Hi,
Does anyone has solve the problem to read under the sun?
Thank
|
Locked
Re: GRAVITATION BOOK & General Relativity
All,
I am locking this thread.
DaveD
KC0WJN
Thanks for all the fish.
==============================
All spelling mistakes are the responsibilty of the reader (Rick Renz, STK, ca. 1994)
==============================
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Oct 16, 2024, at 17:57, W0LEV via groups.io <davearea51a@...> wrote:
? I have the *Gravitation* book by Misner, Thorne, and Wheeler (publisher:
Princeton University Press, ISBN: 978-0-691-17779-3) . Even the first
chapter without math gives a good rendition of what's in store with
Einsten's General Theory. Yes, it's a difficult read for all the higher
math, but well worth it. I seriously doubt I'll finish it in "digested
manner" by the time I push up daisies.
In the first chapter on page 5 I especially like the quote:
"Space acts on matter, telling it how to move. In turn, matter reacts back
on space, telling it how to curve."
He uses an ant attempting to navigate the surface of an apple as an example
of the ultimate outcome of General Relativity with the stem as matter and
the surface of the apple as the curved (but straight) geodesic. It's a
masterful analogy but will bend one's mind even without all the math.
WARNING: If one decides to purchase this wonderful mind-bending book and
expects to "digest" it, one better right off the bat on opening the cover
get used to a 4- dimensioned coordinate system used ONLY to locate and
describe an event. Further, coordinates generally do not measure distance
in curved space/time. Nor are events described by some far off "reference
plane". Thought you knew plane and solid geometry. Better think
twice......
FURTHER WARNING: It rapidly becomes far deeper than that.
Dave - W?LEV
--
Dave - W?LEV
|
Locked
GRAVITATION BOOK & General Relativity
I have the *Gravitation* book by Misner, Thorne, and Wheeler (publisher:
Princeton University Press, ISBN: 978-0-691-17779-3) . Even the first
chapter without math gives a good rendition of what's in store with
Einsten's General Theory. Yes, it's a difficult read for all the higher
math, but well worth it. I seriously doubt I'll finish it in "digested
manner" by the time I push up daisies.
In the first chapter on page 5 I especially like the quote:
"Space acts on matter, telling it how to move. In turn, matter reacts back
on space, telling it how to curve."
He uses an ant attempting to navigate the surface of an apple as an example
of the ultimate outcome of General Relativity with the stem as matter and
the surface of the apple as the curved (but straight) geodesic. It's a
masterful analogy but will bend one's mind even without all the math.
WARNING: If one decides to purchase this wonderful mind-bending book and
expects to "digest" it, one better right off the bat on opening the cover
get used to a 4- dimensioned coordinate system used ONLY to locate and
describe an event. Further, coordinates generally do not measure distance
in curved space/time. Nor are events described by some far off "reference
plane". Thought you knew plane and solid geometry. Better think
twice......
FURTHER WARNING: It rapidly becomes far deeper than that.
Dave - W?LEV
--
Dave - W?LEV
|
It would be well deserved. Could try it in space but wave to watch out for those pesky Quantum Fluctuations. Hi. On 17/10/2024 4:55 am, KENT BRITAIN via groups.io wrote: measurethe velocity of Gravity Waves though materials with differentdielectric constants --
|
David: About time! K2TNO On Wed, Oct 16, 2024, 3:50?PM Dave Daniel via groups.io <kc0wjn= [email protected]> wrote: Folks, this thread went off topic and continues to be off topic. While the
off topic is very interesting it doesn't really have anything to do with
the nanovna, so please do't post any more about gravitational waves.
DaveD, co-owner
KC0WJN
Thanks for all the fish.
==============================
All spelling mistakes are the responsibilty of the reader (Rick Renz, STK,
ca. 1994)
==============================
On Oct 16, 2024, at 15:47, Andrew Lopatin via groups.io <lopatin_andrew= [email protected]> wrote:
? It's more than 20 years since I reviewed the analysis predicting
gravity waves, but it involves the warping of space-time itself. Not sure
that the dielectric constant is included. It can be found in Misner's big
black book, "Gravitation," Part VIII beginning with Chapter 35. It's a
very difficult read.
On Wednesday, October 16, 2024 at 02:44:53 PM EDT, Hoffy <
markvk4oy@...> wrote:
Hi, just a question.
As I understand it, light waves and radio waves react with matter which
might slow down their passing through the matter whereas gravitational
waves can pass through matter almost unaffected. So is this a case of
where matter matters and that in a perfect test environment the speed of
all three might actually be equal?
Cheers,
Hoffy//
On 16/10/2024 6:03 am, Ray Lulling via groups.io wrote:
String Theory.........Quantum Gravity........? Maybe just
mathematicians gone wild?
Most don¡¯t know this and its been heavily downplayed but the
implications are specific.
We watched two stellar masses merge.
The gravity detection array vibrated from the merger several seconds
before anything else on light or radio.
This puts gravity, even if must milliseconds, faster than light.
In my mind this establishes all forms of energy as being forms of
gravity.
Everything, is little more than a vibration on the string that binds
all matter.
The bigger question, what is that string made of. And if it's broken,
does it damage the universe? Would a particle freed from the strings simply
vanish, flying away from other? Would it travel back to the other
dimensions of the universe?
