Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!usenet From: Neil Franklin Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body Subject: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? Date: 26 Oct 1999 21:50:01 +0200 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 46 Sender: neil@chonsp.franklin.ch Message-ID: <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380A6B91.5BDB@not-here.net> <380A753D.BEA9D7D3@Home.com> <380AAB35.18E7B29B@mcn.org> <380AC0D0.6CB2@not-here.net> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 "Jax" writes: > > Oh yeah, heres a question for you. Why does the moon turn with the exactly > correct spin rate to 'coincidentally' keep the same face of the moon facing > the earth... what law of physics makes it do that? And isn't it really > unlikely to have occurred by chance, surely it would be quite possible for > it to turn a little too slow or a little too fast? Try it with mechanics. The amount of kinetic energy in an faster or slower moon is simply larger than in an moon at exactly this speed. No maths from me. I am only recalling some shool physics stuff from 15 years ago. And I was bad at maths then (the only subject I failled in the final exam) and have successfully avoided it since then. This btw also applies to earth rotation around the sun. So the unavoidable energy loss (atmosphere rubbing against interstellar matter) is slowing the earths rotation. Days are becoming slightly longer (fractions of seconds per year). > The only thing I was able > to come up with is that perhaps the front part of the moons really heavy and > the back part (if it exists at all) It exists. It is far more pockmarked than the front. It gets far more chunks of rock thrown at it (it is on the outside, the front is shielded by the earth). > aint... that way the moon would keep its > front towards us using the 'weighted dice' gambling cheat method... Weight distribution of the moon is the same as the earth, the more dense material is, the nearer to the middle it ends up (heavy stuff sinks, the moon was once fluid like the earth core still is). > I've been puzzled by this one for a while... End of puzzle. :-) -- Neil Franklin, neil@franklin.ch.remove http://neil.franklin.ch/ ###### Reply-To: "Jax" From: "Jax" Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380A6B91.5BDB@not-here.net> <380A753D.BEA9D7D3@Home.com> <380AAB35.18E7B29B@mcn.org> <380AC0D0.6CB2@not-here.net> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? Lines: 43 Organization: l X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 04:47:54 +1300 NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.167.242.89 X-Complaints-To: abuse@clear.net.nz X-Trace: news.clear.net.nz 941125865 203.167.242.89 (Fri, 29 Oct 1999 04:51:05 NZDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 04:51:05 NZDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!newspump.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!newsfeed.clear.net.nz!news.clear.net.nz.POSTED!not-for-mail Neil Franklin wrote in message news:6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch... > Try it with mechanics. The amount of kinetic energy in an faster or > slower moon is simply larger than in an moon at exactly this speed. yeah, sorry, im really thick and dont get these things (think homer simpson when told he had a bad heart)... I think that the moon would have more kinetic energy if it was faster, are you saying that the spin has its own kinetic energy that is optimal at this particular speed...? > This btw also applies to earth rotation around the sun. So the > unavoidable energy loss (atmosphere rubbing against interstellar > matter) is slowing the earths rotation. Days are becoming slightly > longer (fractions of seconds per year). > I assume its also slowing the moons rotation. Im just wondering what particular force and how is responsible for stopping them from getting out of sync... > It exists. It is far more pockmarked than the front. It gets far more > chunks of rock thrown at it (it is on the outside, the front is > shielded by the earth). Yeah, I believe it probably does exist ;-) > Weight distribution of the moon is the same as the earth, the more dense > material is, the nearer to the middle it ends up (heavy stuff sinks, > the moon was once fluid like the earth core still is). > > > I've been puzzled by this one for a while... > > End of puzzle. :-) Sorry, still a bit in the dark as to the exact mechanism responsible for syncronizing the spin of 2 orbiting bodies... > > > -- > Neil Franklin, neil@franklin.ch.remove http://neil.franklin.ch/ ###### Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!usenet From: Neil Franklin Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? Date: 28 Oct 1999 21:40:36 +0200 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 46 Sender: neil@chonsp.franklin.ch Message-ID: <6uiu3rmfyj.