Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: ever since 1842, the Doppler shift was assumed to exist for
lightwaves and never experimentally verified Chapt 8 #138; ATOM TOTALITY

Replies: 122   Last Post: Jul 10, 2010 2:38 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com

Posts: 7,405
Registered: 3/31/08
ever since 1842, the Doppler shift was assumed to exist for
lightwaves and never experimentally verified Chapt 8 #138; ATOM TOTALITY

Posted: Jun 5, 2010 2:35 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

A reader has asked me to not go over 200 posts in a thread as that it
is too difficult to retrieve the thread.
So I will oblige.

Also I had some typo errors of my previous post.

--- repeating my post of last night to David and with a few typo
errors such as the ommission of the word
Doppler in some places ---
Jun 5, 3:56 am

- Hide quoted text -

David Bernier wrote:


> Imagine the police radar is at rest and emits sine waves with
> crests one meter apart (a signal at about 300 Mega-Hertz).



> Suppose a mirror is moving away at 10% of the speed of light from
> the radar, in a radial (in-line with the signal) direction.



> When a crest advances 1 meter, the mirror recedes by 0.1 meter.
> The question is then what is the crest-to-crest separation
> after reflection off the mirror?



> This might involve special relativity, I'm not completely sure.
> But think about planets orbiting about far away stars. It's often
> said that as the earth-planet radial velocity varies as
> the planet moves in its orbit, periodic variations in
> spectral lines (wavelengths or frequencies) are measured,
> interpreted as Doppler effects.  Don't you think
> this is well established?



> David Bernier

All physical systems involve SR, since SR is nothing more than saying
that
the Maxwell Equations are invariant as per whether a magnet is moving
or a
wire loop is moving while the other is stationary.


Let me answer you by asking you some questions. Doppler Effect
discovered in
1842; Michelson Morley Experiment 1887; Special Relativity of
Lorentz-
Poincare
1900; Hubble Law of redshift of galaxies 1929.


Questions, David:
(1) Would there be any reason for any scientist to question whether
lightwaves
obeyed a Doppler shift? The actual history shows that noone bothered
to
question whether lightwaves must or must not have a Doppler Effect.


Answer to (1) When the Michelson interferometer experiment arose,
there should
have been at least one physicist or mathematician to raise the
question of whether
we can assume the doppler effect exists for lightwaves. Because the
Interferometer
actually measures wavelengths. So beyond 1887, some people, a few
should have
no longer assumed or presumed that lightwaves obey a Doppler Effect
and begin
to experiment or look for Doppler effect on lightwaves. To my
knowledge, noone
did any such. Noone even raised the question, and all were asleep
under the assumption.


(2) Should anyone have questioned whether a Doppler Effect existed on
lightwaves
after Special Relativity was formulated by Lorentz, Poincare and
later
by Einstein?
Answer (2) as David even mentions that SR comes into question with
the
Doppler
Effect. But here again, apparently not a single person in physics nor
mathematics
raised the fundamental questions of whether SR can support a Doppler
Effect
on lightwaves?


(3) So here comes 1929 with the Hubble Law and we can appreciate how
totally
immersed into the belief or misbelief of a Doppler Shift prevalent
and
pervasive.
So the question is by 1929 and after, what chances were there that
anyone in
physics or mathematics was sober enough to ask the fundamental
question:
is Doppler (sic) lightwaves and Special Relativity compatible or
contradictory?
Answer: By the time of the Hubble Law, only a lone wolf could ask for
a objective
research into whether Doppler Effect on lightwaves contradicted
Special Relativity.


Do you see the historical pattern, David? That a Doppler effect was
so
presumed,
that noone from 1842 to 2010, had the objective commonsense to
question
the assumption of whether lightwaves can have a Doppler shift.


Now, possibly a mathematician from 1842 to 2010 is more likely to
call
attention
to the question of whether Doppler is compatible with SR. Since a
mathematician
often works with consistency and with contradictions. A physicist is
unlikely to
have suspected anything wrong. And a mathematician is more likely to
spot where
a scientist is "making an assumption" that needs valid evidence. From
Christian
Doppler in 1842, who was a mathematician, noone really stepped up and
said
"let us no longer assume lightwaves can be Doppler shifted, but let
us
show
evidence that such is or is not the case." Noone did this. They were
crushed
under the avalanche of Hubble's law and then under the mountain of
the
Doppler radar misnomer.