We have also seen more than enough evidence to support that at the sub
atomic level, matter freely interacts with other planes, or other
dimensions be they mathematical or literal spaces.
Now for us studying RF this is very interesting because we know for
certain that both matter and energy are not as absolute as we thought. We
know that a laser for instance can penetrate a lead brick, without cutting
a hole into the brick.
Thank You,
Ray
Innovative Timing Systems
p:
(314) 737-4900
a:
11671 Lilburn Park Rd, St. Louis, MO 63146
w:
Innovativetimingsystems.com w: itsyourrace.com
e:
ray@...
InnovativeTimingSystems ITS JaguarTiming ITSYOURRACE ITSYOURRACE
The information contained in this message is privileged and
confidential and protected from disclosure. In addition, this information
is the property of the sender. (C) Copyright 2024. If the reader of this
message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible
for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the
message and deleting it from your computer. If you are the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Information in this
message may contain errors and may be subject to change at any time.
-----Original Message-----
From:[email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of
W0LEV via groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 2:31 PM
To:[email protected]
Subject: Re: [nanovna-users] SWR vs. Resonance
WARNING: OFF TOPIC
Take gravity. Einstein did an exquisite job of explaining the EFFECTS
of gravity. That's all from the respect of the EFFECTS of gravity on
propagation of EM waves (bending light, Einstein lensing, ....). However,
conversely, I've never seen the mathematical treatment of the effect of
propagating EM waves on gravity - just the opposite of what Mr. Einstein
put on paper. Both should be true to observation and self closed. Nor do
we have an "excuse" (explanation) of why with a propagating EM wave the
electric and magnetic properties of that wave must be orthogonal (right
angles).
Further: The Higgs Boson (the "God Particle") supposedly embodies mass
to standard matter (remember F=ma?). And since matter embodies gravity,
what is the link between the Higgs Boson (the Higgs Field) and gravity?
Future Nobel Prize winner????
We DO NOT even have an inkling at understanding gravity.
Oh, yes, and then there is the loosie goosie Hubble Constant. There is
a buttload of physics addressing our own universe of which we have no
understanding.
String Theory.........Quntum Gravity........? Maybe just
mathematicians gone wild?
Dave - W?LEV
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 6:22?PM Tony Scaminaci via groups.io <tonyscam=
[email protected]> wrote:
Also, check out the famous dual-slit experiment here:
ved-wave-nature/#:~:text=The%20original%20double%2Dslit%20experiment,p
articles%20%E2%80%93%20revealing%20its%20quantum%20nature
.
Waves or particles? Quantum Mechanics is stranger than truth and
physicists can¡¯t explain why. The latest read I¡¯ve seen suggests that
everything in the universe is composed of different kinds of
interacting fields. When certain fields interact with the Higgs field,
the interaction creates mass.
Don¡¯t think too much about this or your brain will hurt.?
Tony
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 3:10?AM G8HUL via groups.io <g8hul=
[email protected]> wrote:
Now, are the magnetic and electrical fields, waves or quantized
particles? That is the part that I do not fully understand.
Both or may be neither!
Look up wave particle duality.
73
Jeff G8HUL
--
|
Folks, this thread went off topic and continues to be off topic. While the off topic is very interesting it doesn't really have anything to do with the nanovna, so please do't post any more about gravitational waves.
DaveD, co-owner
KC0WJN
Thanks for all the fish.
==============================
All spelling mistakes are the responsibilty of the reader (Rick Renz, STK, ca. 1994)
==============================
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Oct 16, 2024, at 15:47, Andrew Lopatin via groups.io <lopatin_andrew@...> wrote:
? It's more than 20 years since I reviewed the analysis predicting gravity waves, but it involves the warping of space-time itself. Not sure that the dielectric constant is included. It can be found in Misner's big black book, "Gravitation," Part VIII beginning with Chapter 35. It's a very difficult read.
On Wednesday, October 16, 2024 at 02:44:53 PM EDT, Hoffy <markvk4oy@...> wrote:
Hi, just a question.
As I understand it, light waves and radio waves react with matter which
might slow down their passing through the matter whereas gravitational
waves can pass through matter almost unaffected. So is this a case of
where matter matters and that in a perfect test environment the speed of
all three might actually be equal?
Cheers,
Hoffy//
On 16/10/2024 6:03 am, Ray Lulling via groups.io wrote:
String Theory.........Quantum Gravity........? Maybe just mathematicians gone wild? Most don¡¯t know this and its been heavily downplayed but the implications are specific.
We watched two stellar masses merge.
The gravity detection array vibrated from the merger several seconds before anything else on light or radio.
This puts gravity, even if must milliseconds, faster than light.
In my mind this establishes all forms of energy as being forms of gravity.
Everything, is little more than a vibration on the string that binds all matter.
The bigger question, what is that string made of. And if it's broken, does it damage the universe? Would a particle freed from the strings simply vanish, flying away from other? Would it travel back to the other dimensions of the universe?
We have also seen more than enough evidence to support that at the sub atomic level, matter freely interacts with other planes, or other dimensions be they mathematical or literal spaces.
Now for us studying RF this is very interesting because we know for certain that both matter and energy are not as absolute as we thought. We know that a laser for instance can penetrate a lead brick, without cutting a hole into the brick.
