🚀 go-pugleaf

On May 7, 4:42 pm, ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc) wrote:
> On Fri, 7 May 2010 05:43:56 -0700 (PDT), PD <thedraperfam...@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.

Apparently not. Can you write them down here?

>
>
>
> >> >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.

Do variable stars have empty space in them? Prove it.

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

Hmmmm?

>
> Here's anothe simple matchhttp://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.