kenneth collins
Dec14-04, 10:18 AM
<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no, location=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no ,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>\n"kenneth collins" <kenneth.p.collins@worldnet.att.net> wrote in\nmessage\nnews:X2otd.100317\\$7i4.47386@bgtnsc0 5-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...\n| [...]\n| For instance, a few \'weeks\' back,\n| I reached a "consolidation-point"\n| with my then-current bottle of\n| Johnson\'s Baby Shampoo [tm],\n| so, with some Joy, set about rep-\n| licating the "squirting" experiment\n| that I\'ve discussed, reiteratively,\n| in long-former posts.\n\nReiteration of the Experimental\nTechnique:\n\nUse a fine-metering pipette to dis-\npense John\'s Baby Shampoo [or\nthe viscous fluid of your choice --\nI\'ve wanted to do it with Mobil 1\nMotor Oil, but haven\'t done so yet]\ninto a petrie dish that contains an\nevenly-distributed quantity of the\nfluid you\'re using.\n\nIt\'s important to allow the bubbles\nto rise out of both fluid resevoirs\nbefore you undertake trials. Bubbles\nintroduce artifactual discontinuities\nat the pipette tipand in the receiving\nresevoir.\n\nThen open the pipette\'s petcock\njust enough so that a fine "thread"\nof the viscous fluid flows continuously\nfrom it into the receiving resieoir.\n\nWhat you\'ll observe will be a build-\ning of a highly-dynamic little "mound"\nof fluid at "the point" where the stream\nimpacts the resevoir\'s fluid.\n\nThis "mound" is literally a macroscopic\n"atom".\n\nIt builds be-cause the rate at which\nfluid enters it exceeds the rate at which\nfluid can exit it -- because of the fluid\'s\nviscosity.\n\nAnd, as the mound\'s 3-D Topology\nvaries, you\'ll see little "squirts" of fluid\nbeing ejected from the mound.\n\nWhat\'s happening is that the fluid\ncollecting in the mound, and, within\nthe mound, it flows in a way that\nminimizes averall energy-content.\n\nThis energy-minimization results in\nfluid dynamics that vary the mound\'s\n3-D Topology, and when such var-\niation flows toward the point at which\nthe fine stream of fluid flowing out of\nthe pipette meets the surface of the\nmound, instances of non-minimal-\nenergy-flow occur, and, be-cause\nof this non-minimalness, to the de-\ngree of it, the fine-thread flow is\nejected from the mound.\n\nThese fluid-ejection dynamics shift\nthe fluid dynamics within the mound,\nwhich terminates the non-minimal\nenergy condition, so the "squirting"\nceases.\n\nThis is an =exact= macroscopic\ninstance of what has been referred\nto as "quantum shifts" with respect\nto "atoms".\n\nAnd such macroscopic fluid-dynamic\n"atoms" behave in =exact= accord\nwith the Black Body Radiation.\n\nThis can be observed by performing\nsuccessive trials of the above ex-\nperiment while varying the Temper-\nature of the fluid over a range of\nTempK.\n\nAt the low-TempK end of this\nrange, the "squirts" will occur at\nrelatively-high flow rates. [The\npipette\'s petcock will have to be\nopened relatively much in order\nto observe any "squirting".]\n\nAnd as the fluid\'s TempK is in-\ncreased, the "squirting" will occur\nat ever-smaller flow rates, in a way\nthat =exactly= matches the shift-\ning of the black body power spec-\ntrum toward its high-frequency end,\nincluding the extreme-high-frequency\ndropping-off of power.\n\nWhat\'s very-nice about this fluid-\ndynamics instance of the black body\nradiation is that everything in it can\nbe easily calculated from continuous\nflow-rates and 3-D Topology.\n\nThe fluid-mechanical "squirts" are\n=exactly= analogous to what have\nbeen referred to as "quantum" events,\nbut, in the fluid-mechanical case, it\nis readily apparent that the underpin-\nning fluid dynamics are =continuous=,\nand that the only thing that alters is\nthe directedness of fluid flow with\nrespect to minimal energy.\n\nI have Verified that the same dynam-\nics acn account for all energy flows,\nat all scales.\n\nThat is, I have Verified that there\nis no need to propose that energy\nis divided-up into "discrete packets".\n\nI\'ll be happy to provide such com-\nplete Verification to anyone who\nwants to receive it in-person. [There\'s\na lot that needs to be covered, and\nthe dynamics inherent need to be\ndrawn and "animated" at a chaulk\nboard.]\n\nk. p. collins\n\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form"> View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky>"kenneth collins" <kenneth.p.collins@worldnet.att.net> wrote in
message
news:X2otd.100317$7i4.47386@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| [...]
