Limits of Spectroscopy

"Ralph Hertle" wrote in message
...
John:

Thanks for your reply. The additional quotation that you provided is
interesting to me, and I'm simply trying to sort out fact from fiction
in science.

A good start would be to stop injecting fiction into your posts.


John Zinni wrote:

[ text omitted ]

Oh, you sly so-n-so Ralph.
In the quote above, you stop just short of the name of the second
process
(did you think I was incapable of clicking on a link and reading it
myself).

The above quote should end ...

"... Consequently, due to this inelastic collision, the photon emerges
with
a different energy, the Raman process (after Sir Chandrasekhar Venkata
Raman
(1888-1970), the first Asian to win a Nobel Prize, in 1930)."

And yet on Jan 26 of this year, in the thread "TIRED LIGHT [ = NO BB ]"
when
I asked you specifically ...

"As far as I can tell, no such experiment exists (Might you mean "Raman
scattering"???)."
- John Zinni -

Your responses was ...

"No."
- Ralph Hertle -

Any comment Ralph???

[ text omitted ]


Don't get me wrong. The summary of Rayleigh's photon-hydrogen inelastic
collision experiment was what I was referring to. I wasn't referring to
Raman's work, and that is also interesting.

I believe that several scientists work will be found to be true and even
more basic that previously thought, e.g., Max Planck, and that theories
of the photon that identify energy level and integral frequency or
dynamic properties will ultimately prevail over theories of non-physical
and non-existent or etherian waves.

When the prime focus of science is in finding out what exists in the
universe, and how existents function, instead of trying to make
mathematical concepts into metaphysical existents, the path to
discovering the causes of light and gravity will be open.

The above doesn't actually mean anything. Does it???



Ralph Hertle

(Tony Flanders) wrote in message m...
(Abdul Ahad) wrote in message . com...

When is the next supernova due in our part of the galaxy, I wonder.
Tycho's star 1572 ... Kepler's star 1604 ... supernova 1987A inside
the large magellanic cloud ... should be one soon???

Absolutely. By historical averages, we seem to be overdue for a
naked-eye supernova in the Milky Way. I'm rooting for April;
I've got too much to do this March!

- Tony Flanders

Supernovae candidates a Garnet Star (Mu cephei), Antares and
Betelgeuse plus a handful of really old (M or S class) Mira type
variables.
One of them is going to go bang in the next few years! (I just got a
hunch).
And just how bright would it look? The brightness of Venus multiplied
at least 10 fold...

John:

John Zinni wrote:
"Ralph Hertle" wrote in message
...

[ text omitted ]

When the prime focus of science is in finding out what exists in the
universe, and how existents function, instead of trying to make
mathematical concepts into metaphysical existents, the path to
discovering the causes of light and gravity will be open.


The above doesn't actually mean anything. Does it???


[ unsigned ]


Not to you.

Ralph Hertle