HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re:  TIME HAS INERTIA, ALTERING THE EARTH'S TILT ... Reply to: WOMBAT
Date: 8 Oct 92 20:59:11 GMT
Organization: University of Virginia

In article <abian.718566997@pv343f.vincent.iastate.edu> abian@iastate.edu (Alexander Abian) writes:
>    The state of any object (animate or inanimate) at any moment on any 
>planet of our Solar System is inextricably related to the setup of our
>Solar System at that moment.

[stuff deleted]

>  Mr.  Wombat, you ended your remarks with some innuandoes addressed to my
> person. My answer to you is "the feeling is mutual".
>  As far as cranks are concerned, many people consider Copernicus, Galileo,
>Newton and Einstein as being cranks, in fact, quite obnoxious, arrogant,
>aggressive and throat-cutting  megalomaniac nasty cranks.  I do not
>necessarily disagree with them !

     I wonder if the Orbit and Tilt (O&T) of the earth has an
     impact on myelin sheath degeneration?

     Just curious.

                               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: jbaez@riesz.mit.edu (John C. Baez)
Subject: Re: Value Rule is sometimes false
Organization: MIT Department of Mathematics, Cambridge, MA
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 03:15:08 GMT

In article <1992Oct11.171017.203059@uctvax.uct.ac.za> naturman@uctvax.uct.ac.za writes:
>In article <Oct.7.22.00.12.1992.2563@ruhets.rutgers.edu>, bweiner@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Benjamin Weiner) writes:
>> naturman@uctvax.uct.ac.za writes:
>>>Only reply to this if you are deeply familiar with Locality and Realism
>>>paradoxes.
>> 
>> Such arrogance ...
>
>No arrogance intended. Since the subject is quite touchy and could have led to
>a lengthy thread with hundreds of people posting, I hoped that by trying to
>limit replies to experts on the topic, a lot of unnecessary arguments could be
>avoided.

As you can see, your request managed to start unnecessary arguments by
making people call you arrogant.  The way to avoid unnecessary arguments on
Usenet is not to respond to posts that you think are silly and ignore
insults.  I.e., it's easy not to get into arguments you don't want to.  

>>>The VR in interpretations of QM formalism says that
>>>if the probability of an observable Q having a value q in state Psi is zero,
>>>then Q cannot have value q in Psi.
>>>It is certainly agreed that VR is false for observables corresponding to
>>>operators with an uncountable spectrum of eigenvalues, since any such
>>>eigenvalue has prob. zero in a non-eigenstate.
>> 
>> This doesn't make any sense.  How about the superposition 
>>  |psi> = ( |x=0.4> + |x=0.5> ) / sqrt(2) ?  It's not an eigenstate of
>> x, but ...
>
>Ok Ok, delta functions do funny things which I forgot to take into account.

Here's my real point.  Since delta functions are not really functions,
much less L^2 functions, they do not lie in your Hilbert space of
states.  Of course physicists have good reasons for often pretending
that they do, but there are times when being rigorous and insisting that
it does not can come in handy, and this may be one of them.  I wasn't
really following your discussion, so I leave it for you to judge.
From: firth@sei.cmu.edu (Robert Firth)
Subject: Re: Wavefunction of the universe calculated!!!
Organization: Software Engineering Institute
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 11:57:53 GMT

In article <burt.718667740@aupair.cs.athabascau.ca> burt@aupair.cs.athabascau.ca (Burt Voorhees) writes:

>  But, I thought, I mean, the Marahishi published the wave equation for the
>universe this year in the Globe and Mail (Canada's national newspaper).  It
>took up two full pages of newsprint.  Somebody's solved it?

Well, don't keep us in suspense; give us the answer to the Big Question:
Does the Universe collapse, or does it cast God into a superposition of
states?



Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: schiller@prl.philips.nl (schiller c)
Subject: Monster group and elementary particles
Originator: schiller@prl.philips.nl
Organization: Philips Research Laboratories, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 16:29:39 GMT



I read in some journals that there are speculations
that the so called "monster group" has applications in elementary
particle theory, and even to string theory.

I'd like to read more about it, and tell my colleagues about it.

What sort of connections are people thinking of ?
What part of the physical world do 
the elements and/or the representations of the group designate ?
And the group multiplication ?


