| Author |
Message |
Jim Thompson
Guest
|
 Posted:
Mon Feb 07, 2005 5:01 am Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 22:51:52 +0000 (UTC), kensmith@green.rahul.net (Ken
Smith) wrote:
[snip]
| Quote: |
Schottky did a lot of the work on semiconductors but he was a flaming
racist and left some nasty ideas behind.
[snip] |
Eh? That would be SHOCKLEY, not Schottky.
Actually, Shockley may have been technically correct about racial
differences, just not politically correct in his method of expression.
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Fred Bloggs
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 07, 2005 5:17 am Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
Jim Thompson wrote:
| Quote: | On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 22:51:52 +0000 (UTC), kensmith@green.rahul.net (Ken
Smith) wrote:
[snip]
Schottky did a lot of the work on semiconductors but he was a flaming
racist and left some nasty ideas behind.
[snip]
Eh? That would be SHOCKLEY, not Schottky.
Actually, Shockley may have been technically correct about racial
differences, just not politically correct in his method of expression.
|
Heheh- you and the other eugenicists (Seim) ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Reg Edwards
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 07, 2005 6:16 am Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
"Peter O. Brackett" wrote -
| Quote: |
So then... who was the greatest, Euler or Einstein?
Me? I vote for Euler!
======================= |
Euler may be exact whereas Einstein, like Newton, might only be approximate.
But I'll vote for DeMoivre :
e raised to the power j * Theta = Cos(Theta) + j * Sin(Theta)
which is more embracing and universal.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jim Thompson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 07, 2005 7:24 am Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 01:13:45 +0000 (UTC), kensmith@green.rahul.net (Ken
Smith) wrote:
| Quote: | In article <o48d015k167gkdtt4i8dn0qbn9101j9f46@4ax.com>,
Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote:
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 22:51:52 +0000 (UTC), kensmith@green.rahul.net (Ken
Smith) wrote:
[snip]
Schottky did a lot of the work on semiconductors but he was a flaming
racist and left some nasty ideas behind.
[snip]
Eh? That would be SHOCKLEY, not Schottky.
Yes, my error.
Actually, Shockley may have been technically correct about racial
differences, just not politically correct in his method of expression.
No.
|
"The profoundest of all infidelities is the fear that the truth will
be bad!" -Herbert Spencer
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scott Stephens
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 07, 2005 8:41 am Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
keith wrote:
Shockley *was* a jerk, but that didn't mean he was all
Liked to post his workers salaries, and encourage "competition" among them?
| Quote: | Of course in IL the _Rules_of_the_Road_ said that if someone took your
right-of-way, let them have it! (the '!' was an editorial comment)
|
Wasn't former guv lie'in Jim Ryan's buddies taking "contributions" from
illegal immigrant truck drivers to get their licenses, even though they
passed no test, couldn't drive, and one of them killed a family in
another state?
That's fine advice when you are here in the People's Republic! He (Ryan)
also decided the judicial system was too corrupt to impose the death
penalty, and pardoned all of death row, so perhaps its better to just
stay off the streets =(
--
**********************************
DIY Piezo-Gyro, PCB Drill Bot & More Soon!
http://home.comcast.net/~scottxs/
POLITICS, n.
A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles.
The conduct of public affairs for private advantage. - Ambrose Bierce
********************************** |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scott Stephens
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 07, 2005 8:41 am Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
Peter O. Brackett wrote:
| Quote: | NO!
It was Euler who did the easy bit telling us how the five primary
mathematical constants [ j, pi, e, 0 and 1 ] are related.:
exp(jpi) + 1 = 0
|
Doesn't look like some mysterious confluence but a tautology. "j" is
imaginary, unreal, a tool contrived to represent with one (complex)
number a quantity which would otherwise require two numbers.
The trigonometry context "j" is contrived to be useful for is the unit
circle, no mystery Pi is involved.
And exponential based on "e" have that characteristic *circular* curve,
and IIRC can be defined by a sin + cos.
Move the one over on the other side and you can eliminate the "0".
So this looks like one of those cases where you take the same phenomena
involving something (like a circle), mess with it five different ways,
then find some correlation between the different observations you've
made of the same thing.
| Quote: | I wonder, which is more fundamental E = mc^2 or exp(jpi) + 1 = 0?
|
The answer is "mu", since these are apples and oranges. The former
equation is a truth about the character of matter and energy states of
the vacuum. The latter equation is a truth about geometry.
But the latter equation about a geometric truth is abstraction derived
from natural observations, and only has reality in our minds which are
hosted by our brains which are made of matter which the former equation
describes. Even though the former equation was probably derived with aid
of the latter.
--
**********************************
DIY Piezo-Gyro, PCB Drill Bot & More Soon!
http://home.comcast.net/~scottxs/
POLITICS, n.
A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles.