Thank You,
Ray
Innovative Timing Systems
p:
(314) 737-4900
a:
11671 Lilburn Park Rd, St. Louis, MO 63146
w:
Innovativetimingsystems.com w: itsyourrace.com
e:
ray@...
InnovativeTimingSystems ITS JaguarTiming ITSYOURRACE ITSYOURRACE
The information contained in this message is privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. In addition, this information is the property of the sender. (C) Copyright 2024. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. If you are the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Information in this message may contain errors and may be subject to change at any time.
-----Original Message-----
From:[email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of W0LEV via groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 2:31 PM
To:[email protected]
Subject: Re: [nanovna-users] SWR vs. Resonance
WARNING: OFF TOPIC
Take gravity. Einstein did an exquisite job of explaining the EFFECTS of gravity. That's all from the respect of the EFFECTS of gravity on propagation of EM waves (bending light, Einstein lensing, ....). However, conversely, I've never seen the mathematical treatment of the effect of propagating EM waves on gravity - just the opposite of what Mr. Einstein put on paper. Both should be true to observation and self closed. Nor do we have an "excuse" (explanation) of why with a propagating EM wave the electric and magnetic properties of that wave must be orthogonal (right angles).
Further: The Higgs Boson (the "God Particle") supposedly embodies mass to standard matter (remember F=ma?). And since matter embodies gravity, what is the link between the Higgs Boson (the Higgs Field) and gravity? Future Nobel Prize winner????
We DO NOT even have an inkling at understanding gravity.
Oh, yes, and then there is the loosie goosie Hubble Constant. There is a buttload of physics addressing our own universe of which we have no understanding.
String Theory.........Quntum Gravity........? Maybe just mathematicians gone wild?
Dave - W?LEV
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 6:22?PM Tony Scaminaci via groups.io <tonyscam@...> wrote:
Also, check out the famous dual-slit experiment here:
ved-wave-nature/#:~:text=The%20original%20double%2Dslit%20experiment,p
articles%20%E2%80%93%20revealing%20its%20quantum%20nature
.
Waves or particles? Quantum Mechanics is stranger than truth and
physicists can¡¯t explain why. The latest read I¡¯ve seen suggests that
everything in the universe is composed of different kinds of
interacting fields. When certain fields interact with the Higgs field, the interaction creates mass.
Don¡¯t think too much about this or your brain will hurt.?
Tony
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 3:10?AM G8HUL via groups.io <g8hul=
[email protected]> wrote:
Now, are the magnetic and electrical fields, waves or quantized
particles? That is the part that I do not fully understand.
Both or may be neither!
Look up wave particle duality.
73
Jeff G8HUL
--
|
It's more than 20 years since I reviewed the analysis predicting gravity waves, but it involves the warping of space-time itself.? Not sure that the dielectric constant is included.? It can be found in Misner's big black book, "Gravitation,"? Part VIII beginning with Chapter 35.? It's a very difficult read.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Wednesday, October 16, 2024 at 02:44:53 PM EDT, Hoffy <markvk4oy@...> wrote: Hi, just a question. As I understand it, light waves and radio waves react with matter which might slow down their passing through the matter whereas gravitational waves can pass through matter almost unaffected. So is this a case of where matter matters and that in a perfect test environment the speed of all three might actually be equal? Cheers, Hoffy// On 16/10/2024 6:03 am, Ray Lulling via groups.io wrote: String Theory.........Quantum Gravity........?? Maybe just mathematicians gone wild? Most don¡¯t know this and its been heavily downplayed but the implications are specific.
We watched two stellar masses merge.
The gravity detection array vibrated from the merger several seconds before anything else on light or radio.
This puts gravity, even if must milliseconds, faster than light.
In my mind this establishes all forms of energy as being forms of gravity.
Everything, is little more than a vibration on the string that binds all matter.
The bigger question, what is that string made of. And if it's broken, does it damage the universe? Would a particle freed from the strings simply vanish, flying away from other? Would it travel back to the other dimensions of the universe?
We have also seen more than enough evidence to support that at the sub atomic level, matter freely interacts with other planes, or other dimensions be they mathematical or literal spaces.
Now for us studying RF this is very interesting because we know for certain that both matter and energy are not as absolute as we thought. We know that a laser for instance can penetrate a lead brick, without cutting a hole into the brick.
?
?
?
Thank You,
Ray
?
Innovative?Timing?Systems
? ?p:
(314) 737-4900
? ?a:
11671?Lilburn?Park?Rd,?St.?Louis,?MO?63146
? ?w:
Innovativetimingsystems.com ?w:? itsyourrace.com
? ?e:
ray@...
? ?InnovativeTimingSystems?ITS?JaguarTiming??ITSYOURRACE??ITSYOURRACE
The information contained in this message is privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. In addition, this information is the property of the sender. (C) Copyright 2024. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. If you are the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Information in this message may contain errors and may be subject to change at any time.
?
?
-----Original Message-----
From:[email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of W0LEV via groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 2:31 PM
To:[email protected]
Subject: Re: [nanovna-users] SWR vs. Resonance
WARNING:? OFF TOPIC
Take gravity.? Einstein did an exquisite job of explaining the EFFECTS of gravity.? That's all from the respect of the EFFECTS of gravity on propagation of EM waves (bending light, Einstein lensing, ....).? However, conversely, I've never seen the mathematical treatment of the effect of propagating EM waves on gravity - just the opposite of what Mr. Einstein put on paper.? Both should be true to observation and self closed.? Nor do we have an "excuse" (explanation) of why with a propagating EM wave the electric and magnetic properties of that wave must be orthogonal (right angles).
