by prologos 45 Replies latest social current
interesting analogy of "sounds of the past", in The Telegraph March 26 to April :-- "Proof Of The Big Bang" page 26:
"-- left the Unverse RINGING LIKE A BELL--" a bell having CONFINED waves,
like Viola.
-- Voila !
The Telegraph is hardly a scientific journal, not the 'Annalen der Physik' but it explains well, inviting corrections.
Vivian: would you consider writing the editors of The Telegraph, a more worthy target to tar and feather. ?
Well, prologos was completely wrong regarding tides occuring as a result of standing waves i.e. constructive/destructive wave interference. The fact there was no evidence provided to back up the assertion and that the incorrect terminology, understanding and inability to reexamine his position was rather telling. This precedent should be considered in subsequent claims of "understanding" and "education"
As for this topic, clearly there is resonance in musical instruments and a correlation to standing wave theory is valid.
So, 1 for 2 on specific examples. As for the new age woo, let the buyer beware...
Twitch, the tides are not occurring BECAUSE of standing waves,
The Tides ARE standing waves. The two bulges ALWAYS remain ~STANDING under the advancing moon, lifted by it's gravity for the close one, and lifted by centrifugal force and least Moon-effect for the FAR one. (remember the 1/distance ^2 rule.
The Tides "comes in" "goes out" the same way the 'moon rises' and 'sets'
both tides and the rising is the result of the earth's rotation, not the other way around.
If a wave is substantially stationary with respect to an entity, in this case MOON&sun it is standing/staionary . like Galilio said "and yet she moves[rotates]"
Of course the topography changes the tides somewhat, look at the GREAT bores in China, the Amazon delta.
thus Gravity can create standing waves. If confined, a frequency like in a bell, or the finite universe will produce interference patterns, standing waves. they can even cause polarization.
better minds then mine stand by it.
twitch, of course it could be argued that gravity is another form of acceleration, and that the peculiar shape of the gravity gradient under the MOON +or- the solar presence, is an accelration that is stationary under the moon, and it is this acceleration that is perceived as moving, a lifting seen as tides., because -- 'as the world turns'.
Moon and tides rising , lifting in sync. 2 bulges, not the local water, lifted ~permanentely.
"the rising tides lifts all boats" toward the moon.
The Tides ARE standing waves. The two bulges ALWAYS remain ~STANDING under the advancing moon, lifted by it's gravity for the close one, and lifted by centrifugal force and least Moon-effect for the FAR one.
that is not the accepted definiton of a standing wave, according to what I learned in college physics and from a bit of research into the topic with respect to tides
Two opposing waves combine to form a standing wave.This phenomenon can occur because the medium is moving in the opposite direction to the wave, or it can arise in a stationary medium as a result of interference between two waves traveling in opposite directions. In the second case, for waves of equal amplitude traveling in opposing directions, there is on average no net propagation of energy.
In a resonator, standing waves occur during the phenomenon known as resonance
There is no mention of this effect with respect to gravity's pull on water on the earth
better minds then mine stand by it.
then please provide citations that back up your assertion
twitch, of course it could be argued that gravity is another form of acceleration, and that the peculiar shape of the gravity gradient under the MOON +or- the solar presence, is an accelration that is stationary under the moon, and it is this acceleration that is perceived as moving, a lifting seen as tides., because -- 'as the world turns'.
It's not argued, it's established and accepted fact by minds greater than mine, to which I provided evidence.
citation by prologos. argument too.
twich, are the white-water waves in the Colorado, the lenticular clouds over New Zealand not standing waves? recognized as such?
standing waves in moving mediums, fluids, caused by a ~ fixed stony obstacle, phenomenon.
By defenition the 2 tidal bulges are permanently lifted section both water and crust, of the moving planet's surface that
are produced by the increased gravity force, acceleration toward the moon, like the examples cited above.
what interesting interferences might be discovered in the wave patterns revealed in the BICEPS research? expansion of space, energy, matter? moving faster than light?
beating the Colorado and wind over NZ by a wide speed margin.
citation by prologos. argument too.
Your opinion does not constitute proof. Please provide evidence published and agreed upon by established experts in the field
twich, are the white-water waves in the Colorado, the lenticular clouds over New Zealand not standing waves? recognized as such?
standing waves in moving medium, fluids, caused by a ~ fixed stony obstacle, phenomenon.
Yes there is evidence of this, two opposing waves that under specific circumstances create a stationary wave interference pattern, albeit a temporary one. However, this is not listed as a cause of global tides
By defenition the 2 tidal bulges are permanently lifted section both water and crust, of the moving planet's surface that
are produced by the increased gravity force, acceleration toward the moon.
This is correct, tides are caused by gravity.
What is the opposing force to gravity that creates the standing wave in this instance?
what interesting interferences might be discovered in the wave patterns revealed in the BICEPS research? expansion of space, energy, matter? moving faster than light?
beating the Colorado and wind over NZ by a wide speed margin.
This remains to be seen but your conjecture does not constitute proof of anything more than your imagination and wilful ignorance of accepted science.
twich, we had a math/phys teacher in high school that always started to TWICH when confronted with an out-of-the-box - thinking type argument, and at least one of us kids were from Physics - Nobel-Laureat families, just itching to get him twitching
It could just be that prologos looked at the tides and said "standing wave" as in lenticular clouds [surfed by sail planes] waves in RAPIDS [surfed by surfers, cayakers]
another case of WIKI waiting to be amended.
proof? look at the tide coming in: a wave always linked to the Moon, just ~standing there. and
in the big bang BANG, imagine the intereference patterns of THAT reverberating in the expanding, but bound space.
twich, we had a math/phys teacher in high school that always started to TWICH when confronted with an out-of-the-box - thinking type argument, and at least one of us kids were from Physics - Nobel-Laureat families, just itching to get him twitching
You knew a teacher with a tic and someone who had a famous relative who could actually prove something. This doesn't make you right in this or anything for that matter.
Had you taken a course in critical thinking, you would have learned what you just wrote is a ad hominem, which doesn't help your case and in fact, proves your inability to back up your claims.
It could just be that prologos looked at the tides and said "standing wave" as in lenticular clouds [surfed by sail planes] waves in RAPIDS [surfed by surfers, cayakers]
I'm sure he did and thought he was an expert in such things.
As I requested, please advise on the force in oppostion to gravity that results in a standing wave that causes tides.
another case of WIKI waiting to be amended.
I eagerly await your foray into amending the incorrect info written and it's acceptance by established experts on the subject.
proof? look at the tide coming in: a wave always linked to the Moon, just ~standing there.
I considered what you call proof. Then I consulted widely accepted facts written by those who may have won Nobel prizes in science. I'll go with their explanation, which again, makes no mention of standing waves.
That you cannot provide evidence of your assertions and resort to ad hominem is proof of your misinterpretation and wilful ignorance of established science.
Sad, really
twitch: I thought you had a better sense of Homour than that. that was not an ad honim attack, argument, afunny aside. These were great teachers, students braving reprisals for teaching forbidden material.
please, -: google standing waves, rapids, mountains. often a succession of waves. impressive.
a set of waves in a moving medium, stationary or standing with respect to the source. medium, water, air in case of the tides the medium is the planets surface.
of course there are other type of standing waves, accoustic for example that are from refraction and interference mechanism.
The tidal bulges are from disturbence in a moving medium.
strange when at the end of a presentations it always ends in put downs rather than real refutations.
a recurring pattern like a wave, not out-STANDING.