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380A6B91.5BDB@not-here.net> <380A753D.BEA9D7D3@Home.com> <380AAB35.18E7B29B@mcn.org> <380AC0D0.6CB2@not-here.net> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 "Jax" writes: > > Neil Franklin wrote in message > news:6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch... > > Try it with mechanics. The amount of kinetic energy in an faster or > > slower moon is simply larger than in an moon at exactly this speed. > > yeah, sorry, im really thick and dont get these things (think homer simpson > when told he had a bad heart)... :-) > I think that the moon would have more > kinetic energy if it was faster, It would. The trick is, that the moon (and the earth) are constantly losing energy (through collision with interstellar gas). So they slow down (the earth still is, the moon has reached minimal speed). > are you saying that the spin has its own > kinetic energy that is optimal at this particular speed...? The sum of all the moons particles energy summs up to something like that. As said: I heard it 15 years ago, and I am bad at maths anyway. > > This btw also applies to earth rotation around the sun. So the > > unavoidable energy loss (atmosphere rubbing against interstellar > > matter) is slowing the earths rotation. Days are becoming slightly > > longer (fractions of seconds per year). > > > > I assume its also slowing the moons rotation. Im just wondering what > particular force and how is responsible for stopping them from getting out > of sync... The force is earth-mood gravitational attraction. The sum of all gravitational forces between each earth particle and each moon particle. The proof takes some awfull looking integral stuff. I lost contact with the discussion at about that point. -- Neil Franklin, neil@franklin.ch.remove http://neil.franklin.ch/ ###### Message-ID: <381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com> From: The Original Ken Reply-To: sculpt@privatei.com Organization: fractal in nature X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.02 [en]C-DIAL (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380A6B91.5BDB@not-here.net> <380A753D.BEA9D7D3@Home.com> <380AAB35.18E7B29B@mcn.org> <380AC0D0.6CB2@not-here.net> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 18 Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 10:14:19 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.131.176.163 X-Trace: wormhole.dimensional.com 941390677 204.131.176.163 (Sun, 31 Oct 1999 10:24:37 MDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 10:24:37 MDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!enews.sgi.com!paloalto-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!pulsar.dimensional.com!dimensional.com!wormhole.dimensional.com!not-for-mail If the moon was originally part of the earth, a chunk on the surface, then it's rotation would be identical to the earth it was stuck to. When it broke free, it would not suddenly take on a different rotation than what it already had. Ken Jax wrote: > Sorry, still a bit in the dark as to the exact mechanism responsible for > syncronizing the spin of 2 orbiting bodies... > > > > > > > -- > > Neil Franklin, neil@franklin.ch.remove http://neil.franklin.ch/ ###### From: "Jay" Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380A6B91.5BDB@not-here.net> <380A753D.BEA9D7D3@Home.com> <380AAB35.18E7B29B@mcn.org> <380AC0D0.6CB2@not-here.net> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com> <8_DT3.522$5W2.14846@news.clear.net.nz> Message-ID: <01bf2586$adbdb680$742267cf@default> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1161 Lines: 26 NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.103.34.8 X-Trace: typ12.nn.bcandid.com 941583822 207.103.34.8 (Tue, 02 Nov 1999 18:03:42 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 18:03:42 EST Organization: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http://bCandid.com Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 23:03:42 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!gw12.nn.bcandid.com!gate.bCandid.com!hub12.nn.bcandid.com!typ12.nn.bcandid.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Jax wrote: > another one. If one of einsteins theorys says that light is always the same > speed regardless of the speed of the observer, what about the phenomonen of > red shift? I still dont understand how if lights speed is constant how we > can percieve different shifts in it just because an object is moving away > quickly. Surely this would go AGAINST the theory that light is always the > same speed regardless of the observers velocity? Wavelength is one thing, velocity another. Different types of stars show different spectrums, in accordance with their elemental composition, with bands separating portions of the spectrum. Certain specific types of stars (cepheid variables) whose light varies at fixed intervals have very specific spectrums. These stars can be identified in our own and in other galaxies, and their spectrums collected and compaired. Hubble found that the universe was expanding because the light from other galaxies was red-shifted, meaning the bands