The conduct of public affairs for private advantage. - Ambrose Bierce
********************************** |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kevin Aylward
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 07, 2005 8:41 am Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
Gregory L. Hansen wrote:
| Quote: | In article <N9vNd.38499$K7.10964@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
Kevin Aylward <salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk> wrote:
Reg Edwards wrote:
Oh dear. This is simply irrelevant, and does a major disservice to
the dude. It don't look like you really understand the issues
involved. Just saying, its "statistical" doesn't bring out what the
fundamental problem *is*.
Suppose we knew *exactly* the position and momentum of a particle at
time t0. QM says the new position and momentum cannot be known
exactly. This means cause and effect has *failed*. This is *key*. It
says that the particle could be in a new state for *no* reason
whatsoever. This is what is hard to deal with. That things can
happen with no cause. That is, there is no way to determine *why* a
particle is in one position rather then another.
It's better than that.
|
Oh?
| Quote: | Your description suggests that the particle
does have a definite position and momentum, even if they change and
we don't know what they are.
|
I know, I *specifically* worded it this way to avoid the common
misconception that you put below.
| Quote: | But the position is not only unknown,
it doesn't exist.
|
Not according to the ensemble interpretation. The question is open.
http://www.anasoft.co.uk/quantummechanics/index.html
Note reference 2, which highlights *actual* measurements made *better*
then HUP.
This may be usefull as well
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-uncertainty/#2.3
| Quote: | Diffraction of electrons from a crystal depends on
the electron sampling a large enough region that the arrangement of
atoms matters.
|
This is meaningless. There is no physical description of how a particle
produces the pattern it makes. Its just how the sums work out.
| Quote: |
The old question of classical atomic physics was why doesn't the
electron radiate away all its energy and fall into the nucleus.
|
This is trivial. Maxwell's Equations are *wrong*. End of story.
The correct equations that describe E&M is QED. Maxwell's Equations are
just a continuous *approximation* to QED.
| Quote: | The
answer is that it already had radiated away as much energy energy as
it can, it's fallen as far into the nucleus as the uncertainty
principle will let it go.
|
This is a meaningless answer. It just doesn't say anything.
Kevin Aylward
salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
keith
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 07, 2005 8:41 am Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 20:59:29 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:
| Quote: | On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 22:46:13 -0500, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 16:01:09 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 22:51:52 +0000 (UTC), kensmith@green.rahul.net (Ken
Smith) wrote:
[snip]
Schottky did a lot of the work on semiconductors but he was a flaming
racist and left some nasty ideas behind.
[snip]
Eh? That would be SHOCKLEY, not Schottky.
Actually, Shockley may have been technically correct about racial
differences, just not politically correct in his method of expression.
Oh, my! You'll never be the president of a university! Tsk! tsk!
Tsk! Tsk! You think I care ?:-) Although, the way things have been
going, I might qualify for Haarvaahd ;-)
|
Remember what they told us in driver's ed. You can be right and you can
be dead-right! Shockley *was* a jerk, but that didn't mean he was all
wrong either.
Of course in IL the _Rules_of_the_Road_ said that if someone took your
right-of-way, let them have it! (the '!' was an editorial comment)
--
Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jim Thompson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 07, 2005 8:41 am Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 22:46:13 -0500, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
| Quote: | On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 16:01:09 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 22:51:52 +0000 (UTC), kensmith@green.rahul.net (Ken
Smith) wrote:
[snip]
Schottky did a lot of the work on semiconductors but he was a flaming
racist and left some nasty ideas behind.
[snip]
Eh? That would be SHOCKLEY, not Schottky.
Actually, Shockley may have been technically correct about racial
differences, just not politically correct in his method of expression.
Oh, my! You'll never be the president of a university! Tsk! tsk!
|
Tsk! Tsk! You think I care ?:-) Although, the way things have been
going, I might qualify for Haarvaahd ;-)
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
keith
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 07, 2005 8:41 am Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 16:01:09 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:
| Quote: | On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 22:51:52 +0000 (UTC), kensmith@green.rahul.net (Ken
Smith) wrote:
[snip]
Schottky did a lot of the work on semiconductors but he was a flaming
racist and left some nasty ideas behind.
[snip]
Eh? That would be SHOCKLEY, not Schottky.
Actually, Shockley may have been technically correct about racial
differences, just not politically correct in his method of expression.
|
Oh, my! You'll never be the president of a university! Tsk! tsk!
--
Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Reg Edwards
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 07, 2005 9:21 am Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
Maxwell's equations are not wrong. Its just that nobody at the time could
understand them. Far too complicated! And the predicted radio waves had
not yet been generated.
But the reasoning is far better expained by Oliver Heaviside's, 25 years
later, much simplified, more practical interpretation as now appears in ALL
the world's educational text books but for which, self-educated genius
Heaviside seldom gets the credit.
Heaviside, a hard of hearing recluse, by mathematical reasoning, also
predicted the existence of the ionospheric layers via which short-wave radio
propagation was to become possible.