| For instance, a few 'weeks' back,
| I reached a "consolidation-point"
| with my then-current bottle of
| Johnson's Baby Shampoo [tm],
| so, with some Joy, set about rep-
| licating the "squirting" experiment
| that I've discussed, reiteratively,
| in long-former posts.
Reiteration of the Experimental
Technique:
Use a fine-metering pipette to dis-
pense John's Baby Shampoo [or
the viscous fluid of your choice --
I've wanted to do it with Mobil 1
Motor Oil, but haven't done so yet]
into a petrie dish that contains an
evenly-distributed quantity of the
fluid you're using.
It's important to allow the bubbles
to rise out of both fluid resevoirs
before you undertake trials. Bubbles
introduce artifactual discontinuities
at the pipette tipand in the receiving
resevoir.
Then open the pipette's petcock
just enough so that a fine "thread"
of the viscous fluid flows continuously
from it into the receiving resieoir.
What you'll observe will be a build-
ing of a highly-dynamic little "mound"
of fluid at "the point" where the stream
impacts the resevoir's fluid.
This "mound" is literally a macroscopic
"atom".
It builds be-cause the rate at which
fluid enters it exceeds the rate at which
fluid can exit it -- because of the fluid's
viscosity.
And, as the mound's 3-D Topology
varies, you'll see little "squirts" of fluid
being ejected from the mound.
What's happening is that the fluid
collecting in the mound, and, within
the mound, it flows in a way that
minimizes averall energy-content.
This energy-minimization results in
fluid dynamics that vary the mound's
3-D Topology, and when such var-
iation flows toward the point at which
the fine stream of fluid flowing out of
the pipette meets the surface of the
mound, instances of non-minimal-
energy-flow occur, and, be-cause
of this non-minimalness, to the de-
gree of it, the fine-thread flow is
ejected from the mound.
These fluid-ejection dynamics shift
the fluid dynamics within the mound,
which terminates the non-minimal
energy condition, so the "squirting"
ceases.
This is an =exact= macroscopic
instance of what has been referred
to as "quantum shifts" with respect
to "atoms".
And such macroscopic fluid-dynamic
"atoms" behave in =exact= accord
with the Black Body Radiation.
This can be observed by performing
successive trials of the above ex-
periment while varying the Temper-
ature of the fluid over a range of
TempK.
At the low-TempK end of this
range, the "squirts" will occur at
relatively-high flow rates. [The
pipette's petcock will have to be
opened relatively much in order
to observe any "squirting".]
And as the fluid's TempK is in-
creased, the "squirting" will occur
at ever-smaller flow rates, in a way
that =exactly= matches the shift-
ing of the black body power spec-
trum toward its high-frequency end,
including the extreme-high-frequency
dropping-off of power.
What's very-nice about this fluid-
dynamics instance of the black body
radiation is that everything in it can
be easily calculated from continuous
flow-rates and 3-D Topology.
The fluid-mechanical "squirts" are
=exactly= analogous to what have
been referred to as "quantum" events,
but, in the fluid-mechanical case, it
is readily apparent that the underpin-
ning fluid dynamics are =continuous=,
and that the only thing that alters is
the directedness of fluid flow with
respect to minimal energy.
I have Verified that the same dynam-
ics acn account for all energy flows,
at all scales.
