Re: [LAD] Audio Levitation
On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 00:29 +0100, Dominique Michel wrote: And classical physics is even worst. In Einstein formula e=mc^2, the only term for which we have a definition is c... For e, it is no definition, only equations which are not definitions https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c9/E%3Dmc%C2% B2-explication.svg/220px-E%3Dmc%C2%B2-explication.svg.png The Definition for E is m*c². By your explanation we would als have no definition for c, since c also is an equation, c is m/s (another m ;). The only differences are that some values are constants and others are variables. ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Audio Levitation
On Sun, January 5, 2014 7:19 am, Fons Adriaensen wrote: On Sat, Jan 04, 2014 at 06:16:31PM +0100, Dominique Michel wrote: According to that presentation http://www.dalembert.upmc.fr/Oleron2010/docs/Presentations/Oleron-Barriere.pdf it look like Langevin (which is the same than Rayleigh first formula in 1902) apply well when we are long enough from the source, and when we are in its vicinity, Rayleigh (1905) must be applied. Interesting, thanks for the pointer. And it closes the circle... The first slide is a quote from one of Beyer's papers: It might be said that radiation pressure is a phenomenon that the observer thinks he understands â for short intervals, and only every now and thenâ I remember reading the paper that comes from a very long time ago, and that was what inspired my remark about radiation pressure being one of the more elusive topics in acoustics ! IIUC there are some people who understand it very well but the application of their knowledge is considered classified so it's not released into the public domain if it is even written down anywhere. A bit like RSA decryption used to be. The funny thing is that the technology that can be created using this technique would probably solve the energy crisis if this knowledge was allowed to be used for civilian purposes like power stations. It would probably also be useful for deep space exploration. ( Avatar scale not Hubble scale ) Depends on the fuel used of course. One thing we do know is the humble pistol crab can generate impulses with the same heat intensity as the surface of the sun and some salty water. What other exotic mixtures would allow for is anyones guess. -- Patrick Shirkey Boost Hardware Ltd ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Audio Levitation
On Mon, 6 Jan 2014 01:28:58 +1100 (EST), Patrick Shirkey wrote IIUC there are some people who understand it very well but the application of their knowledge is considered classified so it's not released into the public domain if it is even written down anywhere. A bit like RSA decryption used to be. ??? Must be good drugs over there ... From the Wikipedia article on RSA: The RSA algorithm was publicly described in 1977 by Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir, and Leonard Adleman at MIT; the letters RSA are the initials of their surnames, listed in the same order as on the paper. Or do you want to claim that a way to _break_ RSA (decryption) is known but not published (i.e. there's a non-quantum algorythm to solve prime factorization). The funny thing is that the technology that can be created using this technique would probably solve the energy crisis if this knowledge was allowed to be used for civilian purposes like power stations. It would probably also be useful for deep space exploration. ( Avatar scale not Hubble scale ) gee, really good drugs ... Depends on the fuel used of course. One thing we do know is the humble pistol crab can generate impulses with the same heat intensity Over here, impulse is measured in mass x velocity, neither of which expresses heat intensity (in kelvin?). Care to elaborate? Cheers and a happy new year Ralf Mattes ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Audio Levitation
On Mon, January 6, 2014 2:33 am, R. Mattes wrote: On Mon, 6 Jan 2014 01:28:58 +1100 (EST), Patrick Shirkey wrote IIUC there are some people who understand it very well but the application of their knowledge is considered classified so it's not released into the public domain if it is even written down anywhere. A bit like RSA decryption used to be. ??? Must be good drugs over there ... From the Wikipedia article on RSA: Wikipedia. Instant truth Just add the complement set. The RSA algorithm was publicly described in 1977 by Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir, and Leonard Adleman at MIT; the letters RSA are the initials of their surnames, listed in the same order as on the paper. Or do you want to claim that a way to _break_ RSA (decryption) is known but not published (i.e. there's a non-quantum algorythm to solve prime factorization). People knew how to decrypt RSA before it was released. Just saying. Besides that there is *nothing* to prove the solving factors of primes is an inherently difficult task. Separately these days any company with a few 10's of thousands $$$ available can purchase the hardware to do the job with brute force but there are other more subtle methods. Like the NSA paying companies to use broken algorithms by default, etc... But I digress. The funny thing is that the technology that can be created using this technique would probably solve the energy crisis if this