Noteworthy, David, there has never been a eye witness case example to
anything
involving light and a Doppler shift. Unlike sound from a train to
prove Doppler shift
on Soundwaves, noone has seen a Doppler shift on lightwaves. And
there
is one
case in particular that a Doppler Shift should occur but has not. And
that case is
the radio on the Space Station with the astronauts. Their radio is
not
Doppler shifted
of any radio signal from ground. If their radio has no Doppler shift,
then no Doppler
shift on lightwaves exists. If the world has any Doppler shift, the
radio turned on
in the Space Station listening to radio ground waves should have a
Doppler shift.
But they have no shift.


And the Space Station is a similar experiment to the Michelson Morley
experiment where
the end result in both cases is a "null result". No Doppler shift in
either the Space Station
nor the Michelson interferometer.


Final question David: How could so many be fooled into thinking their
radar waves were
Doppler shifted? Answer: easily fooled since the speed of the object
is begot whether
a Doppler shift exists or does not exist when using the radar
gadgets.

--- end quoting my previous post ---

Basically what I want to direct the attention of the
Physics and Math community is the attention to the
fact that a Doppler Shift on lightwaves or EM spectrum
is nonexistent and is easily proven by the fact that any car radio
antennae is never Doppler shifted to radio waves, whether the car is
in motion or not. And the
Space Station of astronauts moving at large speeds compared to the
puny car speeds has no Doppler shift
on ground based radio waves.

So if there is no Doppler shift on radio waves, no matter what the
speed of source versus object, then
why in the world would anyone believe Doppler Effect
occurrs on any EM wave?


Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies


Date Subject Author
6/5/10
Read ever since 1842, the Doppler shift was assumed to exist for
lightwaves and never experimentally verified Chapt 8 #138; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/6/10
Read zapping a moving car with the alleged Doppler radar yet the radio
wave has no Doppler Chapt 8 #139; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/6/10
Read Re: zapping a moving car with the alleged Doppler radar yet the radio
wave has no Doppler Chapt 8 #139; ATOM TOTALITY
pete
6/6/10
Read Re: zapping a moving car with the alleged Doppler radar yet the radio
wave has no Doppler Chapt 8 #139; ATOM TOTALITY
ostap_bender_1900@hotmail.com
6/6/10
Read Re: zapping a moving car with the alleged Doppler radar yet the radio
wave has no Doppler Chapt 8 #140; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/6/10
Read Re: zapping a moving car with the alleged Doppler radar yet the radio
wave has no Doppler Chapt 8 #140; ATOM TOTALITY
ostap_bender_1900@hotmail.com
6/6/10
Read Re: zapping a moving car with the alleged Doppler radar yet the radio wave has no Doppler Chapt 8 #140; ATOM TOTALITY
Mike Dworetsky
6/6/10
Read Re: zapping a moving car with the alleged Doppler radar yet the radio
wave has no Doppler Chapt 8 #140; ATOM TOTALITY
David Bernier
6/6/10
Read Re: zapping a moving car with the alleged Doppler radar yet the radio wave has no Doppler Chapt 8 #140; ATOM TOTALITY
Mike Dworetsky
6/6/10
Read Re: zapping a moving car with the alleged Doppler radar yet the radio
wave has no Doppler Chapt 8 #142; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/7/10
Read Inconsistency of Special Relativity and Doppler Effect Chapt 8 #143;
ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/7/10
Read Re: Inconsistency of Special Relativity and Doppler Effect Chapt 8
#143; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/6/10
Read proof that the Doppler Shift never occurrs with EM waves Chapt 8
#141; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/7/10
Read Re: proof that the Doppler Shift never occurrs with EM waves Chapt 8 #141; ATOM TOTALITY
Mike Dworetsky
6/7/10
Read Re: proof that the Doppler Shift never occurrs with EM waves Chapt 8
#144; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/7/10
Read Re: proof that the Doppler Shift never occurrs with EM waves Chapt 8 #144; ATOM TOTALITY
Mike Dworetsky
6/8/10
Read Slow-light; whether it supports a nonexistant doppler effect on Light
Chapt 8 #145; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/8/10
Read Re: Slow-light; whether it supports a nonexistant doppler effect on
Light Chapt 8 #146; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/8/10
Read using "slow light" in a future experiment where a slow-light source
is on a moving platform to test for a Doppler shift effect Chapt 8 #147; ATOM
TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/8/10
Read Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation proves Atom Totality and
dismisses Big Bang Chapt 3 #148; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/8/10
Read Cosmic Blackbody Microwave Background Radiation proves Atom Totality
and dismisses Big Bang Chapt 3 #149; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/8/10
Read Re: Cosmic Blackbody Microwave Background Radiation proves Atom
Totality and dismisses Big Bang Chapt 3 #149; ATOM TOTALITY
Porky Pig Jr
6/9/10
Read Cosmic Blackbody Microwave Background Radiation proves Atom Totality
and dismisses Big Bang Chapt 3 #150; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/10/10
Read Re: Cosmic Blackbody Microwave Background Radiation proves Atom
Totality and dismisses Big Bang Chapt 3 #151; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/10/10
Read Re: Cosmic Blackbody Microwave Background Radiation proves Atom Totality and dismisses Big Bang Chapt 3 #151; ATOM TOTALITY
Mike Dworetsky
6/10/10
Read maybe I need to combine this chapter with "Dirac new radioactivities"
Chapt 3 #152; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/10/10
Read Re: maybe I need to combine this chapter with "Dirac new radioactivities" Chapt 3 #152; ATOM TOTALITY
Mike Dworetsky
6/10/10
Read Big Bang is a amorphous, a nonentity, process whereas Atom Totality
is a "something that is building" Chapt 3 #153; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/11/10
Read reminder to talk more about blackbody microwave and Dirac new
radioactivities Chapt 1&3 #154; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/11/10
Read Wegener's Continental Drift theory may be telling on Atom Totality
social acceptance Chapt 1 &3 #155; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/12/10
Read expanding the history chapter of this book Chapt 2 #156; ATOM
TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/13/10
Read expanding the history chapter of this book Chapt 2 #157; ATOM
TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/13/10
Read scientists making discoveries of science with superdeterminism Chapt
2 #158; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/13/10
Read summary of "history of physics" and how discoveries of theories are
made Chapt 2 #159; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/13/10
Read Re: summary of "history of physics" and how discoveries of theories
are made Chapt 2 #159; ATOM TOTALITY
bert
6/14/10
Read superdeterminism rather than Darwin evolution for science theory
discoveries Chapt 2 #160; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/14/10
Read Re: superdeterminism rather than Darwin evolution for science theory
discoveries Chapt 2 #160; ATOM TOTALITY
Porky Pig Jr
6/14/10
Read circumstantial evidence for Wegener but not for Darwin; what about
Atom Totality? Chapt 2 #161; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/14/10
Read proving Dirac's new radioactivities is additive creation based on
Local Group galaxies?? Chapt 14 #162; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/15/10
Read best way of testing Dirac's new radioactivities additive creation
Chapt 14 #163; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/15/10