Thank you,
 
                      Christoph Schiller



Christoph Schiller                       
Philips Research Laboratories            It has been proven scientifically  
Eindhoven, The Netherlands               that male rats are more attracted
schiller@prl.philips.nl                  to female rats than to tennis balls.
From: phfrom@nyx.uni-konstanz.de (Hartmut Frommert)
Subject: Re: Quantum gravity ftp site?
Organization: Dept. of Physics, University of Constance
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 08:49:12 GMT

Mitchell.Porter@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Mitchell Porter) writes:

>I read a column by N David Mermin in an issue of `Physics Today' earlier
>this year in which he mentioned that researchers in quantum gravity,
>string theory, 2D quantum field theory etc are communicating primarily
>electronically now- eg preprints being circulated by email etc. He hinted
>that there might be an ftp site somewhere storing these preprints -
>do any sci.physics readers know of something like this?

xxx.lanl.gov: /gr-qc
(login anonymous [or ftp], passwd <your user id+node> [or any string])

--
 Hartmut Frommert                 <phfrom@nyx.uni-konstanz.de>
 Dept of Physics, Univ of Constance, P.O.Box 55 60, D-W-7750 Konstanz, Germany
                                           -- Eat whale killers, not whales --
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: abian@iastate.edu (Alexander Abian)
Subject: Re: TIME HAS INERTIA AND THE PRINCIPLE OF TENDENCY OF MAINTAINING THE
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 02:54:34 GMT

In <2072@snap> paj@uk.co.gec-mrc (Paul Johnson) writes:

>In article <abian.718940281@pv343f.vincent.iastate.edu> abian@iastate.edu (Alexander Abian) writes:

>> The extreme violent Reaction to  provocation is the real explana-
>>tion in the mechanism of the A and H bomb!  But I have explained that
>>before.  

>So if I go and cut down a tree, will it react to this provocation and
>attempt to maintain its upright status by reaching down with its
>branches and trying to strangle me?  I don't think so.  If your
>"explanation" is not useful for making predictions then it is
>considerably less real than mainstream science.

        Yes, the tree will react and it will show the tendency of
        maintaining its status quo.  However, as  I have mentioned, 
        a weak provokee will succumb to a stronger provoker.  Although
        the tree will try to resist (by giving you trouble in cut-
        ting it, by burning your saw, etc) however, it will succumb
        to your saw if the saw is sufficiently strong.
        
        There are trees which with their branches will strangle 
        a weak provoker.  In fact, there are delicate flowers which will
        capture provoking insects and will strangle them to death!

(cf. my posting: THE TENDENCY OF MAINTAINING THE STATUS QUO, REACTION TO
           PROVOCATION AND THE TENDENCY OF MAINTAINING AGAIN A STATUS QUO) 

>Are you the Real Professor Abian, or just an imposter trying to
>discredit him?

>Paul Johnson
      
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.
From: mcirvin@husc8.harvard.edu (Mcirvin)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: Questions of transparency
Date: 13 Oct 92 00:21:26 GMT
 <1992Oct1.010445.13988@u.washington.edu> <1992Oct1.044856.28568@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <1992Oct10.234101.9875@prim>

prim!dave@germany.eu.net (Dave Griffiths) writes:

>If the light is considered to be transmitted by excitation of free charges
>then one would expect that if two light beams at different angles interesected
>half way through the glass block they would interfere with each other. Yet if
                                             ^^^^^^^^^
You mean "interact."  Interference is what *does* happen, and it
doesn't affect the paths.

>I look out through the window, despite the fact there are billions of
>different light paths all pulling these charges in different directions, no
>distortion is observed.

That's because glass is, to a good approximation, a linear material.
The effects of the various oscillating fields on the charges in the
glass may be superimposed linearly, so the reaction of the glass to
light traveling in one direction doesn't affect its reaction to light
traveling in another direction.