in the spectrum of the variable stars were shifted toward the red end of the spectrum, compared to typical variables. The greater the speed away from us, the greater the red shift. Similarly, they could tell our own galaxy was rotating, and in what direction and at what speed, by the same method. ###### Reply-To: "Jax" From: "Jax" Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380A6B91.5BDB@not-here.net> <380A753D.BEA9D7D3@Home.com> <380AAB35.18E7B29B@mcn.org> <380AC0D0.6CB2@not-here.net> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com> Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? Lines: 41 Organization: l X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Message-ID: <8_DT3.522$5W2.14846@news.clear.net.nz> Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 05:03:48 +1300 NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.97.53.85 X-Complaints-To: abuse@clear.net.nz X-Trace: news.clear.net.nz 941558788 203.97.53.85 (Wed, 03 Nov 1999 05:06:28 NZDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 05:06:28 NZDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!ihug.co.nz!news.iprolink.co.nz!news!newsfeed.clear.net.nz!news.clear.net.nz.POSTED!not-for-mail hmm, perhaps not, but if the moon was part of a chunk on the surface, then I think its almost certain it would have a different spin to earth... and even if a chunk spun off, I think its spin might possible be different due to the mass of the object or its diameter? Just a hunch, I could be wrong... another one. If one of einsteins theorys says that light is always the same speed regardless of the speed of the observer, what about the phenomonen of red shift? I still dont understand how if lights speed is constant how we can percieve different shifts in it just because an object is moving away quickly. Surely this would go AGAINST the theory that light is always the same speed regardless of the observers velocity? Man im full of questions lately aint I ;-) Jax The Original Ken wrote in message news:381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com... > If the moon was originally part of the earth, a chunk on the surface, then it's > rotation would be identical to the earth it was stuck to. When it broke free, > it would not suddenly take on a different rotation than what it already had. > > Ken > > Jax wrote: > > > Sorry, still a bit in the dark as to the exact mechanism responsible for > > syncronizing the spin of 2 orbiting bodies... > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Neil Franklin, neil@franklin.ch.remove http://neil.franklin.ch/ > > > ###### Reply-To: "Jax" From: "Jax" Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380A6B91.5BDB@not-here.net> <380A753D.BEA9D7D3@Home.com> <380AAB35.18E7B29B@mcn.org> <380AC0D0.6CB2@not-here.net> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com> <8_DT3.522$5W2.14846@news.clear.net.nz> <01bf2586$adbdb680$742267cf@default> Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? Lines: 43 Organization: l X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 04:45:21 +1300 NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.97.54.177 X-Complaints-To: abuse@clear.net.nz X-Trace: news.clear.net.nz 941644076 203.97.54.177 (Thu, 04 Nov 1999 04:47:56 NZDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 04:47:56 NZDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!naxos.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!news-FFM2.ecrc.net!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!ihug.co.nz!news.iprolink.co.nz!news!newsfeed.clear.net.nz!news.clear.net.nz.POSTED!not-for-mail Yeah, but since wavelength is nothing more than the number of troughs/peaks per X period, for a shift to appear to occur, wouldn't there have to be a change in the speed of the light? Otherwise how are we getting fewer/more peaks per X period? I guess what your saying is that light the medium could propagate at the same speed, but to an observer the frequency of those peaks would change according to the speed of the source/viewer...? that makes a kind of sense I suppose... wrote in message news:01bf2586$adbdb680$742267cf@default... > > > Jax wrote: > > another one. If one of einsteins theorys says that light is always the > same > > speed regardless of the speed of the observer, what about the phenomonen > of > > red shift? I still dont understand how if lights speed is constant how we > > can percieve different shifts in it just because an object is moving away > > quickly. Surely this would go AGAINST the theory that light is always the > > same speed regardless of the observers velocity? > > Wavelength is one thing, velocity another. > > Different types of stars show different spectrums, in accordance with their > elemental composition, with bands separating portions of the spectrum. > Certain specific types of stars (cepheid variables) whose light varies at > fixed intervals have very specific spectrums. These stars can be > identified in our own and in other galaxies, and their spectrums collected > and compaired. Hubble found that the universe was expanding because the > light from other galaxies was red-shifted, meaning the bands in the > spectrum of the variable stars were shifted toward the red end of the > spectrum, compared to typical variables. The greater the speed away from > us, the greater the red shift. Similarly, they could tell our own galaxy > was rotating, and in what direction and at what speed, by the same method. > ###### Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!usenet From: Neil Franklin Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? Date: 03 Nov 1999 20:25:00 +0100 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 69 Sender: neil@chonsp.franklin.ch Message-ID: <6ubt9bbcoj.