Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: "Dark Energy" is a Misleading name. [forcefieldpropulsionphysics] Dark Energy Comes To Light

Expand Messages
  • Robert Neil Boyd
    John, Your description of the Stern-Gerlach experiment was appreciated! Real-world stuff ! Rather than the mysteries which myths are made of, only to be called
    Message 1 of 4 , May 1, 2000
      John,

      Your description of the Stern-Gerlach experiment was
      appreciated! Real-world stuff ! Rather than the mysteries
      which myths are made of, only to be called "science".

      Thanks,

      Neil

      John Schnurer wrote:

      > Dear Folks,
      >
      > A better name would not be "Dark Energy" ... but regular energy,
      > obscured by thin but large in area barrier... the energy, the photons...
      > are not "Dark" ... by any means... they are simply obscured. But it
      > sounds cool to write "Dark Energy".
      > Accurate names may not sell as much news... which does not lead to
      > as any advertisement sales.
      > Also... in some case... accurate words do not make the scientist
      > sound like he is doing new work.
      >
      > Some examples:
      >
      > Fuzzy Logic
      >
      > And the recent mis uses of:
      >
      > Negative Resistance
      >
      > Dark Current
      >
      > Now if you really want to see some "new" then just re examine
      > tried and true experiments which may be foundations of modern work. But
      > examine them in the light of our present more effective instruments or
      > examine them after the "shock" or new-novel-ness has passed.
      >
      > Example:
      >
      > The Stern Gerlach experiment was as follows:
      >
      > A low velocity, or 'thermal-velocity-only' beam of silver atoms is
      > " launched" ... more accurate would be maybe to say "were allowed to loaf
      > along in one direction" from a tiny oven with baffles with holes in them
      > to make this low velocity weak beam of atoms of silver.
      > Now....this thin column is passed through a magnetic field with a
      > high gradient ... the idea was though it would leave a smear, to use
      > Feynman's description.
      > Instead it left two spots.
      >
      > The ONLY conclusion you can reach from this is it made a
      > separation, and probably this was of spins and their opposites of the
      > magnetic current loops formed by the electrons' orbits... but no
      > more...and even this is a maybe.
      >
      > One cannot infer from this alone that there is quantization as it
      > is described today... if this were so ... you would get more than two
      > 'spots' ... and even then, what aspect of 'quantisation' causes and Forces
      > the two spots to be one atop the other?
      >
      > You might want to mention to the audience of the experiment that
      > natural silver is nearly 50 50 of two stable isotopes.
      >
      > You might want to say.. that approaching the gradient part of the
      > magnet poles the "beam" passes first through a gradient beginning as
      > waek.. and then more pronounced fringe effects which are weaker at the
      > top of the beam and are a respectable gradient perpendicular to the main
      > body of the intent of the experiment.
      >
      > Hmm...
      >
      > I am NOT saying this is a 'bad' experiment... I AM saying it may
      > well be poory interpreted.
      >
      > I say it is a GREAT experiment ... because it is almost certainly
      > much deeper than it may appear with one interpretation and on first blush.
      >
      > J
      >
      > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      > Have you been a bad boy?
      > Make up for it now
      > Click Here
      > http://click.egroups.com/1/3656/3/_/187292/_/957152454/
      > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      >
      > To Post a message, send it to: forcefieldpropulsionphysics@...
      >
      > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: forcefieldpropulsionphysics-unsubscribe@...
    • John Schnurer
      One answer I got was I don t need this crap. I myself like this stuff... any real world people, write to me.. door is open
      Message 2 of 4 , May 2, 2000
        One answer I got was "I don't need this crap."


        I myself like this stuff...

        any real world people, write to me.. door is open

        On Tue, 2 May 2000, Robert Neil Boyd wrote:

