Could Albert be wrong?

On 9/25/11 2:29 AM, Robert Clark wrote:
On Sep 24, 9:47 pm, Sam wrote:
On 9/24/11 8:26 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

Zero velocity doesn't exist.

My kitchen table has zero velocity with respect to my kitchen.
Whether an object has zero velocity or non-zero velocity strictly
depends on the point of view of the observer.

The fact that you and your kitchen table do not have zero velocity
with respect to the center of the Earth has important and measurable
physical effects, specifically because the Earth is spinning.

Bob Clark

You have introduces the center of the earth as an observer. This is
exactly what I said--Whether an object has zero velocity or non-zero
velocity strictly depends on the point of view of the observer. Just
because one observer measures non-zero velocity, has no bearing on
what other observers will measure.

Position, velocity, kinetic energy, time dilation, etc. are observer
dependent.

On 9/25/11 4:16 AM, Wolf Norman wrote:
On Sep 25, 3:47 am, Sam wrote:
On 9/24/11 8:26 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

Zero velocity doesn't exist.

My kitchen table has zero velocity with respect to my kitchen.
Whether an object has zero velocity or non-zero velocity strictly
depends on the point of view of the observer.

wrong, the state of the observable

thats the whole point with an observation,
to see whether the observable is moving or not

Moving with respect to what? There is no absolute motion.

In article , says...

On Sep 24, 8:18*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 9/24/11 6:44 PM, Robert Clark wrote:

On Sep 23, 10:39 am, Sam *wrote:
On 9/23/11 3:56 AM, G. L. Bradford wrote:

* *A proper question is how slow is slow in space? What exactly is the
zero of velocity that 300,000kps is measured out from?

* * There is no absolute state of motion or rest. Whether a body is
* * in motion are at rest depends strictly on the point of view of
* * the observer.

That is the current scientific theory. Of course a preferred frame
could be found tomorrow for all we know.

* *Well it started before Galileo, who stated it. Since there is no
* *absolute references in space-time, there is no absolute coordinate
* *system--no absolute motion.

For instance there was a report this year that suggested the universe
could be *spinning.

* *Spinning with respect to what?

* *No Center
* * *http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/nocenter.html
* * *http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/infpoint.html

* *Also see Ned Wright's Cosmology Tutorial
* * *http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm
* * *http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmology_faq.html
* * *http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/CosmoCalc.html

* *WMAP: Foundations of the Big Bang theory
* * *http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni.html

* *WMAP: Tests of Big Bang Cosmology
* * *http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bbtest.html

IF it is spinning. It would be with respect to a center.

Bob Clark


Which could be translating and spinning relative to something else, etc, etc, etc.......

"Sam Wormley" wrote in message
...
On 9/25/11 4:16 AM, Wolf Norman wrote:
On Sep 25, 3:47 am, Sam wrote:
On 9/24/11 8:26 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

Zero velocity doesn't exist.

My kitchen table has zero velocity with respect to my kitchen.
Whether an object has zero velocity or non-zero velocity strictly
depends on the point of view of the observer.

wrong, the state of the observable

thats the whole point with an observation,
to see whether the observable is moving or not

Moving with respect to what? There is no absolute motion.

It is sad that the Mass Media
made Einstein a Poster Boy
to hype the fiction that Jews are intelligent,

in order to rationalize why Jews came into conflict
with all of their neighbors throughout history,

and why the Jewish culture was vastly inferior
to the cultures of Egypt, Persia, India, China, Greece, Rome, etc.

as this caused the masses to believe that
energy, rather than action, was quanta,

and it shifted the focus from
ONE ZERO POINT
for ALL independent properties,
such as time, spaces, masses, etc.

Individual humans, animals, and LGM
use the most convenient ZERO POINTS available to them,
and the most convenient units available to them,
when making observations.

Intelligent, social, sentient beings
map ALL objects and events
using ONE ZERO POINT
and ONE MASTER UNIT
and the minimum number or LINEAR orthogonals.

Two points of each orthogonal are oriented
through the ONE ZERO POINT,
and a constant is used to equate the scaling of
an orthgonal to the MASTER UNIT.

The most intelligent sentient beings
comprehend that observations mapped to a point
other then the MASTER ZERO POINT are data,
that must be morphed into a MASTER ZERO POINT
that can be shared most precisely with other intelligent sentient beings
before it becomes science.

