HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass)
Subject: Re: STRUCTURE OF TIME
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 22:21:38 GMT

In article <1992Oct09.183017.162526@watson.ibm.com> platt@watson.ibm.com (Daniel E. Platt) writes:
>|> >
>|> >As descriptions, they are falsifiable.  Investing them with concrete reality,
>|> >beyond simple description, is not falsifiable; it also does not contribute
>|> >or detract from the descriptive power of the concepts.
>|> 
>|>      Investing them with 'concrete reality' is metaphysics, not physics.
>
>That's my point...  Its metaphysics, yet many physicists act as if its
>physics.  The question has real significance when the issue of state
>vector collapse is considered (another topic that absorbs terabytes of
>data on the net).

     But the discussions often involve possible consequences of the *mechanism*
     of state vector collapse.  Such consequences are possibly observable,
     and may provide a physical basis for such discussions.  Insofar as
     they are simply debates about metaphysics, they are about as
     interesting as calculations of the equivalent angel-surface-area
     of pinheads.

                                dale bass

-- 
C. R. Bass                                           crb7q@virginia.edu
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, Virginia                            (804) 924-7926
From: snarfy@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Xmodem math
Keywords: software snarfy request
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 92 13:25:04 PDT
Reply-To: snarfy@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us



   Hi there sci.physics netters-

   It's  your  old  pal  snarfy again ! Now after the groans die down I just
   want to say how much I've enjoyed monitoring the interminable discussions
   about how to draw a straight line . If you can't even agree about what  a
   straight  line  is  I  know  I'm  in trouble when I start talking about a
   "dragstrip"  FTL-standard signal race.

    Anyway my report is coming along well but it will be a little later than
    I thought . I just got busy with other things and had to put it off.

    I have a question . Does anyone know of any software that properly codes
   math  symbols (greek alphabet, integral signs and the like) into a format
   that xmodem can send / receive?  I promised to publish some of  my  stuff
   on  the  net,  and have even had some inquiries from outside the U.S.  on
   other subjects which would necessitate replies by "snail-mail" due to the
   lack of this code process . Can anybody give me any hints?

   snarfy
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: pad@galaxy.nsc.com (Paul Denny x8349)
Subject: Re: How do you draw a straight line?
Organization: National Semiconductor, Santa Clara
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 18:53:13 GMT

> This is something I've been wondering about since a long time. Although we can
> make a circle as precise as we want, I think we cannot make a really
> precise straight line - every straight line is made from another one or from a tool
> that has been made using some older straight lines - so it all comes down to
> copying a line that has been made thousands years ago. Although we have precise
> instruments and tools, we can only make better and better lines (so that eventually
> the error is less than an atom, and we are there), but IMHO there is no
> process to create a straight line directly. Or is it?
> 
How about growing a crystal? The lines may not be very long but they should be
straight and as a bonus you get well defined angles too. 
-- 
**********************************************************************
* In conclusion, it appears to me that nothing can be more improving *
* to the young naturalist, than a journey in distant countries.      *
*                                                                    *
From: sichase@csa3.lbl.gov (SCOTT I CHASE)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: 1992 Nobel Prizes: a prediction
Date: 8 Oct 1992 14:28 PST
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory - Berkeley, CA, USA
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.254.198
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

In article <MATT.92Oct8124656@physics.berkeley.edu>, matt@physics.berkeley.edu writes...
> 
>What you have to realize about the physics Nobel Prizes is this,
>though: everyone who wins one clearly deserves it, but there are also
>a lot of people who clearly deserve it and don't get one.  There are a
>lot of people out there who do exceptional scientific work---more
>people who can be given this particular award.  

Yes.  This is the most important point that can be made about the whole affair.
There are many people who do the kind of quality work which is recognized
by the Nobel Prize.  I have met so many impressive scientists over the
years who are not showered in prizes that I have lost some of my interest
in the prizes themselves.  They are still fun.  They serve to mark time
and some major events along the way.  But no one prize or title can be used 
to judge the merits of the entire community.  

I have great respect for some almost completely "unknown" physicists.  And
personally, I would rather have this kind of respect bestowed upon me (should
I deserve it) than any of the money or "fame" which comes from winning the 
Nobel prize.  That seems like a much richer reward for all my hard work.