Further: The Higgs Boson (the "God Particle") supposedly embodies mass to standard matter (remember F=ma?).? And since matter embodies gravity, what is the link between the Higgs Boson (the Higgs Field) and gravity?? Future Nobel Prize winner????
We DO NOT even have an inkling at understanding gravity.
Oh, yes, and then there is the loosie goosie Hubble Constant.? There is a buttload of physics addressing our own universe of which we have no understanding.
String Theory.........Quntum Gravity........?? Maybe just mathematicians gone wild?
Dave - W?LEV
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 6:22?PM Tony Scaminaci via groups.io <tonyscam@...> wrote:
Also, check out the famous dual-slit experiment here:
ved-wave-nature/#:~:text=The%20original%20double%2Dslit%20experiment,p
articles%20%E2%80%93%20revealing%20its%20quantum%20nature
.
Waves or particles? Quantum Mechanics is stranger than truth and
physicists can¡¯t explain why. The latest read I¡¯ve seen suggests that
everything in the universe is composed of different kinds of
interacting fields. When certain fields interact with the Higgs field, the interaction creates mass.
Don¡¯t think too much about this or your brain will hurt.?
Tony
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 3:10?AM G8HUL via groups.io <g8hul=
[email protected]> wrote:
Now, are the magnetic and electrical? fields,? waves or quantized
particles? That is the part that I do not fully understand.
Both or may be neither!
Look up wave particle duality.
73
Jeff G8HUL
--
|
Great reading that saga. Thanks 73 Bill K2TNO On Wed, Oct 16, 2024, 12:30?PM AG6CX via groups.io <edwmccann= [email protected]> wrote: Since we¡¯re having do much off-topic fun, I offer the following for you
history buffs:
So, Hertz begins his work on the first experiments 13 Nov 1886.
He finishes up his first experiment to meet the publishing deadline for
Wied Annalen on
25 March 1887.
Wied Annalen XXXI is published on 15 May 1887.
Oliver Lodge reads about it on the train to the British Association
Meeting in Bath 1888, all set to give a talk on lightning rods and rf
transmission and resonance and such, and hears Fitzgerald introduce the
topic at the meeting¡¯s inaugural address on September 6, 1888.
Lodge gets even more excited (excuse the pun) and puts forward a new paper
on Hertz'
work to the Physical Society of London May 11,1889, taking issue with
Hertz' calculations on capacitance, suggesting Hertz missed that there were
really (effectively) two 30 cm diameter spheres in series (P. 151), given
the potential of one sphere at +V
and the other at -V potential, and that the capacity would be 7.5 cm vs
Hertz' 15 cm
capacitance.
He also quibbles about Neumann's formula. Lodge concludes his addendum of
June (P.162) with a repeat of having caught Hertz' capacitance error, and
takes a shot at the French/German use of period T between nodes conflicting
with the English use of period T being one full cycle, and writes:
There is one point on which we find ourselves differing from Hertz...in
the application a 2 or a sqrt2 comes in wrongly in one or other of our
calculations....and it must be that it is owing to a different calculation
of the effective capacity concerned in an oscillator that the discrepancy
arises.
This discrepancy we by no means view lightly, and it is not without many
qualms that
we find ourselves differing, even about a 2, with a man so splendidly
careful in
his work as Hertz has shown himself.
Lodge (humbly or tongue in cheek) ends with:
It is more than probable that he [Hertz] is right after all, so we explain
here what will then
turn out to be our error in this note.
The Physical Society refers the article to Philosophical Magazine, and it
is published in
Vol XXXI on July 1889.
Various correspondence ensues between Fitzgerald and Hertz, and likely
Lodge and
Hertz over the next year.
Across the Channel, Poincare reads of the experiment, and on 15 August or
so 1890
(three years after the publication in Wied Annalen XXXI) writes to Hertz
that he
(Poincare) has written to the Academie des Sciences de Paris about the
experiment,
advising the Academie Hertz' having overlooked the series capacitance of
the two
spheres.
Poincare's paper is picked up Comptes Rendu Volume 111 August 1890 and
Archive des Science.
Hertz writes Poincare back 21 August 1890 with what must have been an
understatement:
L'erruer que vous avez decouverte est une veritable erreur assez
desagreable.
[The mistake you have discovered is a real mistake that is quite
unpleasant.]
Hertz adds that he'd been away for several weeks from his papers, but that
he had
already seen news about his calculation error written by Oliver Lodge
published
somewhere (maybe The Electrician or Nature), i.e., thanks Henri, already
have the bad
news, but thanks anyway.
Correspondence begins between the two that leads to discussion of the
Sarasin and de
La Rive verification in Geneva of Hertz' works in a larger lab, with the
beginnings of an
explanation of multiple resonances phenomena for which Hertz had no
immediate
solution.
Not to be scooped by Lodge, Poincare publishes in early 1891 his text
Electricite et
Optique II: Les Theories de Helmholtz et Les Experiences de Hertz, which
includes
lessons taught by Poincare during the second semester 1889-1890, noting
Hertz
overlooked the correct calculation for the system capacitance.