----
Reg. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ken Smith
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 07, 2005 2:45 pm Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
In article <7ogd01thqdfj41nd61r0nmdfitigb637t9@4ax.com>,
Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote:
[...]
| Quote: | Actually, Shockley may have been technically correct about racial
differences, just not politically correct in his method of expression.
No.
"The profoundest of all infidelities is the fear that the truth will
be bad!" -Herbert Spencer
|
Shockley said better and worse not just different. Too often he
considered what us white folks had was better. Often it is not or is a
trade off with a judgement call.
--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gregory L. Hansen
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 07, 2005 3:12 pm Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
In article <btENd.41704$K7.22736@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
Kevin Aylward <salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | Gregory L. Hansen wrote:
In article <N9vNd.38499$K7.10964@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
Kevin Aylward <salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk> wrote:
Reg Edwards wrote:
Oh dear. This is simply irrelevant, and does a major disservice to
the dude. It don't look like you really understand the issues
involved. Just saying, its "statistical" doesn't bring out what the
fundamental problem *is*.
Suppose we knew *exactly* the position and momentum of a particle at
time t0. QM says the new position and momentum cannot be known
exactly. This means cause and effect has *failed*. This is *key*. It
says that the particle could be in a new state for *no* reason
whatsoever. This is what is hard to deal with. That things can
happen with no cause. That is, there is no way to determine *why* a
particle is in one position rather then another.
It's better than that.
Oh?
Your description suggests that the particle
does have a definite position and momentum, even if they change and
we don't know what they are.
I know, I *specifically* worded it this way to avoid the common
misconception that you put below.
|
Too bad, you were misleading.
Kevin Aylward's interpretation, it seems.
On first glance, the two-slit experiment seems to be intractable in the
ensemble interpretation. If we think in terms of classical particles
that sometimes go through one slit and sometimes goes through the other,
we do not get a diffraction pattern. If the distance between slits
narrows by an angstrom or two, it does not result in the considerable
widening between peaks on the CCD (or whatever you're measuring with).
The punchline of quantum mechanics is that a sequence of events as in a
diffraction experiment cannot be reduced to a sequence of classsical BBs
whose positions and momenta are simply imperfectly known.
| Quote: |
Note reference 2, which highlights *actual* measurements made *better*
then HUP.
This may be usefull as well
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-uncertainty/#2.3
Diffraction of electrons from a crystal depends on
the electron sampling a large enough region that the arrangement of
atoms matters.
This is meaningless. There is no physical description of how a particle
produces the pattern it makes. Its just how the sums work out.
|
It means that small crystals have wide Bragg peaks and large crystals have
narrow Bragg peaks, so it must matter to the electrons how big the crystal
is-- they interact over extended regions, they don't just bounce off of
one atom.
| Quote: |
The old question of classical atomic physics was why doesn't the
electron radiate away all its energy and fall into the nucleus.
This is trivial. Maxwell's Equations are *wrong*. End of story.
The correct equations that describe E&M is QED. Maxwell's Equations are
just a continuous *approximation* to QED.
|
Guess what... QED still uses Maxwell's equations, but with the state
describe by a vector in Hilbert space rather than in phase space.
Promote variables to operators, slap kets on it for the operators to
operate on. Most texts start with the Maxwell Lagrangian, but review the
derivation and see where it says Maxwell was wrong. Greiner's text "Field
Quantization" makes the similarities between classical and quantum field
theory very clear.
| Quote: |
The
answer is that it already had radiated away as much energy energy as
it can, it's fallen as far into the nucleus as the uncertainty
principle will let it go.
This is a meaningless answer. It just doesn't say anything.
|
Sure it does. It means the electron cannot make a transition to a lower
energy state, and it cannot get closer to the nucleus than it already is.
--
"Are those morons getting dumber or just louder?" -- Mayor Quimby |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 07, 2005 3:20 pm Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
Scott Stephens wrote:
| Quote: | keith wrote:
That's fine advice when you are here in the People's Republic! He
(Ryan)
also decided the judicial system was too corrupt to impose the death
penalty, and pardoned all of death row, so perhaps its better to just
stay off the streets =(
|
Really? My impression was that he found the judicial system fallible,
rather than corrupt, and that he commuted the death sentences to life
imprisonment, rather than pardoning anybody.
Your notorious intellectual inadequacies probably blind you to these
sorts of fine distinctions, but even you ought to be able to understand
that it is more difficult to compensate someone who has been falsely
convicted if they have been executed rather than locked away for life.
-----------
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Clifford Heath
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Feb 07, 2005 4:22 pm Post subject:
Re: Albert Einstein |
|
|
bill.sloman@ieee.org wrote:
| Quote: | ...it is more difficult to compensate someone who has been falsely
convicted if they have been executed rather than locked away for life.
|
On the contrary, it's much easier for being impossible :-). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in