OT question

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
news
On 27/12/2017 08:58, Woody wrote:
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
news
On 25/12/2017 09:51, John Hall wrote:

Which raises the interesting question of whether alternative
universes exist in which some or all of those constants have
different values.

There are places not far from here where different values are
universally applied.



Ursa Minor maybe?


Edlington



My godparents used to run the general store there, and eventually
lived in a new house on the site of the former vicarage alongside Old
Edlington Church.

Small world eh?


--
Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com

On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 14:47:15 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 27/12/17 12:49, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Mon, 25 Dec 2017 13:43:50 +0000, Cursitor Doom wrote:

====snip====

Natural philosophy was the term for science back in Newton's day. I'm
guessing you must surely know that, since it's your adopted moniker.

He's long been just "A Ghost in the Machine" afaiac in this NG but I
always thought that monicker was a matter of irony whether by accident
or design.

Just goes to show how wrong you are on all counts really

I guess your 6 months of being ignored in this NG must have just
expired. Either that or else there's another, totally different "You"
posting in uk.d-i-y, that I've ignored forever. :-)

--
Johnny B Good

On 27/12/2017 17:01, Rod Speed wrote:

It's the same with linguistics.

Nope.

Can't argue with logic like that.

Bill

On 27/12/2017 17:51, Java Jive wrote:
On 27/12/2017 15:59, Bill Wright wrote:
On 27/12/2017 11:40, Java Jive wrote:
On 27/12/2017 01:59, Bill Wright wrote:

Be interesting to watch what happens with anthropogenic global
warming over the next few decades.

No it won't, you'll be dead.

Might be, might not. Who knows?

You'll certainly be dead before AGW significantly changes.


It's already changing, and so are public attitudes. You can fool all of
the people some of the time...
When someone makes a reference to global warming these days it's usually
ironic, and it gets a laugh.
By 'someone' I mean a real person, not one of the shills that seem to
get on television to the exclusion of those who dare speak the truth.

Bill

On 27/12/2017 21:11, Woody wrote:

My godparents used to run the general store there, and eventually
lived in a new house on the site of the former vicarage alongside Old
Edlington Church.

Small world eh?

My connections with Edlington are limited to the fact that on the rare
occasions when the police are able to retrieve our stolen property
that's usually where they find it.

Bill

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
news
On 27/12/2017 17:01, Rod Speed wrote:

It's the same with linguistics.

Nope.

Can't argue with logic like that.

Says he carefully deleting everything.

You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag.

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
news
On 27/12/2017 17:51, Java Jive wrote:
On 27/12/2017 15:59, Bill Wright wrote:
On 27/12/2017 11:40, Java Jive wrote:
On 27/12/2017 01:59, Bill Wright wrote:

Be interesting to watch what happens with anthropogenic global warming
over the next few decades.

No it won't, you'll be dead.

Might be, might not. Who knows?

You'll certainly be dead before AGW significantly changes.


It's already changing, and so are public attitudes.

You can fool all of the people some of the time...

Nope.

When someone makes a reference to global warming these days it's usually
ironic, and it gets a laugh.

By 'someone' I mean a real person, not one of the shills that seem to get
on television to the exclusion of those who dare speak the truth.

On 27/12/17 16:49, Fredxx wrote:
On 27/12/2017 14:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 27/12/17 13:04, Fredxx wrote:
I do think any claim that there are 26 "constants", when we don't
know the origin of these numbers, is a bit risky.


That sounds intelligent, but on close examination, it is completely
meaningless.

Then I looked at the poster...

You often trot out your defence of 'meaningless' when you don't
understand something, in this case a simple wiki page?

reveals nothing to do with what you said at all...

Â* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-v...ntal_constants

Are the words too long for your vocabulary?


what are you on about?

On 27/12/17 15:38, Bill Wright wrote:
On 27/12/2017 05:55, Tjoepstil wrote:
On 27/12/17 01:59, Bill Wright wrote:
On 25/12/2017 18:46, Tim Streater wrote:

Mind you, that idea could be scrapped at any time. Remember phlogiston
and the luminiferous ether. Both though to exist to explain observed
phenomena, both ideas scrapped as sharper minds thought up other
explanations.

Be interesting to watch what happens with anthropogenic global
warming over the next few decades.

like watching paint dry?

already people are bored with it: its lost the power to amaze, so it
will be replaced by something else.

but its got nothing to do with science so I don't know why you
introduced it.

As an example of a bandwagon. Like the hoola hoop.

Bill

hula hoop

On 27/12/17 16:02, newshound wrote:
On 25/12/2017 08:19, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/12/17 20:59, newshound wrote:
On 24/12/2017 20:43, Bill Wright wrote:
What are the parameters that set the speed of electromagnetic
transmission in a vacuum? I've googled everywhere but I can't find
the answer. It's easy enough to find the figure but WHY? Why not
29,979,245.8 metres per second or 2,997,924,580 metres per second?

Bill

Start here

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electr..._wave_equation

then look up permittivity and permeability of free space

But that doesnt do more than transform the question into 'why is that
the value of the permittivity and permeability of free space'?



No, but it tells you there are other more fundamantal measurable
parameters which have particular values, and these fix the speed of
light. So it takes you back one step.

well not really, since you might just as well say that these constants
are in fact due to the speed of light....