By the time the 1894 English translation and faithful reproduction of the
original Hertz
collection of the 1891 Collection of Wied Annalen articles is published
the English
edition (Jones) includes an Introduction from Hertz and Supplementary
Notes to the
original articles that, in 1894, addressees the capacitance error,
multiple resonances,
and various other challenges, as well as the positive outcome of the
Sarasin and de La
Rive experiments in Geneva.
Heaviside, in the meantime, on the basis that his ¡°new math¡± works,
becomes accepted.
Great stuff.
And how they communicated without texts and tweets and such, editing for
letters and the next publication of technical papers, that appeared without
links to or ads to the next wonder Balun or OCFD!!
Thought you might find this interesting.
Ed McCann
AG6CX
On Oct 16, 2024, at 9:09?AM, Ron na2o via groups.io <groups.io= [email protected]> wrote:
?On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 12:00 PM, W0LEV wrote:
"off-topic digressions"
Yeah, maybe. But fascinating stuff & worth every minute of it. IMO
--
Ron na2o
|
It would be a very very interesting experiment to measurethe velocity of Gravity Waves though materials with differentdielectric constants.???? I predict a Nobel Prize at least!
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Wednesday, October 16, 2024 at 01:44:59 PM CDT, Hoffy <markvk4oy@...> wrote: Hi, just a question. As I understand it, light waves and radio waves react with matter which might slow down their passing through the matter whereas gravitational waves can pass through matter almost unaffected. So is this a case of where matter matters and that in a perfect test environment the speed of all three might actually be equal? Cheers, Hoffy// On 16/10/2024 6:03 am, Ray Lulling via groups.io wrote: String Theory.........Quantum Gravity........?? Maybe just mathematicians gone wild? Most don¡¯t know this and its been heavily downplayed but the implications are specific.
We watched two stellar masses merge.
The gravity detection array vibrated from the merger several seconds before anything else on light or radio.
This puts gravity, even if must milliseconds, faster than light.
In my mind this establishes all forms of energy as being forms of gravity.
Everything, is little more than a vibration on the string that binds all matter.
The bigger question, what is that string made of. And if it's broken, does it damage the universe? Would a particle freed from the strings simply vanish, flying away from other? Would it travel back to the other dimensions of the universe?
We have also seen more than enough evidence to support that at the sub atomic level, matter freely interacts with other planes, or other dimensions be they mathematical or literal spaces.
Now for us studying RF this is very interesting because we know for certain that both matter and energy are not as absolute as we thought. We know that a laser for instance can penetrate a lead brick, without cutting a hole into the brick.
?
?
?
Thank You,
Ray
?
Innovative?Timing?Systems
? ?p:
(314) 737-4900
? ?a:
11671?Lilburn?Park?Rd,?St.?Louis,?MO?63146
? ?w:
Innovativetimingsystems.com ?w:? itsyourrace.com
? ?e:
ray@...
? ?InnovativeTimingSystems?ITS?JaguarTiming??ITSYOURRACE??ITSYOURRACE
The information contained in this message is privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. In addition, this information is the property of the sender. (C) Copyright 2024. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. If you are the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Information in this message may contain errors and may be subject to change at any time.
?
?
-----Original Message-----
From:[email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of W0LEV via groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 2:31 PM
To:[email protected]
Subject: Re: [nanovna-users] SWR vs. Resonance
WARNING:? OFF TOPIC
Take gravity.? Einstein did an exquisite job of explaining the EFFECTS of gravity.? That's all from the respect of the EFFECTS of gravity on propagation of EM waves (bending light, Einstein lensing, ....).? However, conversely, I've never seen the mathematical treatment of the effect of propagating EM waves on gravity - just the opposite of what Mr. Einstein put on paper.? Both should be true to observation and self closed.? Nor do we have an "excuse" (explanation) of why with a propagating EM wave the electric and magnetic properties of that wave must be orthogonal (right angles).
Further: The Higgs Boson (the "God Particle") supposedly embodies mass to standard matter (remember F=ma?).? And since matter embodies gravity, what is the link between the Higgs Boson (the Higgs Field) and gravity?? Future Nobel Prize winner????
We DO NOT even have an inkling at understanding gravity.
Oh, yes, and then there is the loosie goosie Hubble Constant.? There is a buttload of physics addressing our own universe of which we have no understanding.
String Theory.........Quntum Gravity........?? Maybe just mathematicians gone wild?
Dave - W?LEV
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 6:22?PM Tony Scaminaci via groups.io <tonyscam@...> wrote:
Also, check out the famous dual-slit experiment here:
ved-wave-nature/#:~:text=The%20original%20double%2Dslit%20experiment,p
articles%20%E2%80%93%20revealing%20its%20quantum%20nature
.
Waves or particles? Quantum Mechanics is stranger than truth and
physicists can¡¯t explain why. The latest read I¡¯ve seen suggests that
everything in the universe is composed of different kinds of
interacting fields. When certain fields interact with the Higgs field, the interaction creates mass.
Don¡¯t think too much about this or your brain will hurt.?
Tony
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 3:10?AM G8HUL via groups.io <g8hul=
[email protected]> wrote:
Now, are the magnetic and electrical? fields,? waves or quantized
particles? That is the part that I do not fully understand.