Of course, a *little* money would be nice.

-Scott
--------------------
Scott I. Chase			"The question seems to be of such a character
SICHASE@CSA2.LBL.GOV		that if I should come to life after my death
				and some mathematician were to tell me that it
				had been definitely settled, I think I would
				immediately drop dead again."      - Vandiver
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass)
Subject: Re: TIME HAS INERTIA AND THE PRINCIPLE OF TENDENCY OF MAINTAINING THE
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 12:37:37 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.165021.14682@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com> bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris) writes:
>In article <abian.719117674@pv343f.vincent.iastate.edu> abian@iastate.edu (Alexander Abian) writes:
>
>)Yes, I am the real Professor Abian who states that
>)           
>)                 TIME HAS INERTIA    and that
>)  
>) E = mcc  (Einstein)   must be replaced by    E = m(0) exp(-At)  (Abian)
>)    
>)and that our decadent  Solar System must be altered by reshuffling some
>)planets.
>)
>
>On a slightly more serious note - an abstract from July 1992 'Science"
>"Chaotic Evolution of the Solar System" (p 56)
>
>"The evolution of the entire planetary system has been numerically integrated
>for a time span of nearly 100 million years.  This calculation confirms that
>the evolution of the solar system as a whole is chaotic, with a time scale of
>exponential diveregence of about 4 million years.  Additional numerical
>experiments indicate that the Jovian planet subsystem is chaotic, although
>some small variations in the model can yield quasiperiodic motion.  The
>motion of Pluto is independently and robustly chaotic."
>
>Also
>
>"Another unsettling feature of the chaotic behavior we observe in long-term
>planetary integrations is that nothing dramatic happens.  This is compounded
>by the fact that in no case have we unambiguously identified the mechanism
>responsible for the chaotic behavior.  This lack of mechanism and lack of
>obvious irregular behavior is in marked contrast to the clearly understood
>mechanisms and irregular character observed in other examples of chaotic
>behavior in the solar system, for example, asteroids on chaotic trajectories
>near commensurabilities...."

     Typical misuse of the language to make a point that is 
     tenuous at best.   Numerical integration of the solar system
     out to 100 million years 'confirms' little.  One interesting quotation is
     'additional numerical experiments indicate that the Jovian planet
     subsystem is chaotic, although some small variations in the model
     can yield quasiperiodic motion'.  

                             dale bass
-- 
C. R. Bass                                           crb7q@virginia.edu
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, Virginia                            (804) 924-7926
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: court@newton.physics.mun.ca (J. Lewis)
Subject: Re: Time to develop a crackpot index?
Organization: Memorial University of Newfoundland
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 01:48:10 GMT

These days, posting to sci.physics should be worth at least a 5!; non-
crackpots (wholepots?!)  seem to be outnumbered at present; the newsgroup
has become a veritable zoo of lunacy.

Perhaps the group should be renamed "sci.physics.crackpot" :-)  That
would offend the true crackpots and they would stay away, leaving
those who do not believe themselves to be
God|Galileo|Newton|Darwin|Einstein to get on with the discussions.

John Lewis
Physics
Memorial Univ. of Nfld.
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Crackpots of the newsgroup
From: bob@1776.COM (Robert Coe)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 92 08:27:00 EDT
Distribution: world
Organization: 1776 Enterprises, Sudbury MA

bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris) writes:
> In article <abian.718940281@pv343f.vincent.iastate.edu> abian@iastate.edu (Al
> ) Give me a better explanation for the violent reaction of gun-powder 
> )when it is struck ! I say that  gun-powder is like a Hitler or Stalin, ...
>
> Yeah - but why is the 'boom' from an H-bomb so much bigger than that from
> gunpowder?  Is it just because H-bomb's are more irritable?  ...

Can't you people tell when your leg is being pulled?  :^)  I suppose it's 
impossible to tell whether or not the Abians of the newsgroup actually 
believe the guff they post, but it doesn't matter: what they *really* enjoy 
is the *reactions* they provoke.  If you want them to go away, ignoring them 
is probably a better strategy than ridiculing them.