Read Re: best way of testing Dirac's new radioactivities additive creation
Chapt 14 #164; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/6/10
Read Re: zapping a moving car with the alleged Doppler radar yet the radio
wave has no Doppler Chapt 8 #140; ATOM TOTALITY
Porky Pig Jr
6/7/10
Read Re: zapping a moving car with the alleged Doppler radar yet the radio
wave has no Doppler Chapt 8 #140; ATOM TOTALITY
bjacoby@iwaynet.net
6/7/10
Read Re: zapping a moving car with the alleged Doppler radar yet the radio wave has no Doppler Chapt 8 #140; ATOM TOTALITY
Androcles
6/7/10
Read Re: zapping a moving car with the alleged Doppler radar yet the radio
wave has no Doppler Chapt 8 #140; ATOM TOTALITY
ostap_bender_1900@hotmail.com
6/7/10
Read Re: zapping a moving car with the alleged Doppler radar yet the radio
wave has no Doppler Chapt 8 #140; ATOM TOTALITY
ostap_bender_1900@hotmail.com
6/7/10
Read Re: zapping a moving car with the alleged Doppler radar yet the radio
wave has no Doppler Chapt 8 #140; ATOM TOTALITY
Brian Q. Hutchings
6/15/10
Read reorganization of chapters Chapt 1 #165; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/15/10
Read Experiment to prove Dirac's new-radioactivities additive-creation
Chapt 5 #166; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/15/10
Read history of sciences and deciding-evidence Chapt 2 #167; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/15/10
Read Additive Creation; Dirac's new radioactivities Chapt 5 #168; ATOM
TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/15/10
Read heavy water in comets is already proof Re: Additive Creation; Dirac's
new radioactivities Chapt 5 #169; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/16/10
Read Heavy water Experiment; 160 ppm deuterium Re: Additive Creation;
Dirac's new radioactivities Chapt 5 #170; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/16/10
Read Re: Heavy water Experiment; 160 ppm deuterium Re: Additive Creation;
Dirac's new radioactivities Chapt 5 #170; ATOM TOTALITY
Porky Pig Jr
6/17/10
Read Comet heavy water due to salt counterbalance? Re: Additive Creation;
Dirac's new radioactivities Chapt 5 #171; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/17/10
Read Re: Comet heavy water due to salt counterbalance? Re: Additive
Creation; Dirac's new radioactivities Chapt 5 #171; ATOM TOTALITY
bert
6/17/10
Read Experiment: Additive Creation; Dirac's new radioactivities Chapt 5
#172; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/18/10
Read rewrite of #172; Dirac's new radioactivities Chapt 5 #173; ATOM
TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/19/10
Read Re: rewrite of #172; Dirac's new radioactivities Chapt 5 #173; ATOM TOTALITY
Owen Jacobson
6/19/10
Read Re: rewrite of #172; Dirac's new radioactivities Chapt 5 #173; ATOM TOTALITY
Androcles
6/19/10
Read Comet's 320ppm versus Earth's 160ppm experiment; Dirac's new
radioactivities Chapt 5 #177; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/22/10
Read a check on my derivation "elementary charge e" out of pure math;
1.618.. x 10^-19 C; magnetic monopole Chapt 14 #190; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/22/10
Read question as to whether speed of light is precisely 314159265.35.. m/s
; magnetic monopole Chapt 14 #191; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/22/10
Read Re: question as to whether speed of light is precisely 314159265.35..
m/s ; magnetic monopole Chapt 14 #191; ATOM TOTALITY
Frederick Williams
6/22/10
Read Re: question as to whether speed of light is precisely 314159265.35.. m/s ; magnetic monopole Chapt 14 #191; ATOM TOTALITY
Owen Jacobson
6/22/10
Read Re: question as to whether speed of light is precisely 314159265.35.. m/s ; magnetic monopole Chapt 14 #191; ATOM TOTALITY
Androcles
6/22/10
Read Re: question as to whether speed of light is precisely 314159265.35..
m/s ; magnetic monopole Chapt 14 #191; ATOM TOTALITY
David R Tribble
6/22/10
Read Re: question as to whether speed of light is precisely 314159265.35.. m/s ; magnetic monopole Chapt 14 #191; ATOM TOTALITY
Androcles
6/23/10
Read Re: question as to whether speed of light is precisely 314159265.35..
m/s ; magnetic monopole Chapt 14 #191; ATOM TOTALITY
David R Tribble
6/23/10
Read Re: question as to whether speed of light is precisely 314159265.35.. m/s ; magnetic monopole Chapt 14 #191; ATOM TOTALITY
Androcles
6/28/10
Read Re: question as to whether speed of light is precisely 314159265.35.. m/s ; magnetic monopole Chapt 14 #191; ATOM TOTALITY
Mitchell Jones
6/22/10
Read Re: question as to whether speed of light is precisely 314159265.35..
m/s ; magnetic monopole Chapt 14 #191; ATOM TOTALITY
Uncle Al
6/22/10
Read Re: question as to whether speed of light is precisely 314159265.35..
m/s ; magnetic monopole Chapt 14 #191; ATOM TOTALITY
David R Tribble
6/23/10
Read deriving speed of light from purely math considerations ; speed of
light Chapt 19 #192; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/23/10
Read speed of light in km as exactly equal to 314159 km/second ; speed of
light Chapt 19 #193; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/23/10
Read Re: speed of light in km as exactly equal to 314159 km/second ; speed
of light Chapt 19 #193; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/23/10
Read some backtracking in deriving speed of light from purely math
considerations ; speed of light Chapt 19 #194; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/23/10
Read pseudosphere in deriving speed of light from purely math
considerations ; Chapt 19 #195; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/24/10
Read pseudosphere poles = 5,000 km? in deriving speed of light from purely
math considerations ; Chapt 19 #196; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/24/10
Read looking for 1/8 circumference of Earth-Sphere = 5,000 km ; Chapt 19
#197; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/25/10
Read deriving speed of light from pure math alone; Tractrix ; Chapt 19
#198; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/25/10
Read deriving "elementary charge" from pure math alone ; Chapt 19 #199;
ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/25/10
Read deriving speed of light purely from math; radius of pseudosphere
defect as 5,000km?? Chapt 19 #200; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/25/10
Read deriving speed of light purely from math; diameter of pseudosphere
defect as 5,000km?? Chapt 19 #201; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/26/10
Read speed of light from pure math as (NxN)/(1/8N) = 8N Chapt 19 #202;
ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/26/10
Read speed of light from pure math as (NxN)/(1/8N) = 8N ; Schrodinger Eq.
Chapt 19 #203; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/26/10
Read Re: speed of light from pure math as (NxN)/(1/8N) = 8N ; Schrodinger
Eq. Chapt 19 #203; ATOM TOTALITY
Cassidy Furlong
6/27/10
Read backtracking on speed of light derived from pure math Chapt 19 #204;
ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/27/10
Read on course! for deriving speed of light from pure math Chapt 19 #205;
ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/27/10
Read deriving speed of light out of raw pure math Chapt 19 #206; ATOM
TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/28/10
Read deriving speed of light out of raw pure math Chapt 19 #207; ATOM
TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/28/10
Read Re: deriving speed of light out of raw pure math Chapt 19 #207; ATOM
TOTALITY
Brian Q. Hutchings
6/29/10
Read Olber's paradox resolved Chapt 3 #208; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/29/10
Read uniform Blackbody 2.71 K cosmic microwave background radiation Chapt
3 #209; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/29/10
Read blackbody CMBR and why kelvin scale is special Chapt 3 #210; ATOM
TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/29/10
Read blackbody CMBR and why kelvin scale is special Chapt 3 #211; ATOM
TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
7/1/10
Read blackbody CMBR and why kelvin scale is special Chapt 3 #212; ATOM
TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
7/1/10
Read Re: blackbody CMBR and Olbers Chapt 3 #213; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
7/1/10
Read blackbody CMBR and Olber's Paradox explained Chapt 3 #213; ATOM
TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
7/2/10
Read missing mass with its solid-body-rotation conundrum solved Chapt 4
#214; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
7/8/10
Read deriving speed of light out of pure math as pseudosphere nested
inside sphere Chapt 19 #215; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
7/8/10
Read speed of light out of pure math the pseudosphere as time and sphere
as distance Chapt 19 #216; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
7/8/10
Read time as the circumference of the lobe inside the sphere: deriving
speed of light from pure math Chapt 19 #217; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
7/10/10
Read Re: Schrodinger cubic set; deriving speed of light from pure math
Chapt 19 #219; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
7/10/10
Read Why blackbody Cosmic microwave radiation is more compelling evidence
than Missing Mass Chapt 4 #220; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/19/10
Read Re: rewrite of #172; Dirac's new radioactivities Chapt 5 #173; ATOM TOTALITY
Owen Jacobson
6/19/10
Read Re: rewrite of #172; Dirac's new radioactivities Chapt 5 #173; ATOM TOTALITY
Androcles
6/19/10
Read additive versus multiplicative creation: Dirac's new radioactivities
Chapt 5 #178; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/19/10
Read Anders, Ebihara Re: additive versus multiplicative creation: Dirac's
new radioactivities Chapt 5 #179; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/20/10
Read Re: Anders, Ebihara Re: additive versus multiplicative creation:
Dirac's new radioactivities Chapt 5 #180; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/20/10
Read combinations of additive and multiplicative creation: Dirac's new
radioactivities Chapt 5 #181; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/20/10
Read Universe itself is the one and only magnetic monopole Chapt 14 #182;
ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/21/10
Read Dirac was both right and wrong about his magnetic monopole Chapt 14
#184; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/21/10
Read speed of light is likely to be more accurately that of 3.14159.. x
10^8 m/s; magnetic monopole Chapt 14 #185; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/21/10
Read electric charge is likely to be more accurately that of 1.618.. x
10^-19 C; magnetic monopole Chapt 14 #186; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/21/10
Read 1/8 log spiral to yield speed of light ; magnetic monopole Chapt 14
#187; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/21/10
Read Re: electric charge is likely to be more accurately that of 1.618.. x
10^-19 C; magnetic monopole Chapt 14 #188; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/22/10
Read deriving "elementary charge e" out of pure math; 1.618.. x 10^-19 C;
magnetic monopole Chapt 14 #189; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/18/10
Read Additive Creation Dirac's new radioactivities predicts why lithium,
beryllium, boron are so rare Chapt 5 #174; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/18/10
Read Additive Creation Dirac's New Radioactivities predicts that iron is
stable to fission & fusion Chapt 12 #175; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/18/10
Read Additive Creation Dirac's New Radioactivities and Gamma Ray Bursts
Chapt 5 #176; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/22/10
Read Re: a check on my derivation "elementary charge e" out of pure math;
1.618.. x 10^-19 C; magnetic monopole Chapt 14 #190; ATOM TOTALITY
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/23/10
Read Re: ever since 1842, the Doppler shift was assumed to exist for
lightwaves and never experimentally verified Chapt 8 #138; ATOM TOTALITY
NoEinstein

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2013. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.