to these measurements. Look at this:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Rela...perluminal.html
In essence the velocity of the jets are being measured using a clock in the laboratory frame [this case the earth frame] so the velocity being measured is the proper velocity. There is no limit for proper velocity. When you transform to the rocket frame [this case the jet frame] velocity will always be < c. The other component is the geometry of the measurement. This can change the number but the measurement remains for proper velocity.
Hay thanks bro for going out of your way to help. I will read it, if I have any questions I will bug you if you don't mind.
I am not a conspiracy theorist, but your right I was beginning to think something is going on because NOT ONE Physics professor out of 100 has replied, not one, my video couldn't have been that bad, OK it was bad, that's probably why. The new video should help that but I don't know if it can salvage any shred of credibility I have lost, only the chronic nicotine addicts can understand.
Thanks again for taking time out and I will be reading it tonight.
Kevin
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Rela...perluminal.html
In essence the velocity of the jets are being measured using a clock in the laboratory frame [this case the earth frame] so the velocity being measured is the proper velocity. There is no limit for proper velocity. When you transform to the rocket frame [this case the jet frame] velocity will always be < c. The other component is the geometry of the measurement. This can change the number but the measurement remains for proper velocity.
Hay thanks bro for going out of your way to help. I will read it, if I have any questions I will bug you if you don't mind.
I am not a conspiracy theorist, but your right I was beginning to think something is going on because NOT ONE Physics professor out of 100 has replied, not one, my video couldn't have been that bad, OK it was bad, that's probably why. The new video should help that but I don't know if it can salvage any shred of credibility I have lost, only the chronic nicotine addicts can understand.
Thanks again for taking time out and I will be reading it tonight.
Kevin
I will say in my defense, because I feel utter stupid, that my mind set was worrying if there was enough candy to hand out.
:EDIT:
Plus I was drunk!
:EDIT:
Plus I was drunk!
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.