   ___            _                                           -  Bob
   /__) _   /    / ) _   _
(_/__) (_)_(_)  (___(_)_(/_______________________________________ bob@1776.COM
Robert K. Coe ** 14 Churchill St, Sudbury, Massachusetts 01776 ** 508-443-3265
From: emarkp@soda.berkeley.edu (E. Mark Ping)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: Mattel protest
Date: 7 Oct 1992 23:12:00 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley, CS Undergraduate Association
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Oct5.163944.15794@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass) writes:
}In article <1992Oct5.084600.26398@nuscc.nus.sg> matmcinn@nuscc.nus.sg (Mcinnes B T (Dr)) writes:

}>Implicit in your outrage is the assumption that if Barbie finds math
}>class difficult, she will thereby be dissuaded from taking said class.
}>In short, Barbie is a wimp who is unable to meet a challenge. This whole
}>anti-Mattel campaign is an affront to the staying power of women
}>everywhere.
}
}     It is also an affront to the intellegence of women and girls.
}
}     They are so stupid that a ersatz statement from the mouth of a 
}     plastic bubblehead irretrievably alters their worldview, poisoning
}     them against math forever (I don't recall Barbie mentioning science
}     in her little encyclical).  
}
}     If y'all feel it necessary to 'do something' about the paucity of
}     women in the physical sciences, then go to the middle schools
}     and *teach* math to them in an interesting and wonderful way.  
}
}     However, don't be mislead into thinking that overall numbers
}     of mathematicians will change unless the profession pays as 
}     well as medicine or law.  There seem to be plenty of women in
}     those demanding fields. 
}
}     Also, for most, law school and medical school are tough.
}
}                               dale bass

  Oh come on!  You're all using adult reasoning about a toy which is
marketed towards children whose powers of reasoning isn't this developed.
I'm sure that any child who heard the words "Math class is tough" over and
over again would tend to believe it, whether it came from a toy or a friend.

--
E. Mark Ping
emarkp@ocf.Berkeley.EDU

  "Stand aside, I take large steps."  --Michael Dorn
  "Say, that's a nice bike."          --Cyberdyne Systems T-1000
  "Pituita es."                       --Unknown Latin Scholar
From: magdi@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (Magdi N Azer)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: E-Mail Address for CERN
Date: 8 Oct 92 21:03:57 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.BvtMIn.DB
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


	In response to my post regarding MINUIT, I found that it is public
domain, but the author did not know of an ftp site to get it from.  Does
anyone know of either an ftp site or an e-mail address for someone at CERN
from whom I could get a copy.  The only person I know of at CERN is A. Zichichi,
but I don't know him well enough to try to contact him.  Thank you

Magdi N. Azer
magdi@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu
From: leongaw@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Ak Wing Leong)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 10:26:36 GMT
Subject: Re: New book on Feynman available
Organization: the HP Corporate notes server
Newsgroups: sci.physics

Post again when the paperback version is out. I can't afford this version :-)
From: sichase@csa1.lbl.gov (SCOTT I CHASE)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: List Wanted: Nobel Laureats in Physics
Date: 14 Oct 1992 11:32 PST
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory - Berkeley, CA, USA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.254.196
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

In article <1992Oct14.170147.3158@u.washington.edu>, jing@u.washington.edu writes...
> 
>I am wondering whether somebody has a neat list of Nobel laureates in 
>physics over the years and the topic of their work that led to the prize.
>Detailed descriptions are even more appreciated (though I thought it is 
>unlikely to get?)  I will post a summary if I get partial info from everyone
>that replies.  Thanks!
> 
>-Jing Huang (jing@fred.fhcrc.org or jing@milton.u.washington.edu 
>	     or pnj@stein.u.washington.edu (this account) )

READ THE FAQ!

-Scott
--------------------
Scott I. Chase			"It is not a simple life to be a single cell,
SICHASE@CSA2.LBL.GOV		 although I have no right to say so, having
				 been a single cell so long ago myself that I 
				 have no memory at all of that stage of my 
				 life." - Lewis Thomas
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris)
Subject: Re: Quantum reality silliness
Organization: Motorola, CCR&D, CORP, Schaumburg, IL
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 23:36:51 GMT

In article <1992Oct10.183406.6433@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> ddixon@nyx.cs.du.edu (David Dixon) writes:

)Anybody want to invent a gamma-ray polarizer so the silly experiment can
)be done properly with e+e- annihilation?