And of course, the most intelligent sentient beings
comprehend that it is not only essential to
use one MASTER ZERO POINT,

they comprehend that for data to be integrated
onto a MASTER CALENDAR,
that the units the data is in,
has to be transformed into the MASTER UNIT,
which at this time is the second.

It is sad that the Mass Media
has brainwashed the masses to consider multiple ZERO REFERENCE POINTS
as standards, rather than data,
and to use rubber rulers and clocks,
rather than the minimum number of linear orthogonals
scaled using one MASTER UNIT.

The bottom line is this:
1. What people observe and report is DATA.

2. The most intelligent sentient beings
take the data,
shift the zero reference point to the MASTER ZERO POINT,
shift the units to the MASTER UNIT,
linearize the data if needed,
and map the data onto the ONE MASTER CALENDAR.

3. The most intelligent sentient beings
make this data available to users,
along with algorithms
that can be used to compress historical data,
and make extrapolations to future data.

4. The most intelligent sentient beings
then accept compression algorithms from users,
and use points on their MASTER CALENDAR
to compare the various algorithms
in order to determine the utility of each algorithm.

--
Tom Potter
-----------------
http://www.prioritize.biz/
http://voices.yuku.com/forums/66
http://tdp1001.wiki.zoho.com/siteindex.zhtml
http://184.105.237.216/~tompotte/
http://tdp1001.wiki.zoho.com

On Sep 25, 3:05*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 9/25/11 2:23 AM, Robert Clark wrote:



* IF it is spinning. It would be with respect to a center.

* * Bob Clark

* *You confuse center of rotation with rotation reference such as
* *the "fixed stars".

* * *No Center
* * * *http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/nocenter.html
* * * *http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/infpoint.html
*
* * *Also see Ned Wright's Cosmology Tutorial
* * * *http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm
* * * *http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmology_faq.html
* * * *http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/CosmoCalc.html
*
* * *WMAP: Foundations of the Big Bang theory
* * * *http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni.html
*
* * *WMAP: Tests of Big Bang Cosmology
* * * *http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bbtest.html



Read that article I linked again. It refers to an axis of rotation.
Likely there would be a center in that case. I say "likely" because if
the universe were infinite it could have an axis of rotation without
having a center.
The current theory that there is no preferred frame is confirmed
within our current measurement accuracy. That does not mean increased
accuracy or knowing what to look for such as, say, superluminal
neutrinos couldn't show a preferred frame later.


Bob Clark

In article ,
Sam Wormley writes:
Position, velocity, kinetic energy, time dilation, etc. are observer
dependent.

True.

Rotation, however, seems to be frame-independent. That is, the
"kitchen table" reference frame can be shown to be non-inertial by
local experiments (gyroscopes or, if not located at the equator,
Foucoult pendulum).

--
Help keep our newsgroup healthy; please don't feed the trolls.
Steve Willner Phone 617-495-7123
Cambridge, MA 02138 USA

"Steve Willner" wrote in message
...
| In article ,
| Sam Wormley writes:
| Position, velocity, kinetic energy, time dilation, etc. are observer
| dependent.
|
| True.
|
| Rotation, however, seems to be frame-independent. That is, the
| "kitchen table" reference frame can be shown to be non-inertial by
| local experiments (gyroscopes or, if not located at the equator,
| Foucoult pendulum).

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html

8. 5 points for each mention of "Einstien", "Hawkins" or "Feynmann".

Baez left out "Foucoult", Wilma.

In article , I wrote:
Foucoult pendulum).

Ouch! Foucault, of course. Almost every major science museum has
one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum

--
Help keep our newsgroup healthy; please don't feed the trolls.
Steve Willner Phone 617-495-7123
Cambridge, MA 02138 USA

On Sep 24, 6:47*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 9/24/11 8:26 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

Zero velocity doesn't exist.

* *My kitchen table has zero velocity with respect to my kitchen.
* *Whether an object has zero velocity or non-zero velocity strictly
* *depends on the point of view of the observer.

Don't be silly. We're all moving at c or something less, and we're
also moving in all xyz directions at the same time. Apparently some
particles get to move faster than c, especially if adding their
trajectory and apparent velocity to the surroundings that's moving
close to c as is.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On 9/30/11 2:27 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
We're all moving at c or something less, and we're
also moving in all xyz directions at the same time.

Let me correct you, Brad. Object are traveling at
exactly c through *space-time*.