brian a m stuckless science forum Guru
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Posts: 2024
|
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:13 am Post subject:
'Conic Mental Emptiness' by Bilge & jOE Fischer.
|
|
|
$$ Bilge writes fleming:
Quote: | The uncertainty relations are a consequence of the fact that
observables are hermitian operators.
-=-
QCD is NOT able to even get the unknowns right,
plus it has an inaccuracy (HUP)
The uncertainty relations have nothing to do with accuracy.
|
$$ 41. HUP down, Higg's Boson & Planck UNcertainty.
$$ You caN'T locate HUP-point A to "ARBiTRARiLY high precision".
$$ Planck UNcertainty of Position A:
$$ [ *PRE*-tunneling ..and *PRE*-momentum, POSiTiON A ].
$$ HUP FAiLs, for it's SCiENTiFiCALLY-iMpossible-EXACTness of A.
$$ [Poor] Bilge whines:
Quote: | Picture a cone with the apex pointing -=-.
|
$$ "As you move along the axis of the cone to
$$ greater distances from the apex," the CONE
$$ GETs BiGGER as the AXiS MEASURE iNCREASES,
$$ ..EiNSTEiN.!!
Quote: | -=- -=- the area of the circles [ALSO] becomes larger.
Does the cone become any bigger? No.
Only the point at which you measure the radius of the circles changes.
|
$$ No, jOE:
$$ As "the point at which you measure the radius of the circles
changes", the CONE GETs BiGGER as the AXiS MEASURE iNCREASES,
$$ ..CONE-head.!!
Quote: | Anything magic about that?
$$ My my poor FLUFFY ..what CRACKED-pottery NEXT.?!! |
Quote: | The base of a cone has a larger cross sectional area than the apex.
Does it require a substance for a cone to exist?
|
$$ "Any SPACE is 'emptiest' where there isN'T even light."
$$ Hiesenberg was NOT WRONG just because he got CAUGHT too OFTEN
$$ trying to ((focus)) on BOTH ENDs of velocity VECTORs, at ONCE.
Re: DiVERGENT conic MENTAL emptiness ..OUTside of physical points.
Re: "Physical EMPTiNESS, iN Between POiNTs" by jOE Fischer (2005).
Re: "The PHYSiCs of EMPTiNESS OUTside of POiNTs" j Fischer (2006).
[Go-go NETSCAPE newsgroups < alt.sci.nanotech > and < bit.org > ].
Re: 'Conic Mental Emptiness' by Bilge & jOE Fischer. End of POST. |
|