        > John,
        >
        > Your description of the Stern-Gerlach experiment was
        > appreciated! Real-world stuff ! Rather than the mysteries
        > which myths are made of, only to be called "science".
        >
        > Thanks,
        >
        > Neil
        >
        > John Schnurer wrote:
        >
        > > Dear Folks,
        > >
        > > A better name would not be "Dark Energy" ... but regular energy,
        > > obscured by thin but large in area barrier... the energy, the photons...
        > > are not "Dark" ... by any means... they are simply obscured. But it
        > > sounds cool to write "Dark Energy".
        > > Accurate names may not sell as much news... which does not lead to
        > > as any advertisement sales.
        > > Also... in some case... accurate words do not make the scientist
        > > sound like he is doing new work.
        > >
        > > Some examples:
        > >
        > > Fuzzy Logic
        > >
        > > And the recent mis uses of:
        > >
        > > Negative Resistance
        > >
        > > Dark Current
        > >
        > > Now if you really want to see some "new" then just re examine
        > > tried and true experiments which may be foundations of modern work. But
        > > examine them in the light of our present more effective instruments or
        > > examine them after the "shock" or new-novel-ness has passed.
        > >
        > > Example:
        > >
        > > The Stern Gerlach experiment was as follows:
        > >
        > > A low velocity, or 'thermal-velocity-only' beam of silver atoms is
        > > " launched" ... more accurate would be maybe to say "were allowed to loaf
        > > along in one direction" from a tiny oven with baffles with holes in them
        > > to make this low velocity weak beam of atoms of silver.
        > > Now....this thin column is passed through a magnetic field with a
        > > high gradient ... the idea was though it would leave a smear, to use
        > > Feynman's description.
        > > Instead it left two spots.
        > >
        > > The ONLY conclusion you can reach from this is it made a
        > > separation, and probably this was of spins and their opposites of the
        > > magnetic current loops formed by the electrons' orbits... but no
        > > more...and even this is a maybe.
        > >
        > > One cannot infer from this alone that there is quantization as it
        > > is described today... if this were so ... you would get more than two
        > > 'spots' ... and even then, what aspect of 'quantisation' causes and Forces
        > > the two spots to be one atop the other?
        > >
        > > You might want to mention to the audience of the experiment that
        > > natural silver is nearly 50 50 of two stable isotopes.
        > >
        > > You might want to say.. that approaching the gradient part of the
        > > magnet poles the "beam" passes first through a gradient beginning as
        > > waek.. and then more pronounced fringe effects which are weaker at the
        > > top of the beam and are a respectable gradient perpendicular to the main
        > > body of the intent of the experiment.
        > >
        > > Hmm...
        > >
        > > I am NOT saying this is a 'bad' experiment... I AM saying it may
        > > well be poory interpreted.
        > >
        > > I say it is a GREAT experiment ... because it is almost certainly
        > > much deeper than it may appear with one interpretation and on first blush.
        > >
        > > J
        > >
        > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        > > Have you been a bad boy?
        > > Make up for it now
        > > Click Here
        > > http://click.egroups.com/1/3656/3/_/187292/_/957152454/
        > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        > >
        > > To Post a message, send it to: forcefieldpropulsionphysics@...
        > >
        > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: forcefieldpropulsionphysics-unsubscribe@...
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        > Get your money connected @ OnMoney.com - the first Web site that lets
        > you see and manage all of your finances all in one place.
        > http://click.egroups.com/1/3012/3/_/187292/_/957242068/
        > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        >
        > To Post a message, send it to: forcefieldpropulsionphysics@...
        >
        > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: forcefieldpropulsionphysics-unsubscribe@...
        >
      • Adrian
        ... ===Forget about Jack Sarfatti, one is either a disciple or permanent excommunicate. Typical case of if not found in MY pigeonholes, it is anything
        Message 3 of 4 , May 2, 2000
          > One answer I got was "I don't need this crap."

          ===Forget about Jack Sarfatti, one is either a disciple or permanent
          excommunicate. Typical case of " if not found in MY pigeonholes, it is
          anything pejorative, rather common around the place.

          > > > A better name would not be "Dark Energy" ... but regular
          energy,
          > > > obscured by thin but large in area barrier...
          === Quite agree hee.

          > > > Fuzzy Logic
          === Cannot see the fuzzy logic, it is still binary but transmapped into a
          semblance of degrees by at most 5 types, mostest, most, nomal, lesser,
          least, etcc.. routinely available for language.

          == I'd also agree with the poorly reported, seems reporters have a bunch of
          standard pop phrases, typical in the shift from the actual work done to pop
          consumption.

          Adrian
        • Adrian
          Hi Folks, On second thoughts this Dark follows a same pattern of accommodation as did Science Fiction to mainstream Literature a while back. Started as
          Message 4 of 4 , May 2, 2000
            Hi Folks,

            On second thoughts this "Dark" follows a same pattern of accommodation as
            did Science Fiction to mainstream Literature a while back. Started as B.E.M.
            visitations then into junior tinkering up Dad's truck to fly, after which
            we visited the aliens, traded with them and turned partners. Here we
            initially get labels that make sense to mainstream science, Haha, we've
            penetrated the firewall, and will follow this accommodation pattern, first
            laughter, then incomprehension, after which Hohum, it works, so we better do
            something. S.F. took from around the 20s pulp lit into the 70s now normal.
            A same pattern is found in psycho-politics of consciousness studies, they're
            weakening too. So watch for the slow changes in verbosities and jargon
            coming along. It's obviously called "dark" by way of an opposite to "light"
            as being observable. At a same time the UFO biz seems to be busting out all
            over with public confessions of previously secret stuff.

            All this entails people in what I worked out as a pentagon pattern, with the
            bottom two points as opposed romantics'nostalgics and want to keep the past
            at any cost, with the mid two points as political right and left, and the
            top point as the future cannot come fast enough, with the mid section the
            actual arena of communication nobody actually grasps as an intellectual
            armageddon ground. .


            Any bets on how long this one will take?

            Adrian
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.