Both or may be neither!
Look up wave particle duality.
73
Jeff G8HUL
--
|
Hi, just a question. As I understand it, light waves and radio waves react with matter which might slow down their passing through the matter whereas gravitational waves can pass through matter almost unaffected. So is this a case of where matter matters and that in a perfect test environment the speed of all three might actually be equal? Cheers, Hoffy// On 16/10/2024 6:03 am, Ray Lulling via groups.io wrote: String Theory.........Quantum Gravity........? Maybe just mathematicians gone wild? Most don¡¯t know this and its been heavily downplayed but the implications are specific.
We watched two stellar masses merge.
The gravity detection array vibrated from the merger several seconds before anything else on light or radio.
This puts gravity, even if must milliseconds, faster than light.
In my mind this establishes all forms of energy as being forms of gravity.
Everything, is little more than a vibration on the string that binds all matter.
The bigger question, what is that string made of. And if it's broken, does it damage the universe? Would a particle freed from the strings simply vanish, flying away from other? Would it travel back to the other dimensions of the universe?
We have also seen more than enough evidence to support that at the sub atomic level, matter freely interacts with other planes, or other dimensions be they mathematical or literal spaces.
Now for us studying RF this is very interesting because we know for certain that both matter and energy are not as absolute as we thought. We know that a laser for instance can penetrate a lead brick, without cutting a hole into the brick.
Thank You,
Ray
Innovative?Timing?Systems
?p:
(314) 737-4900
?a:
11671?Lilburn?Park?Rd,?St.?Louis,?MO?63146
?w:
Innovativetimingsystems.com ?w:? itsyourrace.com
?e:
ray@...
?InnovativeTimingSystems?ITS?JaguarTiming??ITSYOURRACE??ITSYOURRACE
The information contained in this message is privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. In addition, this information is the property of the sender. (C) Copyright 2024. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. If you are the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Information in this message may contain errors and may be subject to change at any time.
-----Original Message-----
From:[email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of W0LEV via groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 2:31 PM
To:[email protected]
Subject: Re: [nanovna-users] SWR vs. Resonance
WARNING: OFF TOPIC
Take gravity. Einstein did an exquisite job of explaining the EFFECTS of gravity. That's all from the respect of the EFFECTS of gravity on propagation of EM waves (bending light, Einstein lensing, ....). However, conversely, I've never seen the mathematical treatment of the effect of propagating EM waves on gravity - just the opposite of what Mr. Einstein put on paper. Both should be true to observation and self closed. Nor do we have an "excuse" (explanation) of why with a propagating EM wave the electric and magnetic properties of that wave must be orthogonal (right angles).
Further: The Higgs Boson (the "God Particle") supposedly embodies mass to standard matter (remember F=ma?). And since matter embodies gravity, what is the link between the Higgs Boson (the Higgs Field) and gravity? Future Nobel Prize winner????
We DO NOT even have an inkling at understanding gravity.
Oh, yes, and then there is the loosie goosie Hubble Constant. There is a buttload of physics addressing our own universe of which we have no understanding.
String Theory.........Quntum Gravity........? Maybe just mathematicians gone wild?
Dave - W?LEV
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 6:22?PM Tony Scaminaci via groups.io <tonyscam@...> wrote:
Also, check out the famous dual-slit experiment here:
ved-wave-nature/#:~:text=The%20original%20double%2Dslit%20experiment,p
articles%20%E2%80%93%20revealing%20its%20quantum%20nature
.
Waves or particles? Quantum Mechanics is stranger than truth and
physicists can¡¯t explain why. The latest read I¡¯ve seen suggests that
everything in the universe is composed of different kinds of
interacting fields. When certain fields interact with the Higgs field, the interaction creates mass.
Don¡¯t think too much about this or your brain will hurt.?
Tony
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 3:10?AM G8HUL via groups.io <g8hul=
[email protected]> wrote:
Now, are the magnetic and electrical fields, waves or quantized
particles? That is the part that I do not fully understand.
Both or may be neither!
Look up wave particle duality.
73
Jeff G8HUL
--
|
Since we¡¯re having do much off-topic fun, I offer the following for you history buffs:
So, Hertz begins his work on the first experiments 13 Nov 1886.
He finishes up his first experiment to meet the publishing deadline for Wied Annalen on
25 March 1887.
Wied Annalen XXXI is published on 15 May 1887.
Oliver Lodge reads about it on the train to the British Association Meeting in Bath 1888, all set to give a talk on lightning rods and rf transmission and resonance and such, and hears Fitzgerald introduce the topic at the meeting¡¯s inaugural address on September 6, 1888.
Lodge gets even more excited (excuse the pun) and puts forward a new paper on Hertz'
work to the Physical Society of London May 11,1889, taking issue with Hertz' calculations on capacitance, suggesting Hertz missed that there were really (effectively) two 30 cm diameter spheres in series (P. 151), given the potential of one sphere at +V
and the other at -V potential, and that the capacity would be 7.5 cm vs Hertz' 15 cm
capacitance.
