🚀 go-pugleaf

On Thu, 15 May 2008 01:18:05 +0100, "Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics>
wrote:

>
>"Dr. Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message 
>news:22pm24dvn64f8oi9edu8u8q4drn2i4ndbr@4ax.com...
>| On Wed, 14 May 2008 03:54:52 +0100, "Androcles" 

>| >| Of course the second ring is concentric. it is right next to the gyro
>| >ring.
>| >
>| >
>| >
>| >It can't be right next to, left next to, front next to or back next to, 
>it
>| >can only be above next to or below next to. There is no "of course"
>| >about it, your descriptions are vague and imprecise. Just because
>| >you know what you mean doesn't mean anybody else does.
>|
>| Stop acting dumb.....I assume you're acting....
>
>I'm smarter than you'll ever know or appreciate. Your language is too
>imprecise to be acceptable as anything called "science". "Obviously"
>I have to rely on past knowledge and experience of your mentality to
>know the difference between what you mean and what you say, "of
>course". Your pathetic cliche, "right next to", is "left" wide open
>to intepretation. I conclude you don't know right from left. That's
>hardly surprising since you live in Oz and are upside-down.

....Still acting dumb.....

>| The two rings are parallel and adjacent.
>
>Ah... now that is scientific language, much better than "right next to".
>So why didn't you say so?
>If you want me to read carefully then you must write carefully, as I do.

....Still acting dumb.....


>| Have a look at the back wheels of the
>| next semi-trailer that goes past.
>
>What's a semi-trailer? Half a fucking trailer? Which half am I to
>look at, the half left at home or the half drawn by the semi-tractor?

A semi-trailer is Aussie for a truck with a front 'prime mover' and a back half
that carries the load. I'm sure you've seen one.


>| What happens if the brakes are put on one and not the other....jacked up 
>of
>| course.
>
>No no, jack-knife occurs when you put the brakes on the tractor.
>Unless you mean lowering the trailer jacks, but then you don't need
>a  tractor and it doesn't "go past".
>Wilson, I speak fluent English and fluent American, but Ozzie I never
>learned beyond "G'day, mate" and "Fosters, orstrylian for beer."
>That's awful piss too.

All beer is piss...full of preservative and other crap and lacking vitamin B.
Beer drinkers end up braindead and hypertense.....unlike us healthy consumers
of good red wine. 

>| >| The movement is only a couple of light wavelengths at the most.
>| >| You can assume the movement is in a straight line and is just vt..
>| >
>| >Are you saying ring microwave gyroscopes won't work?
>| >I don't ASSUME anything, Wilson, especially when there is no need to.
>|
>| the movement is straight.
>| Forget the fucking sine.
>
>No. I'm a mathematician, you are sheep shagger. The movement is curved.

....Still acting dumb.....

>| >You are less intelligent so can't possibly see what's going on.
>| >READ CAREFULLY as I do.
>| >
>| >THE MARK MOVES AWAY AT V.SIN(T), EVENTUALLY RETURNING.
>| >Fucking physicists, hopeless at mathematics, clueless the lot of them.
>|
>| The pulse moves away at c in the rotating frame and eventually returns.
>
>Nope, c.sin(2pi).
>Oh wait, forget the fucking eventual return.

....Still acting dumb.....

>| The mark moves only a few microns at most during that time interval.
>
>Depends on the radius.
>2pi.r may be only a couple of microns but 2pi.R is 584336233 miles.

The latest ring gyros are usually only a few cms in diameter.


>| >Ok, so far I have read carefully and:
>| >i) the mark is stationary and moves.
>|
>| The mark is stationary in the inertial frame but moves in the rotating 
>frame.
>| Relativists are incapable of understanding that.
>
>Inertial? What's that?

The NonRotating frame at rest with the centre of rotation of the ring.


>| >ii) the mark moves in a straight line.
>|
>| Near enough.
>
>22/7 is pi, near enough.

sometimes

>|
>| >iii) arcs are straight lines.
>|
>| A micron long arc on a 10cm circle is as good as straight.
>
>Arcs are measured in units of angle, not cm.

For very small angles, tan(x) ~= sin(x) ~= x becasue the arc is as good as
straight.

>| >iv) the light reflects from total internal reflection by sqrt(2), you 
>once
>| >said.
>|
>| I did not.
>
>Yes you did, you lying bastard. You even made a hopeless drawing of 4
>mirrors using BASIC and ranted for a year about it.

A four mirror sagnac doesn't involve internal reglection.....pity engineers are
taught any optics....

>"  The ballistic theory and Sagnac.      In this frame, the speed of light 
>will be c, and the distance between the mirrors
>      will be sqrt(2)*r. (That's why the first order approximation is t ... 
>If you run
>      my program www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/sagnac.exe you will observe that 
>rays that
>      start out 90 apart do not reunite at the same point on the detector. 
>..."
>      -- 24 Feb 2006 by Henri Wilson
>
>That was  load of garbage, wasn't it?

How can it be garbage when it is fully supported by experimental evidence.

>| >v) the world is flat.
>|
>| My neighbour's tennis court is....but he's quite round.
>
>I expect you are too. I know I am.

I'm not.

>| >vi) You are upside down.
>|
>| Not in polar coordinates.
>|
>| >vii) You are less intelligent so you can't possibly see what's going on.
>|
>| I might be a specialist in teaching physics to engineers but sometimes the
>| pupils are incapable of learning.
>
>The pupils recognise bullshit when they see it.

....Still acting dumb.....


>| >| In a ring gyro, the detector rides the ring.
>| >
>| >The detector is not where the rays meet "in phase" going in opposite
>| >directions, Wilson, or it wouldn't detect anything. First, one of the 
>rays
>| >has to meet a reflector "in which total internal reflection occurs" so 
>that
>| >it goes the same way as the other ray.
>|
>| The 'reflector' is a half silvered plain mirror. It doesn't involve 
>internal
>| reflection.
>
>Fucking hopeless.

Obviously NOT acting....

>| >| In a ring gyro stuck in an aeroplane, the kids don't ever get off.
>| >
>| >You are less intelligent so you can't possibly see what's going on.
>| >READ CAREFULLY as I do.
>| >They walk around in a circle at the tail, collide (in step) and
>| >walk down the aisle of the plane at different speeds, one arriving
>| >at the flight deck before the other. The captain sees which one
>| >arrived first and knows which way his plane is rotating. It doesn't
>| >work if he's at the tail.
>|
>| That's the SR/aether analysis.
>| You have revealed your true beliefs.
>
>Enough. You are so obviously a wanker there is nothing to
>do but plonk you, you stupid cunt.
> *plonk*

Gid riddance to a closet aetherist....



Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

....specialising in teaching physics to engineers and mathematicians....