-- 
Matt McIrvin, posting nonsense again 
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: hearns@vxcrna.cern.ch (HEARNS,J./EP)
Subject: some HEP detector information please
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Keywords:  HEP, detector
Organization: European Organization for Nuclear Research, CERN
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 09:54:00 GMT

Could some high energy physicists help me out please?
I need to know the depth in radiation lengths of the E/M 
calorimeters used by the TPC collaboration and by Delphi.
This is for a table in my thesis.
No, I'm not too lazy to go to the library to look them up.
I have lots and lots of reviews and papers, but these pieces of information
are not to hand.
Thanks in advance


Xref: sparky sci.physics:16207 sci.astro:10537 sci.math:12934 sci.philosophy.tech:3600
From: jbaez@riesz.mit.edu (John C. Baez)
Subject: Opalescence
Organization: MIT Department of Mathematics, Cambridge, MA
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 05:37:22 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.033402.12388@galois.mit.edu> jbaez@riesz.mit.edu (John C. Baez) writes:
>(This "absorb and re-emit" scenario might actually be what's going on
>in opalescence, but I'm not sure.  I'm pretty sure something along these lines
>occurs in luminescence, e.g. dayglo paint.  But these are very different
>from transparency.)  

I meant fluorescence, not luminescence.  Anyone knowledgeable willing to
divagate on fluorescence, luminescence, opalescence, and
phosphorescence?   Actually it's opalescence that's the most mysterious
to me.  Hmm, opalescence may be the answer to a question Dale Bass recently
asked me: what would happen if light had to fight its way through lumps
much bigger than atoms?



Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: mroussel@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Marc Roussel)
Subject: Re: 1992 Nobel Prizes: a prediction
Organization: Department of Chemistry, University of Toronto
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 15:47:59 GMT

In article <138426@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> chaiken@cmsgee.llnl.gov (Alison
Chaiken) writes:
>Here are my predictions for 1992:
>
>Chemistry: Roy Smalley and Donald Huffman, for C60 discovery

     Why are you leaving out Harry Kroto?  I'm sure the Nobel Committee
will see fit to include Kroto if a prize is given for C60.

				Marc R. Roussel
                                mroussel@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: rama@main01.rz.uni-ulm.de (RAINER MALLON)
Subject: Displacement Current
Organization: Uni Ulm Physik
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 09:24:16 GMT

Hello !
From Maxwells equations we have learned that a displacement current provokes
a magnetic field.
                                       -->
                -->   4 pi   -->    1  dD                 -->
             rot H  = ----    j   + -  --   ;       wherin j = 0
                       c            c  dt
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.
Regards,
     RaMa.
   ---------------------------------------------------------------------
   | Rainer "RaMa" Mallon            |                                 |
   | University of Ulm, Germany      | I am an instant swimmer ...     |
   | Department of Applied Phyiscs   |    ... just add water !         |
   | mallon@main01.rz.uni-ulm.de     |                                 |
   ---------------------------------------------------------------------
   \  PLEASE NOTE : do not reply to rama@main01.rz.uni-ulm.de but to   /
    \                  mallon@main01.rz.uni-ulm.de                    /
     -----------------------------------------------------------------
From: crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: Time to develop a crackpot index?
Date: 14 Oct 92 12:39:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: murdoch.1992Oct14.123901.22419
Organization: University of Virginia

In article <1992Oct14.043202.2607@galois.mit.edu> jbaez@riesz.mit.edu (John C. Baez) writes:
>Okay, since not everyone is posting to alt.physics.new-theories who
>should be, I think it's time to develop a crackpot index.
>
>I think the simplest system is to add points for various indications of 
>kookiness.  
>
>Some proposals:
>
>0) 1 point for every statement that is widely agreed on to be false.
>1) 2 points for every statement that is logically inconsistent.
>2) 5 points for each such statement that is adhered to despite careful
>correction.
>3) 30 points for each posting that claims a revolutionary theory but
>gives no concrete testable predictions.
>4) 10 points for each favorable comparison of oneself to Einstein, or
>claim that special or general relativity are fundamentally misguided
>(without good evidence).
>5) 10 points for each claim the quantum mechanics is fundamentally
>misguided (without good evidence).
>6) 20 points for each favorable comparison of oneself to Newton
>claim that classical mechanics is fundamentally misguided (without
>evidence).
>7) 5 points for each word in all capital letters (except for posters
>with defective keyboards).  
>9) 10 points for every use of science fiction works as if they were
>fact.

     Is obvious chagrin that the appropriate Nobel committee left said 
     word unrecognized worth an 'Einstein' or a 'Newton'?