I think it'd be easier to use e+ e- creation and Stern-Gerlach magnets for
the polarization detectors.  Actually, there was some discussion in the
Clauser et al. paper on really *good* tests of the theory (to eliminate
the aux assumptions) - unfortunately, I've forgotten the details and mislaid
the paper :-(.

Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: hagerman@ece.cmu.edu (John Hagerman)
Subject: CRACKED!
Organization: Carnegie Mellon University
Distribution: sci
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 04:38:02 GMT

SO once again we have so-called INTILECTUAL SCIENTISTS attempting to
paint the rest of us NORMAL PEOPLE as INFERIOR.  I see, for example,
that the "CRACKPOT INDEX" makes NO MENTION of SPELLING, which is, of
course, due to the fact that INTILECTUALS CANT SPELL.  Besides their
attempt to SUPRESS important FACTS about ALTERNATIVE REALITIES which
will ultimately SAVE THE EARTH, such as FREE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES and
PSYCHO-ENERGY HAIRCUT devices, they completely spurn truly IMPORTANT
issues such as JUSTIFYING their paragraphs.  May their KARMAS drift.

As was CLEARLY and OBVIOUSLY stated by GAUSS (and further demonstrated
by DARWIN), there is NO SUCH THING as OBJECTIVE REALITY.  Therefore,
ANY FOOL can conclude that only ALTERNATE REALITIES are of importance.
Such REALITIES have been shown to be the FINAL ANSWER to all IMPORTANT
QUESTIONS.  Such as, WHAT'S FOR LUNCH?  As such, the ALTERED REALITIES
UNEQUIVICOUBLY show that QUANTUM MECANICS (QM) is UNFOUNDED and FALSE.
This is CLEAR from the statement in HIGHER-ORDER LOGIC that P => ~P
(where P is the PROBABILITY that QM will FAIL at time T).  At least,
it is clear to those of us who, through SELF-EDUCATION, like EINSTEIN
Himself, have TRANSCENDED REALITY to achieve an ALTERNATING RESONANCE
such as that used by TESLA to communicate with BEING FROM VENUS.  In
his famous COLORADO EXPERIMENTS (the results of which were SUPRESSED
by the NSF), TESLA demonstrated that RADIO ENERGY generated by SUPER
ALTERNATOR actually travels FASTER than the SPEED OF LIGHT; this fact,
also DENIGHED by "scientists" (even though used by EINSTEIN in his
infamous PHILADELPHIA STORY EXPERIMENTS), clearly shows that NEWTON,
while almost as well educated as me, was FUNDAMENTALLY WRONG about his
CALCULUS OF MOTION.  Any reader of LARRY NIVEN will tell you this.

In spite of CONTINUED SUPRESSION, I will continue to SPREAD THE WORD
concerning the SOLUTION offered by ALTERED STATES.

								johno
From: ted@physics.Berkeley.EDU (Emory F. Bunn)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: Mattel on women
Date: 12 Oct 1992 23:13:35 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: physics.berkeley.edu
Keywords: Targetting females once again.

In article <1992Oct11.063216.24011@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> ddixon@nyx.cs.du.edu (David Dixon) writes:

>Hi there.  As much as I agree with this thread, it has no place on
>sci.physics.  Kindly take it elsewhere.

I disagree.  I think it is entirely appropriate for this group to discuss
issues having to do with societal issues that affect the nature and the
quality of science.  And, IMHO of course, the systematic indoctrination
of girls with the idea that they can't master technical subjects is
such an issue.

-Ted

(Now, there's a separate issue of whether anybody is adding anything new
to the thread or just repeating the same ideas over and over.  I make
no comment on that question.)

Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: rodmur@ecst.csuchico.edu (Dale Harris)
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.math
Subject: Re: How do you draw a straight line?
Date: 8 Oct 92 03:22:13 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: grotus.ecst.csuchico.edu

In article <1b08aaINN5ul@gap.caltech.edu> stieger@cco.caltech.edu (Ronald David Stieger) writes:
>chrisman@wheatena.berkeley.edu (chrisman) writes:
>
>>Indeed, a stretched string won't be completely straight, because
>>of the influence of gravity (gusts of wind, Brownian motion, ...)
>>no matter what the tension on the string.
>
>But what is a straight line, anyway?  General relativity postulates that
>the universe is not Euclidean, instead it is analogous to a curved surface,
>How would you define a straight line on a balloon?  


