Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 114 (8733 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-26-2017 4:48 PM
448 online now:
jar, kjsimons, Modulous (AdminModulous), NoNukes, PaulK, Percy (Admin), Rrhain (7 members, 441 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Post Volume:
Total: 801,990 Year: 6,596/21,208 Month: 2,357/2,634 Week: 20/525 Day: 20/11 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
78910
11
12Next
Author Topic:   faith based science?
Son Goku
Member
Posts: 1059
From: Ireland
Joined: 07-16-2005
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 151 of 171 (677716)
11-01-2012 5:10 AM
Reply to: Message 149 by foreveryoung
11-01-2012 3:15 AM


Re: E&M 101
foreveryoung writes:

How do the magnetic and electrical sources exert a force an object that they are not in contact with? There has to be a medium in between them in order for one to exert a force on the other.


There are various levels of answers to this question, depending on how accurately you want the phenomena described or what principles you would prefer to understand it in terms of.

However, basically, electric and magnetic fields never exert a force on an object they are not in contact with, the must first reach the object they are going to influence. They do so by travelling at the speed of light from the source object which creates them.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by foreveryoung, posted 11-01-2012 3:15 AM foreveryoung has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 164 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-01-2012 11:35 PM Son Goku has responded

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 1063 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 152 of 171 (677720)
11-01-2012 6:48 AM
Reply to: Message 148 by Alfred Maddenstein
11-01-2012 12:25 AM


Re: light waves
Mad writes:

Of course, all those are nouns as grammatical category.


There are no other categories when talking about nouns.

Mad writes:

Love though is an abstraction devoid of physical properties and only a lover is a physical object that can move and love. Love does not belong in physics. Lovers can wave, love cannot do that other than in poetry. Love is an abstraction denoting the various actions of lovers. Simple.
Can you grasp the difference or your skull is too thick for that?


Since no-one really understands what you are saying, it stands to reason that the problem lies with you.

The only knowledge that can be gleaned from your repeated posts of "It is not ME!! It is everyone else!!" is that you are both mad by name and mad by nature.

Mad writes:

My grasp of English may be poor or may be not.


Do you not know?
Are you unable to tell how bad your English is?

Well, then let me help you: your English is dreadful. I repeat: you should be embarrassed.
Perhaps there is someone at your care-home that can confirm this.


"There is no great invention, from fire to flying, which has not been hailed as an insult to some god." J. B. S. Haldane

This message is a reply to:
 Message 148 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-01-2012 12:25 AM Alfred Maddenstein has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-01-2012 11:42 PM Panda has responded

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9323
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 153 of 171 (677723)
11-01-2012 8:38 AM
Reply to: Message 149 by foreveryoung
11-01-2012 3:15 AM


Re: E&M 101
A magnetic field and electric field exert force on particles.

I'd express this a little differently. A field is the force that would be fellt on a particle at points in space. When we describe a field, we have said nothing about how the force itself is generated or propagated.

I take your post to be the equivalent of saying that you do not agree that fields (electric, magnetic, or gravity) can actually be formed in empty space. What medium do you believe is used to establish a gravity field?

ABE:

What would the properties of such a medium be?

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by foreveryoung, posted 11-01-2012 3:15 AM foreveryoung has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 154 by foreveryoung, posted 11-01-2012 9:56 AM NoNukes has responded

    
foreveryoung
Member
Posts: 879
Joined: 12-26-2011


Message 154 of 171 (677734)
11-01-2012 9:56 AM
Reply to: Message 153 by NoNukes
11-01-2012 8:38 AM


Re: E&M 101
That is correct. You cannot form an electric or magnetic field without a medium. The medium is the vacuum of space. The difference between me and you is that I view the vacuum of space as having physical properties and is as much a medium as a wall of concrete, albeit much thinner. I have read some things by people you would consider quacks about the exact nature of the vacuum of space itself.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by NoNukes, posted 11-01-2012 8:38 AM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by NoNukes, posted 11-01-2012 10:28 AM foreveryoung has not yet responded
 Message 158 by Taq, posted 11-01-2012 11:03 AM foreveryoung has responded
 Message 159 by Theodoric, posted 11-01-2012 11:16 AM foreveryoung has not yet responded

    
New Cat's Eye
Member
Posts: 11176
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 155 of 171 (677735)
11-01-2012 9:58 AM
Reply to: Message 147 by Alfred Maddenstein
11-01-2012 12:04 AM


Bill's explanation is internally consistent...