knowledge was allowed to be used for civilian purposes like power stations. It would probably also be useful for deep space exploration. ( Avatar scale not Hubble scale ) gee, really good drugs ... I guess you don't have the information that I have ;-) Lets go, bring out the naysaying, heretical, finger pointing. Just let me get a shot in now before it descends into truly dangerous territory. Yo Mama is so fat they can't launch her into orbit , land her on the moon and then return her to Earth. Depends on the fuel used of course. One thing we do know is the humble pistol crab can generate impulses with the same heat intensity Over here, impulse is measured in mass x velocity, neither of which expresses heat intensity (in kelvin?). Care to elaborate? The heat generated when the *snap* occurs is as hot as the surface of the sun. Watch the video... -- Patrick Shirkey Boost Hardware Ltd ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Audio Levitation
On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 04:12:16AM +1100, Patrick Shirkey wrote: People knew how to decrypt RSA before it was released. Just saying. The NSA has said it knew about the algorithm before R, S and A discovered it. That's all. And if we accept that Wikipedia and blogs are not the ultimate thruth, then the next question must be: where do *you* get the information from on which your claims are based, and what makes you think it is more reliable ? Besides that there is *nothing* to prove the solving factors of primes is an inherently difficult task. True, you can't prove it. But there is lots of evidence that it is hard. Factoring products of primes isn't an isolated problem. If it can be done efficiently then lots of other problems instantly become trivial as well, and/or vice versa. None of those has been cracked. The heat generated when the *snap* occurs is as hot as the surface of the sun. Watch the video... Doesn't mean a thing. This happens when the bubble has been reduced to a few micrometers at most. The amount of heat (which is not the same as temperature) is quite small. Ciao, -- FA A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia. It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow) ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Audio Levitation
On Sun, 05 Jan 2014 13:50:52 +0100 Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote: On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 00:29 +0100, Dominique Michel wrote: And classical physics is even worst. In Einstein formula e=mc^2, the only term for which we have a definition is c... For e, it is no definition, only equations which are not definitions https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c9/E%3Dmc%C2% B2-explication.svg/220px-E%3Dmc%C2%B2-explication.svg.png The Definition for E is m*c². By your explanation we would als have no definition for c, since c also is an equation, c is m/s (another m ;). The only differences are that some values are constants and others are variables. Please, no. c is a constant with the unit(!) m/s. m and s are no variables... And the m in [c] = m/s is not the same as the m in E = m*c². - Arnold signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Audio Levitation
Le Sun, 05 Jan 2014 13:50:52 +0100, Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net a écrit : On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 00:29 +0100, Dominique Michel wrote: And classical physics is even worst. In Einstein formula e=mc^2, the only term for which we have a definition is c... For e, it is no definition, only equations which are not definitions https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c9/E%3Dmc%C2% B2-explication.svg/220px-E%3Dmc%C2%B2-explication.svg.png The Definition for E is m*c². By your explanation we would als have no definition for c, since c also is an equation, c is m/s (another m ;). The only differences are that some values are constants and others are variables. That's an equation. A definition is with ==, not =. The definition of energy is the capacity to do some work, and as both work and energy share the same unit, the Joule, we get that work is equivalent to energy, as we learn it at school. Maxwell's theory as we learn it at school (which is a truncation of its original 1865 theory made by Heaveside, Herz and Gibbs) doesn't allow things like the Bohren experiment which give us up to 18 times more energy at the output than the input energy. But the fact remain that the Bohren experiment can be reproduced, and have been reproduced. Hopefully, it is other theories slowly emerging like the electrodynamics (O3), Sachs work and the unified field theory of Evans, that mix Maxwell's original theory (which is relativistic) with general relativity, quantum physics, and with new advances like Whitaker EM decomposition and broken symmetry, to get a new theory where coefficient of efficiency 1 are achievable. The main issue here is money, the one that make big money with the energy are the ones that found most research in that field. More, Maxwell was assuming a material ether, therefore the assumption of EM fields in vacuum, but EM fields just cannot exist without particles. They are not a cause but an effect of the particles: In my considered opinion I think that a photon is a manifestation of spacetime curvature, the result of quantization of the electromagnetic field tensor in antisymmetrized general relativity. Evans, the author of The Enigmatic Photon. A photon is a magnetic dipole. It is an elementary magnet. Evans' discovery of the photon's longitudinal magnetic field in 1992 is as significant, at the quantum level, as Einstein's discovery of relativity at the universal level. It helps to give a physical interpretation to string theory, wave mechanics, two-slit interference and the Faraday effect. A string is a harmonically moving photon that vibrates, oscillates, spins and twists. K. L. Rajpal Among all the vulgarisation that is in Bearden's web site, see http://www.cheniere.org/references/index.htm for references. Dominique ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Audio Levitation
