Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 82 (8871 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 11-15-2018 6:42 PM
220 online now:
dwise1, JonF, Meddle, ooh-child, Percy (Admin), Phat (AdminPhat), Tanypteryx (7 members, 213 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: paradigm of types
Post Volume:
Total: 842,008 Year: 16,831/29,783 Month: 819/1,956 Week: 322/331 Day: 50/50 Hour: 1/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
2
Author Topic:   Scientific Rules Of Evidence.
John
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 24 (57329)
09-23-2003 8:22 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by James J
09-23-2003 5:45 PM


quote:
If you have a theory, and it is correct, you should be able to turn the results on and off with a specific set of circumstances applied.

That would be a machine, not a theory.

------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com


This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by James J, posted 09-23-2003 5:45 PM James J has not yet responded

  
James J
Inactive Member


Message 17 of 24 (57335)
09-23-2003 8:52 PM


I disagree.
In the lab where I work,we have failures day in and day out. There are lots of theories as to why the failures occured. However until the failure can be turned on and off, you have not found the root cause of the issue. Once you can turn it on and off, by finding the circumstances and proving that these are the cause through testing, your theory is just that.
Evidence is the manupulation of the circumstance with repeatable forcastable results. Then and only then is it a fact.
Tell me Ned- for years the constant speed of light was supposed as fact-yet Harvard has been able to speed it up, slow it, stop it, then release it. Is the speed of light still a constant? Was the theory of it's constant speed through space and time True? Now that it is known that the speed of light is indeed able to be manipulated it brings every quotient using the speed of light as a constant back into question.
Can I turn gravity on and off? No I don't know how- but that in no way translates that it cannot be done. Just that I am unaware of how to do it. Maybe it can, maybe it can't, but no one here can anwser that. Blackholes appear have intense gravity, but no one knows why-they have theories. If Gravity is constant-why is the moon escaping earths gravitational pull a few inches every year? If everything is in decay as is believed, they should be getting closer because of the gravitational pull, right?

[This message has been edited by James J, 09-23-2003]


Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by DBlevins, posted 09-23-2003 11:59 PM James J has not yet responded
 Message 20 by NosyNed, posted 09-24-2003 12:54 AM James J has not yet responded

  
DBlevins
Member (Idle past 1726 days)
Posts: 652
From: Puyallup, WA.
Joined: 02-04-2003


Message 18 of 24 (57374)
09-23-2003 11:59 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by James J
09-23-2003 8:52 PM


I believe that the speed of light IS constant...in a vacuum. The operative word here is "vacuum." If i am not mistaken they were able to slow down light in some kind of condensate (bose-einstien? (sp?))?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by James J, posted 09-23-2003 8:52 PM James J has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by crashfrog, posted 09-24-2003 12:43 AM DBlevins has responded
 Message 21 by Rei, posted 09-24-2003 3:37 AM DBlevins has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 24 (57387)
09-24-2003 12:43 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by DBlevins
09-23-2003 11:59 PM


Light slows down when it passes through things. That's how refraction works, for instance. We've known this since Newton. The speed of light in a vacumn is constant to all observers, and no experiement has shown otherwise. The speed of light through various objects is not the same, but again, it's constant to all observers.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by DBlevins, posted 09-23-2003 11:59 PM DBlevins has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by DBlevins, posted 09-25-2003 2:46 AM crashfrog has not yet responded

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8811
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 20 of 24 (57393)
09-24-2003 12:54 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by James J
09-23-2003 8:52 PM


There are lots of theories as to why the failures occured.

James you sound like a software engineer. Use the word "theory" here and think that you have something like a scientific theory is an enormous streach. It is so enormous as to be wrong.

The speed of light in a vacuum is still constant. You have misunderstood the experiments you have been reading about.

Your comments about the moon's behaviour shows a futher misunderstanding of the mechanics involved.

see: http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=124

The tidal forces on the earth (as has been discussed elsewhere ) are slowin the earth's rotation. This is putting energy into the moons revolution about the earth and causing it to spiral outward.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by James J, posted 09-23-2003 8:52 PM James J has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by PaulK, posted 09-24-2003 4:11 AM NosyNed has not yet responded

  
Rei
Member (Idle past 4963 days)
Posts: 1546
From: Iowa City, IA
Joined: 09-03-2003


Message 21 of 24 (57415)
09-24-2003 3:37 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by DBlevins
09-23-2003 11:59 PM


Not to mention, if the speed of light wasn't constant between given regions of spacetime, all of spatial relativity should break down in those regions, since motion is relative to the speed of light, and you'd have asymmetrical relative velocities. Correct? I always hate having to work out problems like this, it strains the mind.

------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by DBlevins, posted 09-23-2003 11:59 PM DBlevins has not yet responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14488
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 22 of 24 (57422)
09-24-2003 4:11 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by NosyNed
09-24-2003 12:54 AM


Actually he sounds like a lab technician who thinks that working as a lab technician makes him a scientist.

And if he studied physics even to high school level his school should be ashamed ("If Gravity is constant-why is the moon escaping earths gravitational pull a few inches every year?")


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by NosyNed, posted 09-24-2003 12:54 AM NosyNed has not yet responded

    
sidelined
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 24 (57559)
09-24-2003 8:30 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by James J
09-23-2003 5:45 PM


James J Please explain what you mean by "specific set of circumstances".Give us an example.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by James J, posted 09-23-2003 5:45 PM James J has not yet responded

  
DBlevins
Member (Idle past 1726 days)
Posts: 652
From: Puyallup, WA.
Joined: 02-04-2003


Message 24 of 24 (57676)
09-25-2003 2:46 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by crashfrog
09-24-2003 12:43 AM


I'll need to check my physics book, but I was under the impression that light moving through a prism or atmosphere doesn't "slow-down" but loses energy and changes frequency?

(edited because of my error )

I did some armchair research and I see that my thinking above was mostly wrong. While the light wave propogates at c, the phase velocity of the wave is either faster or slower than light due to interference from atoms in the material. It is this apparant speed that we treat as a slowing down of light.

Thanks to Jesse Clair at Mount Allison U. http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae217.cfm

[This message has been edited by DBlevins, 09-25-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by crashfrog, posted 09-24-2003 12:43 AM crashfrog has not yet responded

  
Prev1
2
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018