                             dale bass
-- 
C. R. Bass                                           crb7q@virginia.edu
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, Virginia                            (804) 924-7926
From: abian@iastate.edu (Alexander Abian)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: VERY FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS  -    ABIAN's Comments
Keywords: WHY, HOW, REASON and EXPLAIN
Date: 15 Oct 92 20:51:40 GMT
Article-I.D.: pv343f.abian.719182300
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA


 

   Some people's answer to the question
 
        " WHY IT DOES "    is    " BECAUSE IT DOES "
  
   Some people's answer to the question
 
        " HOW IT DOES "    is    " THE WAY IT DOES "

  
       and some people  REASON  and  EXPLAIN !




  TIME HAS INERTIA


   E = mcc   (Einstein)             E = m(0) exp (-At)    (Abian) 


  THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES ... (Darwin)      THE FUTURE OF SPECIES ... (Abian)

                                            Alexander ABIAN
From: rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu (Jeff Bytof)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: Who is Alexander Abian and why is he doing this?
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 21:55:19 GMT
Organization: ucsd
NNTP-Posting-Host: lutherlab.ucsd.edu


>I hope that someone close to the scene of the crime will publicly identify
>Alexander Abian and put a stop to this nonsense.  

I just had a discussion with Dr. Abian, and find that at the very
least, he is a Mathematician and a Gentleman.   His desire is to
express his view of nature in a new and original way, and
who can fault him for that?   

---------------------
rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu
Xref: sparky sci.physics:16414 sci.astro:10680 sci.math:13108 sci.philosophy.tech:3648
From: rusin@mp.cs.niu.edu (David Rusin)
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.math,sci.philosophy.tech
Subject: Re: What is a wood-duck
Date: 13 Oct 92 16:35:06 GMT
Article-I.D.: mp.1992Oct13.163506.13394
Organization: Northern Illinois University

In article <1992Oct13.191914.90326@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au> kevin@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au writes:
>What is a wood-duck?
>Ans: In many amusement parks, there are stalls where you pay money to take

wood = crazy. Does no one read Chaucer anymore?
(OK, so I use slightly out of date language. Methinks it behooves me to get
more hip ere I be thought antediluvian).
From: bweiner@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Benjamin Weiner)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: Question on aerodynamics........
Date: 15 Oct 92 21:43:42 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

z_arthurjk@ccsvax.sfasu.edu writes:
>Assuming it is thrown correctly, why exactly does a frisbee fly
>the way it does?  Why does it seem to float across the air
>without wobbling, and why does it slowly descend to the ground
>instead of just fall?
>Also, how does the aerobee disk fly so damn far?

These are damn tough questions, in fact.  The crucial element in
throwing a frisbee stably is giving it a *lot* of spin.  Frisbees
have a relatively thin disk with a heavy outer rim, so a spinning
frisbee has a large angular momentum, and only a large torque
will change it - so it won't wobble in mid-flight.  Wobbling is
bad since it must increase the air resistance and the frisbee won't
go as far.  (Note to experts - you've probably noticed that the
frisbee wobbles immediately after leaving your hand, and then settles
down to a smooth spin.  I imagine that there is a little dissipation
which damps out the wobble from your release.)

I think the frisbee "flies" because while moving forward, it's
a convex airfoil in the usual airplane-wing style.  (Let's not
revive the debate over airplane wings please!)  If you throw a frisbee
high and far, you'll see that its descent has less forward motion;
it's much more vertical than its ascent - you may see it "shelve,"
slipping from side to side while descending as its (roll) angle
changes.  I bet another reason it doesn't fall fast is this: the spin
keeps it roughly horizontal, and in that position it has a large
cross-sectional area as seen from below, so it can't fall straight
down very quickly, due to air resistance. 

The aerobie is also stabilized by spin, and has a heavy rim and
airfoil shape.  But it's got almost zero frontal area, so very little
drag, which is probably which it can fly very far (and in a much less
interesting way, IMHO; I'm a Frisbee purist).

