🚀 go-pugleaf

On Fri, 7 May 2010 05:43:56 -0700 (PDT), PD <thedraperfamily@gmail.com> wrote:

>On May 6, 5:28�pm, ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc) wrote:
>> On Thu, 6 May 2010 15:15:39 -0700 (PDT), PD <thedraperfam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On May 6, 5:02�pm, ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc) wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 6 May 2010 11:10:23 -0700 (PDT), PD <thedraperfam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >On May 5, 11:47�pm, ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc) wrote:

>> >Say you want to know the charge distribution on a metal fork after
>> >you've stuck it in the light socket. (Try it.) You know what will tell
>> >you that? Maxwell's equations.
>> >Say you want to know how much current you will need to drive a
>> >toroidal electromagnet to ferric saturation. You know what will tell
>> >you that? Maxwell's equations.
>>
>> Hahahahhhaaha! We're talking about Maxwell's wave equations...not general
>> electromagnetic ones that were created long before Maxwell
>
>Then perhaps you don't know what Maxwell's equations are. Would you
>care to google them?

Not only do I know what they are I also know what they mean.

>> >Say you want to know how to design an antenna to transmit your bootleg
>> >all-porn FM channel. You know what will tell you that? Maxwell's
>> >equations.
>>
>> Slightly more relevant...
>>
>> >Say you want to design a parallel plate capacitor with pudding as a
>> >dielectric. You know what will tell you that? I think you get the
>> >idea.
>>
>> Maxwell's wave equations are not required for that.
>
>Yes, they are.
>
>>
>> >> 'c' also happens to represent the magnitude of light's speed wrt its source.
>> >> Light moves at c+v wrt an observer moving at -v wrt its source.
>>
>> >> Empty space (completely devoid of fields) has NO e or mu. Maxwell's equations
>> >> are not relevant there.
>>
>> >You haven't said how to generate what YOU call empty space. I presume
>> >it is also devoid of angels and ectoplasm.
>>
>> Empty space exists below the WDT, which is the threshold at which the inverse
>> square law breaks down and genuine 'holes of nothing' appear in space.
>
>And how would you demonstrate or recreate this empty space to verify
>its existence?

I rely on variable star curves for all the evidence I need.

>Or are you happy to posit ectoplasm and angels over and over and over
>again?

Here's anothe simple match
http://www.scisite.info/v899herc.jpg

The poor buggers think this is an eclipsing contact binary when it is probably
just a star with a large planet in a 'time compression' situation. 
In fact the red shift they observe after the 'dip' is due to ADoppler, not
another star.
 
>> EM is 100% ballistic in those holes even though its presence temporarily
>> destroys the emptiness.
>>
>> Henry Wilson...
>>
>> .......A relativist's IQ = his snipping ability.


Henry Wilson...

.......A relativist's IQ = his snipping ability.