That is, I have Verified that there
is no need to propose that energy
is divided-up into "discrete packets".
I'll be happy to provide such com-
plete Verification to anyone who
wants to receive it in-person. [There's
a lot that needs to be covered, and
the dynamics inherent need to be
drawn and "animated" at a chaulk
board.]
k. p. collins
message
news:X2otd.100317$7i4.47386@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| [...]
| For instance, a few 'weeks' back,
| I reached a "consolidation-point"
| with my then-current bottle of
| Johnson's Baby Shampoo [tm],
| so, with some Joy, set about rep-
| licating the "squirting" experiment
| that I've discussed, reiteratively,
| in long-former posts.
Reiteration of the Experimental
Technique:
Use a fine-metering pipette to dis-
pense John's Baby Shampoo [or
the viscous fluid of your choice --
I've wanted to do it with Mobil 1
Motor Oil, but haven't done so yet]
into a petrie dish that contains an
evenly-distributed quantity of the
fluid you're using.
It's important to allow the bubbles
to rise out of both fluid resevoirs
before you undertake trials. Bubbles
introduce artifactual discontinuities
at the pipette tipand in the receiving
resevoir.
Then open the pipette's petcock
just enough so that a fine "thread"
of the viscous fluid flows continuously
from it into the receiving resieoir.
What you'll observe will be a build-
ing of a highly-dynamic little "mound"
of fluid at "the point" where the stream
impacts the resevoir's fluid.
This "mound" is literally a macroscopic
"atom".
It builds be-cause the rate at which
fluid enters it exceeds the rate at which
fluid can exit it -- because of the fluid's
viscosity.
And, as the mound's 3-D Topology
varies, you'll see little "squirts" of fluid
being ejected from the mound.
What's happening is that the fluid
collecting in the mound, and, within
the mound, it flows in a way that
minimizes averall energy-content.
This energy-minimization results in
fluid dynamics that vary the mound's
3-D Topology, and when such var-
iation flows toward the point at which
the fine stream of fluid flowing out of
the pipette meets the surface of the
mound, instances of non-minimal-
energy-flow occur, and, be-cause
of this non-minimalness, to the de-
gree of it, the fine-thread flow is
ejected from the mound.
These fluid-ejection dynamics shift
the fluid dynamics within the mound,
which terminates the non-minimal
energy condition, so the "squirting"
ceases.
This is an =exact= macroscopic
instance of what has been referred
to as "quantum shifts" with respect
to "atoms".
And such macroscopic fluid-dynamic
"atoms" behave in =exact= accord
with the Black Body Radiation.
This can be observed by performing
successive trials of the above ex-
periment while varying the Temper-
ature of the fluid over a range of
TempK.
At the low-TempK end of this
range, the "squirts" will occur at
relatively-high flow rates. [The
pipette's petcock will have to be
opened relatively much in order
to observe any "squirting".]
And as the fluid's TempK is in-
creased, the "squirting" will occur
at ever-smaller flow rates, in a way
that =exactly= matches the shift-
ing of the black body power spec-
trum toward its high-frequency end,
including the extreme-high-frequency
dropping-off of power.
What's very-nice about this fluid-
dynamics instance of the black body
radiation is that everything in it can
be easily calculated from continuous
flow-rates and 3-D Topology.
The fluid-mechanical "squirts" are
=exactly= analogous to what have
been referred to as "quantum" events,
but, in the fluid-mechanical case, it
is readily apparent that the underpin-
ning fluid dynamics are =continuous=,
and that the only thing that alters is
the directedness of fluid flow with
respect to minimal energy.
I have Verified that the same dynam-
ics acn account for all energy flows,
at all scales.
That is, I have Verified that there
is no need to propose that energy
is divided-up into "discrete packets".
I'll be happy to provide such com-
plete Verification to anyone who
wants to receive it in-person. [There's
a lot that needs to be covered, and
the dynamics inherent need to be
drawn and "animated" at a chaulk
board.]
k. p. collins