He also quibbles about Neumann's formula. Lodge concludes his addendum of June (P.162) with a repeat of having caught Hertz' capacitance error, and takes a shot at the French/German use of period T between nodes conflicting with the English use of period T being one full cycle, and writes:
There is one point on which we find ourselves differing from Hertz...in the application a 2 or a sqrt2 comes in wrongly in one or other of our
calculations....and it must be that it is owing to a different calculation of the effective capacity concerned in an oscillator that the discrepancy arises.
This discrepancy we by no means view lightly, and it is not without many qualms that
we find ourselves differing, even about a 2, with a man so splendidly careful in
his work as Hertz has shown himself.
Lodge (humbly or tongue in cheek) ends with:
It is more than probable that he [Hertz] is right after all, so we explain here what will then
turn out to be our error in this note.
The Physical Society refers the article to Philosophical Magazine, and it is published in
Vol XXXI on July 1889.
Various correspondence ensues between Fitzgerald and Hertz, and likely Lodge and
Hertz over the next year.
Across the Channel, Poincare reads of the experiment, and on 15 August or so 1890
(three years after the publication in Wied Annalen XXXI) writes to Hertz that he
(Poincare) has written to the Academie des Sciences de Paris about the experiment,
advising the Academie Hertz' having overlooked the series capacitance of the two
spheres.
Poincare's paper is picked up Comptes Rendu Volume 111 August 1890 and Archive des Science.
Hertz writes Poincare back 21 August 1890 with what must have been an
understatement:
L'erruer que vous avez decouverte est une veritable erreur assez desagreable.
[The mistake you have discovered is a real mistake that is quite unpleasant.]
Hertz adds that he'd been away for several weeks from his papers, but that he had
already seen news about his calculation error written by Oliver Lodge published
somewhere (maybe The Electrician or Nature), i.e., thanks Henri, already have the bad
news, but thanks anyway.
Correspondence begins between the two that leads to discussion of the Sarasin and de
La Rive verification in Geneva of Hertz' works in a larger lab, with the beginnings of an
explanation of multiple resonances phenomena for which Hertz had no immediate
solution.
Not to be scooped by Lodge, Poincare publishes in early 1891 his text Electricite et
Optique II: Les Theories de Helmholtz et Les Experiences de Hertz, which includes
lessons taught by Poincare during the second semester 1889-1890, noting Hertz
overlooked the correct calculation for the system capacitance.
By the time the 1894 English translation and faithful reproduction of the original Hertz
collection of the 1891 Collection of Wied Annalen articles is published the English
edition (Jones) includes an Introduction from Hertz and Supplementary Notes to the
original articles that, in 1894, addressees the capacitance error, multiple resonances,
and various other challenges, as well as the positive outcome of the Sarasin and de La
Rive experiments in Geneva.
Heaviside, in the meantime, on the basis that his ¡°new math¡± works, becomes accepted.
Great stuff.
And how they communicated without texts and tweets and such, editing for letters and the next publication of technical papers, that appeared without links to or ads to the next wonder Balun or OCFD!!
Thought you might find this interesting.
Ed McCann
AG6CX
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Oct 16, 2024, at 9:09?AM, Ron na2o via groups.io <groups.io@...> wrote:
?On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 12:00 PM, W0LEV wrote:
"off-topic digressions"
Yeah, maybe. But fascinating stuff & worth every minute of it. IMO
--
Ron na2o
|
On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 12:00 PM, W0LEV wrote:
"off-topic digressions"
Yeah, maybe. But fascinating stuff & worth every minute of it. IMO
--
Ron na2o
|
And not to mention the "velocity" of neutrinos. Not quite c but darn close. Do they contain mass which would limit their velocity to something < c. If not, why don't they travel at c? Yes, deep space is dispersive. Do neutrinos also interact with a dispersive medium? Sure, all this is quite off topic, but terribly interesting. Dave D. one of the other moderators of this group, and I used to have these conversations when we worked together in Colorado. So, please forgive the off-topic digressions. Dave - W?LEV On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 3:32?AM KENT BRITAIN via groups.io <WA5VJB= [email protected]> wrote:
>String Theory.........Quantum Gravity........? Maybe just
mathematicians gone wild?
Most don¡¯t know this and its been heavily downplayed but the implications
are specific.
We watched two stellar masses merge.
The gravity detection array vibrated from the merger several seconds
before anything else on light or radio.
This puts gravity, even if must milliseconds, faster than light.
In my mind this establishes all forms of energy as being forms of gravity.
Not Exactly. The EM Waves have been traveling though a Plasma.Yes, a
very thin Plasma, but a plasma never the less.
A Plasma is a Non-Linear-Transmission line. Meaning different wavelengths
travel though it a different speeds. One way for getting a good estimate
for the distance to a pulsar is how much ime\frequency spread there is in
the pulse.
I think we can safely say the light has been slowed down by passing though
a media.
Thin but there and been traveling for a LONG time. Kent
-- *Dave - W?LEV* -- Dave - W?LEV
|
Re: SWR vs. Resonance; Heaviside
I'll just copy/paste from a DM from one of members on this forum. No attribution, not sure if they'd like me to "name names", but content is worth sharing :)
"...the Telegrapher's equation comes from Oliver Heaviside, a self taught mathematician. Is it called the Telegrapher's Equation because it was given to us by a telegrapher? Heaviside was a telegrapher (you know, sending telegrams on the wire) and he was curious to how the telegraph worked, and his work on submarine cables was formative."
|
Re: SWR vs. Resonance; Heaviside
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 06:11 PM, John Nightingale wrote:
one of the few who did understand Maxwell's jungle of ideas and "built" his
own mathematics to express Maxwell's thesis. (For doing so, Mr. Heaviside was
excoriated by his "betters", learned gentlemen all, at first, for having the
temerity to fabricate a "do-it-yourself" mathematics that he could not seat
upon a formal basis. Heaviside answered his critics by saying, essentially,"It
works, you figure it out!")