Being internally consistant doesn't tell us anything about whether or not its true. The Matrix and The Lord of the Rings are internally consistant.

...and yours second hand one is not.

Bullshit, that's a lie.

So yours fails already before any testing can even begin.

That's because you're employing faith instead of science. You declare it wrong by fiat. You never test anything. That's the epitome of faith and science is the opposite of that.

What is there to test if you have no clue what you are talking about? You just flip and flop and dance around the issues. That what inconsistent means.

I don't know what you're talking about and that's not what internal consistancy has to do with. Do you even know what "internally consistent" means?

That is how you ended up with the Universe popping out of nothing

False. The Big Bang Theory doesn't have the Universe popping out of nothing.

You've got nothing, Vatican. Your case is closed.

But as you've admitted, you decided that before you even began any testing. You're taking a faith based position. Its not really something that science can argue against if all you're going to do is close you eyes, stick your fingers in your ear, and yell "la la la la la". Stop behaving like a child and learn something already.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-01-2012 12:04 AM Alfred Maddenstein has not yet responded

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9323
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 156 of 171 (677745)
11-01-2012 10:28 AM
Reply to: Message 154 by foreveryoung
11-01-2012 9:56 AM


Re: E&M 101
I have read some things by people you would consider quacks about the exact nature of the vacuum of space itself.

And how did you reach the conclusion that those "things by people [I] would consider quacks" were correct? Contrary to your belief that I am merely "indoctrinated", I reached my conclusions regarding the explanation because the non-quack explanations result in predictions that work.

This is actually the part of the discussion that is on topic. Faith based science.

The difference between me and you is that I view the vacuum of space as having physical properties

Again, what are those physical properties and how do they allow the transmission of light/gravity in a way consistent with observation? One such observation is that the speed of light is the same as measured in any inertial reference frame.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by foreveryoung, posted 11-01-2012 9:56 AM foreveryoung has not yet responded

    
Taq
Member
Posts: 6014
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.6


(1)
Message 157 of 171 (677758)
11-01-2012 10:57 AM
Reply to: Message 144 by Alfred Maddenstein
10-31-2012 10:06 PM


Re: light waves
Every experiment indicates waves thereby indicating there is a medium that allows the waving.

That is a faith based statement.

The actual experiments demonstrate that there is no medium:

http://en.wikipedia.org/...chelson%E2%80%93Morley_experiment

If you think I am wrong, then cite a single experiment that has detected this ether.

It's waves again that propagate. That needs a medium necessarily.

Where did you show that? All we have is your empty assertions.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 10-31-2012 10:06 PM Alfred Maddenstein has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 6014
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.6


(1)
Message 158 of 171 (677761)
11-01-2012 11:03 AM
Reply to: Message 154 by foreveryoung
11-01-2012 9:56 AM


Re: E&M 101
The difference between me and you is that I view the vacuum of space as having physical properties and is as much a medium as a wall of concrete, albeit much thinner.

Since the Earth is moving through space in addition to its rotation as well as the movement of our solar system around the galactic core we should observe differences in the speed of light depending on the travel of the photon with respect to the ether. We don't observe this. That is what the Michelson-Morley experiment sought to measure, and it failed spectacularly. This website has a very nice applet that lets you run the experiment yourself:

http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virginia.edu/...mexpt6.htm

No experiment has ever measured an ether. That's because it isn't there. The medium isn't there.

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by foreveryoung, posted 11-01-2012 9:56 AM foreveryoung has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by foreveryoung, posted 11-01-2012 12:25 PM Taq has responded
 Message 165 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-01-2012 11:39 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5700
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.9


(1)
Message 159 of 171 (677768)
11-01-2012 11:16 AM
Reply to: Message 154 by foreveryoung
11-01-2012 9:56 AM


Re: E&M 101
I have read some things by people you would consider quacks about the exact nature of the vacuum of space itself.