If you are going to talk about the abstract, then think abstractly.  A being
in any space, Euclidean or no, would still see his straight line as straight,
even if to an outside observer it didn't.  So to a person that would live in
the surface of a ballon, would see a straight never-ending line, even though
it might appear to be an arc to me.
-- 
   __        _                     Dale A. Harris  {rodmur@ecst.csuchico.edu} 
  /  )      //                           /   "There is only one Race, the     
 /  / __.  // _      , , , __.  _       /_  _  __  _  Human Race", If I 
/__/_(_/|_</_</_    (_(_/_(_/|_/_)_    / /_</_/ (_</_  quoted someone...good.
From: miked@phenos.physics.wisc.edu (Mike Doncheski)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Magnetic levitation
Date: 12 Oct 92 22:35:13 GMT
Followup-To: sci.physics
Organization: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Physics

Hi all!

     One of my students is interested in building a simple magnetic 
levitation system.  If my memory is working OK, I think it can be 
done passively (using carefully shaped permanent magnets) or actively 
(using electromagnets, sensor coils and some sort of feedback/logic 
circuit).  The idea is to create a floating sculpture (the mass isn't 
a problem, as it can be primarily styrofoam with a steel ball bearing 
inside);  I know this is going to be difficult, but I want to give the 
student some idea of what's involved, and let the student decide.  So, 
I'd like to know if anyone in sci.physics land has any experience in 
designing/building, or even a good reference about, magnetic levitation 
systems.

      Please post or email, I'll see it either way.

                                     Thanks in advance,

                                          Mike
                                         (miked@phenos.physics.wisc.edu)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: palmer@sfu.ca (Leigh Palmer)
Subject: Re: Displacement Current
Organization: Simon Fraser University
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 16:06:45 GMT

In article <rama.2@main01.rz.uni-ulm.de> rama@main01.rz.uni-ulm.de (RAINER
MALLON) writes:


>From Maxwells equations we have learned that a displacement current provokes
>a magnetic field.

>What we are looking for is a simple experiment we can easily conduct in
>a lecture hall.
>If you have experience with an appropriate experiment or if you can give
>us a hint to some literature we would be glad to hear from you.

What is wrong with connecting a large capacitor, a battery, and an ammeter
in series and noting that a current flows when the uncharged capacitor is
connected?

If you are trying to demonstrate, somehow, the reality of the displacement
current you should probably give up (see postings on "A VERY FUNDAMENTAL
QUESTION" recently in this group). The displacement current was *invented*
by Maxwell for the purpose of symmetrically complementing a mathematical
scheme which, with its addition, becomes appealingly elegant.

The demonstration I propose above relates to the most common derivation of
the displacement current used in elementary courses which uses the device 
of a displacement current to extend the realm of validity of Ampere's Law.
I no longer use that derivation since I prefer the more elegant (but less
readily demonstrated) derivation to be found in the Feynman Lectures. If
you have not seen it, look it up. You're in for a treat.

Leigh
derivation. The much more
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris)
Subject: Re: Bell Inequality consistent with LOCALITY
Organization: Motorola, CCR&D, CORP, Schaumburg, IL
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 23:42:53 GMT
Keywords: Bell Inequality

In article <1992Oct8.145344.203020@uctvax.uct.ac.za> naturman@uctvax.uct.ac.za writes:
)Its me and Fluffy again.
)
)Last night was the first time that I actually bothered to look up a rigorous
)proof of the Bell Inequality. I did this to check out how Value Rule failure
)affects it. As I pointed out in a previous posting, it doesn't.
)
)However I made the following observations:
)
)1) BI is a condition about certain mean values of products of spin values.
)2) The calculation of the means involves not only measured values but "hidden
)   values" which are required by realist hidden variable approaches.

Not in principle - if I understand you correctly.  Existing experiments
may require these assumptions, but theoretically only measured values
and no assumptions, etc.  are required with 'good enough' detector
effeciencies.

(This is the Clauser & Shimony formulation from 'Bells Thereom: Experimental
Tests And Implications'  rather than the original formulation.)
Newsgroups: sci.physics