On Sun, Jan 05, 2014 at 05:48:51PM +, Fons Adriaensen wrote: On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 04:12:16AM +1100, Patrick Shirkey wrote: People knew how to decrypt RSA before it was released. Just saying. The NSA has said it knew about the algorithm before R, S and A discovered it. That's all. And if we accept that Wikipedia and blogs are not the ultimate thruth, then the next question must be: where do *you* get the information from on which your claims are based, and what makes you think it is more reliable ? And GCHQ knew about it in the 1950s, apparently. -- Gordonjcp MM0YEQ ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Audio Levitation
On Sun, 5 Jan 2014 19:56:19 +, Gordon JC Pearce wrote On Sun, Jan 05, 2014 at 05:48:51PM +, Fons Adriaensen wrote: On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 04:12:16AM +1100, Patrick Shirkey wrote: People knew how to decrypt RSA before it was released. Just saying. The NSA has said it knew about the algorithm before R, S and A discovered it. That's all. And if we accept that Wikipedia and blogs are not the ultimate thruth, then the next question must be: where do *you* get the information from on which your claims are based, and what makes you think it is more reliable ? And GCHQ knew about it in the 1950s, apparently. Apparently? AFAIK Clifford Cocks discovery and the internal GCHQ paper date from 1973 (the paper is available online, IIRC). Cheers RalfD -- Gordonjcp MM0YEQ ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev -- R. Mattes - Hochschule fuer Musik Freiburg r...@inm.mh-freiburg.de ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Audio Levitation
On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 19:52 +0100, Arnold Krille wrote: Please, no. c is a constant with the unit(!) m/s. m and s are no variables... And the m in [c] = m/s is not the same as the m in E = m*c². :D I said that the two m's aren't the same. And sure, I also said that there are variables and constants. It wouldn't make sense if E would be a constant ;), so I don't understand the problem. And why should equations which are not definitions be true, resp. what's the problem with equations? For me it doesn't make sense. A definition is done by an equation. ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Audio Levitation
On Sun, Jan 05, 2014 at 08:41:55PM +0100, Dominique Michel wrote: Allow things like the Bohren experiment which give us up to 18 times more energy at the output than the input energy. Bullshit. It just shows that the target receives more energy than its size would suggest, because its presence modifies the field around it. The effect is the same as putting a large lens in front of a small target. Ciao, -- FA A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia. It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow) ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Audio Levitation
On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 20:41 +0100, Dominique Michel wrote: That's an equation. A definition is with == https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_mathematischer_Symbole#Definitionszeichen And why is c a definition for you when the =-sign is used? https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lichtgeschwindigkeit On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 19:52 +0100, Arnold Krille wrote: m and s are no variables Meters and seconds are variables, just the speed of light in a vacuum is constant. All physical constants are defined by a =-sign, or rounded ≈. There seems to be a language barrier. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physikalische_Konstante ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Audio Levitation
On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 19:52 +0100, Arnold Krille wrote: m and s are no variables Sure, we e.g. have an International Prototype Metre, everything is based on something that is defined, even E(energy) is defined. ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Audio Levitation
On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 22:31 +, Fons Adriaensen wrote: On Sun, Jan 05, 2014 at 08:41:55PM +0100, Dominique Michel wrote: Allow things like the Bohren experiment which give us up to 18 times more energy at the output than the input energy. [snip] The effect is the same as putting a large lens in front of a small target. I get the impression that some on this list doubt the law of conservation of energy. I didn't follow the whole thread, perhaps I missed something. ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