Can they make a coherent and cogent argument? If they could they wouldn't be thought of as quacks.

Present the arguments. Lets see if they are coherent and cogent.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by foreveryoung, posted 11-01-2012 9:56 AM foreveryoung has not yet responded

    
foreveryoung
Member
Posts: 879
Joined: 12-26-2011


Message 160 of 171 (677786)
11-01-2012 12:25 PM
Reply to: Message 158 by Taq
11-01-2012 11:03 AM


Re: E&M 101
We don't observe any changes in the speed of light as long as it is going through the vacuum of space no matter where that might happen to be. The quality of the vacuum of space is everywhere constant even in the presence of massive bodies.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by Taq, posted 11-01-2012 11:03 AM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 161 by Taq, posted 11-01-2012 12:52 PM foreveryoung has not yet responded
 Message 162 by Theodoric, posted 11-01-2012 1:28 PM foreveryoung has not yet responded
 Message 163 by NoNukes, posted 11-01-2012 1:56 PM foreveryoung has not yet responded

    
Taq
Member
Posts: 6014
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.6


(2)
Message 161 of 171 (677793)
11-01-2012 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 160 by foreveryoung
11-01-2012 12:25 PM


Re: E&M 101
We don't observe any changes in the speed of light as long as it is going through the vacuum of space no matter where that might happen to be. The quality of the vacuum of space is everywhere constant even in the presence of massive bodies.

We are MOVING through space, are we not? We are moving through the medium. If the speed of light is constant in the medium this would indicate that we should observe a slower speed of light in the direction of our movement and a faster speed of light behind us. Is this the case? No. Therefore, there is no medium.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by foreveryoung, posted 11-01-2012 12:25 PM foreveryoung has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 11-02-2012 1:45 AM Taq has responded

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5700
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 162 of 171 (677802)
11-01-2012 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 160 by foreveryoung
11-01-2012 12:25 PM


Re: E&M 101
The quality of the vacuum of space is everywhere constant even in the presence of massive bodies.

That kinda would debunk the idea of some sort of medium wouldn't it. Unless of course this medium is miraculously consistent throughout the universe.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by foreveryoung, posted 11-01-2012 12:25 PM foreveryoung has not yet responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9323
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 163 of 171 (677807)
11-01-2012 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 160 by foreveryoung
11-01-2012 12:25 PM


Re: E&M 101
Taq's question is the same as the question I ask you in message 156. Feel free to respond only to Taq. Your predicted observation fails to explain a number of observed phenomena.

It also raises the question of what quality of space is involved in supporting gravitational fields. How does a light ray bend in a gravitational field if the quality of space does not change in a gravitational field.

Further, there is the problem that the velocity of light is often not constant when viewed from an accelerating reference frame. How does this vacuum property of space accommodate all of these issues? Surely you have thought of all of these things.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by foreveryoung, posted 11-01-2012 12:25 PM foreveryoung has not yet responded

    
Alfred Maddenstein
Member (Idle past 1318 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 04-01-2011


Message 164 of 171 (677850)
11-01-2012 11:35 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by Son Goku
11-01-2012 5:10 AM


Re: E&M 101
So what is it exactly travelling in your hypothesis, Son? You sound like it's the speeding fields.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Son Goku, posted 11-01-2012 5:10 AM Son Goku has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by Son Goku, posted 11-02-2012 4:56 AM Alfred Maddenstein has not yet responded

  
Alfred Maddenstein
Member (Idle past 1318 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 04-01-2011


Message 165 of 171 (677851)
11-01-2012 11:39 PM
Reply to: Message 158 by Taq
11-01-2012 11:03 AM


Re: E&M 101
Whereas Tacky is talking about travelling photons. Your descriptions clash, Son. The judge is smelling something fishy.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by Taq, posted 11-01-2012 11:03 AM Taq has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
78910
11
12Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017