A Sky, cable and digital tv forum. Digital TV Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Digital TV Banter forum » Digital TV Newsgroups » uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General) (uk.tech.digital-tv) Discussion of all matters technical in origin related to the reception of digital television transmissions, be they via satellite, terrestrial or cable. Advertising is forbidden, with no exceptions.

OT question



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old December 27th 17, 04:55 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv,uk.d-i-y
Tjoepstil
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8
Default OT question

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.


Bill


Ads
  #62  
Old December 27th 17, 07:58 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv,uk.d-i-y
Woody[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,865
Default OT question


"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?


  #64  
Old December 27th 17, 10:40 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv,uk.d-i-y
Java Jive[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,774
Default OT question

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.
  #65  
Old December 27th 17, 11:47 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv,uk.d-i-y
Indy Jess John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,307
Default OT question

On 26/12/2017 06:14, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Look at Brexit/Remoaner arguments. Two fundamentally different
metaphsyical positions based on opposed views of a certain political
structure - the European Union.


There are more than two.

One view holds that it is however
flawed, a fundamentally benevolent institution.

The other view holds that it is a pernicious self seeking lying
anti-democratic and thoroughly dangerous organisation.


There is the group who see the EU as their route to promotion, and for
their potential future personal financial gain they will put up with
whatever the EU chooses to do. Unfortunately many of these are MPs who
will stall Brexit as best they can, because they are only risking other
people's money.

Then there is the group that has been convinced by a flawed educational
system that what you have got is better than what you might otherwise
have had. They are frightened of change; the realities of the character
of what they are changing from is irrelevant.

Then there is the group that views the EU as a Ponzi scheme, which needs
to keep introducing new members to feed the expectations of the early
joiners, and wants to jump ship as soon as possible. Like all Ponzi
schemes it will ultimately go bust when it has sucked in all the
gullible and there is nowhere else to go for financial props. By then
the originators of the scheme will have made their millions and have
retired, leaving others to face the impending doom.

I have no doubt that there are other groups, but this subset is
sufficient to prove that the perceived character of the institution
isn't the only driver.

Jim

  #66  
Old December 27th 17, 11:49 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv,uk.d-i-y
Johnny B Good[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 513
Default OT question

On Mon, 25 Dec 2017 13:43:50 +0000, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Mon, 25 Dec 2017 11:57:21 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 25/12/17 11:44, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Mon, 25 Dec 2017 09:10:43 +0000, Norman Wells wrote:

But it's a philosophical question. And I thought from your name that
you might have an answer.

Natural Philosophy has nowt much to do with philosophy; it's simply
the archaic term for science.


And you think that science has nowt to do with philosophy? How quaint!"



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.

--
Johnny B Good
  #67  
Old December 27th 17, 12:04 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv,uk.d-i-y
Fredxx[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5
Default OT question

On 25/12/2017 09:25, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , 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'?


AIUI, there are about 26 physical constants (such as speed of light)
for the values of which there is no theoretical explanation known
today. That is, it's as if God (I use the term for convenience) has 26
knobs to turn to set these values and launch the universe. They could
have any values, these constants, and life would not be possible in
most of the resulting universes.


There are thoughts that the speed of sound changes over time, in much
the same way the gravitational constant is believed to be changing
(excluding the known 5.9 year cycle).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_speed_of_light
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-v...ntal_constants

It is therefore possible that the goldilocks period we are in may change
into one that can't sustain carbon life-forms, who knows!

I do think any claim that there are 26 "constants", when we don't know
the origin of these numbers, is a bit risky.


  #68  
Old December 27th 17, 12:40 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Phi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 318
Default OT question


"Roderick Stewart" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Dec 2017 02:56:59 -0800 (PST), "R. Mark Clayton"
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

Not everything has a cause. Some things Just Are.

God was the traditional explanation of course.


Child: - Who made the universe?
RE teacher - God.
Child: - Who made God?


Superman: "Don't worry, I've got you"
Lois Lane: "You've got me? - who's got you?"

This brief exchange you may recall takes place when he's carrying her
for the first time while flying. I've often thought it would be a good
starting point for a useful philosophical discussion, but it's
probably as far as a movie intended for a godfearing American public
would ever dare take it.

Rod.


Tell Bill 'c' is close to 300,000,000 metres per sec

  #69  
Old December 27th 17, 01:47 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv,uk.d-i-y
The Natural Philosopher[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 639
Default OT question

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

On Mon, 25 Dec 2017 11:57:21 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 25/12/17 11:44, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Mon, 25 Dec 2017 09:10:43 +0000, Norman Wells wrote:

But it's a philosophical question. And I thought from your name that
you might have an answer.

Natural Philosophy has nowt much to do with philosophy; it's simply
the archaic term for science.

And you think that science has nowt to do with philosophy? How quaint!"



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


--
Of what good are dead warriors? … Warriors are those who desire battle
more than peace. Those who seek battle despite peace. Those who thump
their spears on the ground and talk of honor. Those who leap high the
battle dance and dream of glory … The good of dead warriors, Mother, is
that they are dead.
Sheri S Tepper: The Awakeners.
  #70  
Old December 27th 17, 01:55 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv,uk.d-i-y
The Natural Philosopher[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 639
Default OT question

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...

--
"What do you think about Gay Marriage?"
"I don't."
"Don't what?"
"Think about Gay Marriage."

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.SEO by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2018 Digital TV Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.