Most people are not aware of the debt we owe to Oliver Heaviside (who died in poverty, by the way) and assume that the equations we know as Maxwell's were expressed in their current form by Maxwell. Not so. For a very good read, check out "The Maxwellians", by Bruce J. Hunt. And for a short but good read on the development of Vector Analysis, check out this link: - Jeff, k6jca
|
Re: SWR vs. Resonance; Heaviside
Hi All,
Yes, Oliver Heaviside is another of our little known doyens of the electronics world. He was indeed a remarkable man.
Most of us would only know his name, let alone of his existence, if we are involved in amateur radio or radio physics through the naming of the "Heaviside layer" or "E layer" in the ionosphere.
I put Oliver Heaviside in the same category as Nicola Tesla as two of the most under rated contributors to our understanding of the science of electricity and RF propagation.
Just my 2c worth...
Cheers...Bob VK2ZRE
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 16/10/2024 12:11 pm, John Nightingale via groups.io wrote:
On 2024-10-15 12:59, W0LEV wrote:
WARNING:? MORE OFF TOPIC
And only last week I read a paper that proposed that in the big picture of
the universe which we are just on the verge of detecting, that as well
obeys quantization rules much like the electrons around the atomic nucleus
and the energy levels of the nuclear particles within the nucleus.? The
finer we poke at a problem, the more we discover we don't understand.? But
that's the joy and draw of hard science.
Oh, yes, to my last email.? Outside of Mr. Einstein, we must give Mr.
Maxwell full credit for bringing electromagnetics to a well defined set of
four equations (even though two of them are plagerized from previous
works). With the greatest respect, what Mr. Maxwell produced, so very early on, was a brilliant insight. It was, however, indigestible but for a few. Maxwell's four equations are, really, Oliver Heaviside's four equations.
Heaviside was a man without a formal background. Nonetheless, he was one of the few who did understand Maxwell's jungle of ideas and "built" his own mathematics to express Maxwell's thesis. (For doing so, Mr. Heaviside was excoriated by his "betters", learned gentlemen all, at first, for having the temerity to fabricate a "do-it-yourself" mathematics that he could not seat upon a formal basis. Heaviside answered his critics by saying, essentially,"It works, you figure it out!")
?? After all, that's what our VNAs are all about: measuring RF energy
over its many forms and frequencies.? And Mendeleev for seeing the
organization of the basic elements.
Dave - W?LEV
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 7:47?PM Ray Lulling via groups.io <ray=
[email protected]> wrote:
Waves or particles? Quantum Mechanics is stranger than truth
and physicists can¡¯t explain why. The latest read I¡¯ve seen suggests
that everything in the universe is composed of different kinds of
interacting fields. When certain fields interact with the Higgs field,
the interaction creates mass.
Don¡¯t think too much about this or your brain will hurt.? ...
|
Who was it said that there is only one electron in the universe, but it moves so fast that its everywhere.
Peter
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 15/10/2024 19:21, Tony Scaminaci wrote: Also, check out the famous dual-slit experiment here:
,particles%20%E2%80%93%20revealing%20its%20quantum%20nature.
Waves or particles? Quantum Mechanics is stranger than truth and physicists
can¡¯t explain why. The latest read I¡¯ve seen suggests that everything in
the universe is composed of different kinds of interacting fields. When
certain fields interact with the Higgs field, the interaction creates mass.
Don¡¯t think too much about this or your brain will hurt.?
Tony
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 3:10?AM G8HUL via groups.io <g8hul=
[email protected]> wrote:
Now, are the magnetic and electrical fields, waves or quantized
particles? That is the part that I do not fully understand.
Both or may be neither!
Look up wave particle duality.
73
Jeff G8HUL
|
Sorry..typos
I wanted to add ad more options anyway. What's the best bang for your buck? Maximum accurate dynamic range under 400mhz is the target too.
Lite VNA 64, SV4401A, NanoVNA V2 Plus4 or VNA6000?
|
So the SV4401A of the Lite VNA 64? Which device is more reliable?
|
String Theory.........Quantum Gravity........?? Maybe just mathematicians gone wild? Most don¡¯t know this and its been heavily downplayed but the implications are specific. We watched two stellar masses merge. The gravity detection array vibrated from the merger several seconds before anything else on light or radio. This puts gravity, even if must milliseconds, faster than light. In my mind this establishes all forms of energy as being forms of gravity. Not Exactly.??? The EM Waves have been traveling though a Plasma.Yes, a very thin Plasma, but a plasma never the less. A Plasma is a Non-Linear-Transmission line.? Meaning different wavelengths travel though it a different speeds.?? One way for getting a good estimate for the distance to a pulsar is how much ime\frequency spread there is in the pulse. I think we can safely say the light has been slowed down by passing though a media. Thin but there and been traveling for a LONG time.??? Kent
|
Hoffy
