"nightbat" wrote in message
...
nightbat wrote

Y.Porat wrote:
nightbat wrote:

nightbat wrote

Y.Porat wrote:


Felix of The North wrote:


| Suppose that the electron is the minimum quantum of an
electron-wave.
Would
| that model accomodate observations?


No.
Cars are not waves. Electrons are not waves. Photons are not waves.
Wave models are incorrect. Replace them with field models and
particle
models if you wish to understand.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...lina/Drive.htm
Androcles


Katzebrude.

The electron is a particle. The electron is a wave. It is both.

Fields are places where ones finds dogs mating.

Wave-particle duality is the result of a continuous-discrete duality,
and
this continuous-discrete duality is easily explained by allowing
Plancklength graduations to be oriented arbitrarily, not fixed, but
sliding
arbitrarily.

Cars are indeed waves, electrons are waves, photons are waves, and
sometimes
bull**** comes in waves like a tsunami.

The universe has no geometric origin. There is no cosmic (0,0,0,0).
Planck
length chunks of dimension are not numbered. Their configuration is
arbitrary, and so is the location of the origin (as a corollary).

I explained the whole thing already. For Pete's sakes -

For any two points in the universe there is a path of zero distance
connecting those points. It has zero length because it is composed of
trivial points. Obviously, there are also points which are not
trivial, and
so ........


gotta run -------

Y. Porat
----------------------
most probably
run to the pub --take his wives(or mothers ) money ---and buy some
bottles of whiskey !!
we can smell these guys as far as from the south pole

Y.Porat
---------------------------------


nightbat

Hello Porat why has it been so long since you posted to
alt.astronomy where I reside and how are things over in sci.physics the
home of mainstream profound scientists and researchers. How is your
family and work coming along? We touched on some many like thoughts and
still going after the clueless I see. Androcles however is a special
case very profound. Nice seeing you still posting and do please post
here more often for your misunderstood profoundness is well respected.

cheers,
the nightbat

Porat
---------------------------
i was responding to Felix

did you read his post ? did you understand him ??
(di dhe understood whah he wrote ???)

ATB
Y.Porat
------------------------------------


nightbat

Yes Porat, Felix is entertaining for he contradicts himself but
still entertaining. Tell him from point Earth to point Titan moon
tealeaf base it should according to him take zero time for him to get
there since there is purportedly zero distance between us, ha, ha. Don't
let the entertainers get to you they provide lighthardiness to the
seriousness of your own investigations. Come and post some here at
alt.astronomy and let your mind be respected as a honorary Earth Science
Team Officer friend.

cheers,
the nightbat



One can certainly explain nonlocality using trivial geometry.

In R3, you have a collection of points which are said to exist. Consider
chopping a point in half, it cannot be done, and so such "half points" may
be considered trivial. Their existence is arbitrary, because they are
trivial. R3 looks a little different now. You have a collection of points
(R3) which is said to exist, along with a kind of co-space which is
completely trivial and perhaps not really existent.

So, for any two points A and B in R3, draw a path from A to B using only
trivial points. It is clear that this path is not really existent, and so
the distance from A to B "via trivial geometry" is indeed zero.

Mathematicians dont like this because, WLOG, they dont like paradoxes in the
first place. However - we do know how to chop a point in half, |A-A|/2, so
trivial points are constructible. Trivial manifolds, spaces, etc etc.

So, yeah, the distance from Earth to Titan is several million miles as
measured in real points which exist along real paths. But all "trivial"
paths from Earth to Titan are indeed zero, and there are infinitely many of
them.

Cant believe that you guys dont get it. This is really simple stuff that
completely explains why whichway information exists, etc.

My Schmidt-Cassegrain's bigger than yours anyway. : P