One always hears that somebody did their thesis on Frisbees, but
really they're a difficult problem, and there are certainly holes
in what I said above.  I bet that Scientific American's Amateur
Scientist column has covered them at some point.
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: G.Joly@cs.ucl.ac.uk (Gordon Joly)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Mach's Principle (was Re: TIME HAS INERTIA Reply to: Steven Groom)
Date: 13 Oct 92 15:43:42 GMT

Mcirvin writes:
 > G.Joly@cs.ucl.ac.uk (Gordon Joly) writes:
 > 
 > >If time has inertia, and four dimensional spacetime is good model,
 > >then space must have inertia, must it not?
 > 
 > In a sense it does, according to GR-- gravitational waves can carry
 > energy and momentum, and they keep moving once you get them started,
 > which I suppose could be called inertia.  ("Inertia," as has been
 > pointed out earlier, has nothing to do with things requiring an
 > input of energy to keep moving-- that's closer to the medieval idea
 > of impetus, which was supposed to get used up by motion.) 
 > 
 > -- 
 > Matt McIrvin, posting nonsense again 


Interesting: how does that relate to Mach's Principle?

Gordon,
____

Gordon Joly      Phone  +44 71 387 7050 ext 3703      FAX  +44 71 387 1397
Internet: G.Joly@cs.ucl.ac.uk        UUCP: ...!{uunet,uknet}!ucl-cs!G.Joly
Computer Science, University College London, Gower Street, LONDON WC1E 6BT
Xref: sparky sci.physics:16212 sci.math:12936 soc.men:17493 soc.women:17498
From: pepke@ds1.scri.fsu.edu (Eric Pepke)
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.math,soc.men,soc.women
Subject: Re: Mattel on women
Keywords: Targetting females once again.
Date: 8 Oct 92 21:25:02 GMT
Reply-To: pepke@ds1.scri.fsu.edu (Eric Pepke)
Followup-To: sci.physics
Organization: Florida State University, but I don't speak for them

In article <1992Oct7.173414.18001@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com> bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris) writes:
>Unfortunately, though I really *do* like math, I'm having a hard time
>imagining something that a 'Barbie' could reasonably say that would be
>supportive of it :-( :-(.

How about, "I can interpolate quaternions over the unit sphere maintaining
second order continuity and equal parametric distances better'n any white
het-boy"?

>'Math will get you lots of boys/dates'?  -
>Nope, sorry :-).

I knew a math professor who had a poster up on his wall.  It was a standard
easy-viewing beach scene with a bikini-clad woman running along the shoreline.
The text said something like, "Do you know why I like Bob?  Because Bob 
knows CALCULUS!"

>[we acually had one of those at college - it went something like "Tangent,
>secant, cosine, sine - 3.14159 e^x e^y e^-pi."]  However, that does seem too
>advanced for Barbie :-(.

e^u du/dx 
e^x dx
secant tangent cosine sine
3.14159
integral, square root, u dv,
slipstick, slide rule, MIT!

>Anyway, I think it'll take a really major effort to improve the view the
>average person has of math and science in this country - merely 'coming down'
>on Barbie isn't going to solve that problem.

I'm reading a book called _How Superstition Won and Science Lost_ by somebody
or other.  He has an interesting thesis: During the 19th and early 20th 
centuries, scientists frequently spent a lot of time popularizing science.
The scientific lecture was actually a rather common social event, at least
among middle- and upper-class types.  At some point, scientists started to
turn away from popularizing science, at least partly because they thought
that the battle had mostly been won and they could get back to their real
work.  By default, then, the job of popularizing science fell to newspapers
and the rest of "the Media," whose primary means of distributing information
(presenting short, sometimes unconnected assertions of events or facts with
little or no reference to the methodology by which the information was 
determined) is precisely the means by which superstition is promulgated.

It's certainly not the complete story (i.e. it leaves out the effect of
the progressive reform of the primary and secondary school system), but it
is certainly worth thinking about.

Our local newspaper has started running a weekly "science page."  Of course,
it's only a half page--the rest is devoted to advertising.  Also, only about
25% of the stories are devoted to science; the rest are gee-whiz technology
or social issues of science.  It is a measure of how bad it has become that
there are some who are compelled to consider this a promising development.

-EMP
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: dag@col.hp.com (David Geiser)
Subject: Re: lemon-radio
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 19:20:51 GMT
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division

> tried this themselves, I'd be interested in knowing quantitative
> things like the size and make-up of the nail and copper wires
> that would give a lemon-radio which could pick up an FM station.
                                                       ^^
Think AM.
-- 

 To the cat, the experimenter is problematic.