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380A6B91.5BDB@not-here.net> <380A753D.BEA9D7D3@Home.com> <380AAB35.18E7B29B@mcn.org> <380AC0D0.6CB2@not-here.net> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com> <8_DT3.522$5W2.14846@news.clear.net.nz> <01bf2586$adbdb680$742267cf@default> X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 "Jax" writes: > > Yeah, but since wavelength is nothing more than the number of troughs/peaks > per X period, for a shift to appear to occur, wouldn't there have to be a > change in the speed of the light? Otherwise how are we getting fewer/more > peaks per X period? > I guess what your saying is that light the medium could propagate at the > same speed, but to an observer the frequency of those peaks would change > according to the speed of the source/viewer...? that makes a kind of sense I > suppose... > > wrote in message > > > > Jax wrote: > > > speed regardless of the speed of the observer, what about the phenomonen > > of > > > red shift? I still dont understand how if lights speed is constant how > we > > > can percieve different shifts in it just because an object is moving > away > > > quickly. Surely this would go AGAINST the theory that light is always > the > > > same speed regardless of the observers velocity? > > > > Wavelength is one thing, velocity another. > > > > and compaired. Hubble found that the universe was expanding because the > > light from other galaxies was red-shifted, meaning the bands in the Ah, another victim of that pesky Doppler effect. To make this post easier to understand I will use the example of sound. If you have air (all of the same pressure) and a sound source (say a police siren) you will notice its sound being higher frequency when nearing you and then fall to lower frequency when going away from you. Now sound speed in same-pressure air is constant. But we end up with lower frequency (= longer wavelength). How this? Because the source is moving in the time between producing the sound peaks. So that distance is subtracted from (when nearing) or added to (when going away) the wavelength of the sound and, if the movement is fast enough, that shows up as an audible change in pitch. The same effect also happens with light (at much higher speeds, as the frequency is a lot higher), making nearing objects blue-shift and objects going away red-shift. But the actual (already discoloured) light then travels to you runns at the constant light speed. P.S: could you please improve 2 things in your posting style: 1. restrict the line lenghts to something around 70 characters. This gets rid of them silly one word lines that appear as soon as your post has been quoted, making it difficult to read and lengthening it to double length and so increasing scrolling work for readers. 2. could you when quoting others in reply posts write your replies _beneath_ their stuff. This would be fitting with the social convention of putting later stuff below, which leads to the convention of reading from top to bottom. It would get rid of the confusing order of parts of post 3,1,2,4 appearing in that order, forcing the reader to jump up and down. It would also allow people to put their replies to your posst direct with your writing, without producing 3,4,1,2. -- Neil Franklin, neil@franklin.ch.remove http://neil.franklin.ch/ ###### Message-ID: <3820DCD2.6E62DFFF@privatei.com> From: The Original Ken Reply-To: sculpt@privatei.com Organization: fractal in nature X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.02 [en]C-DIAL (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380A6B91.5BDB@not-here.net> <380A753D.BEA9D7D3@Home.com> <380AAB35.18E7B29B@mcn.org> <380AC0D0.6CB2@not-here.net> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com> <8_DT3.522$5W2.14846@news.clear.net.nz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 21 Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 18:09:38 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.131.176.170 X-Trace: wormhole.dimensional.com 941678391 204.131.176.170 (Wed, 03 Nov 1999 18:19:51 MDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 18:19:51 MDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!hermes.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!pulsar.dimensional.com!dimensional.com!wormhole.dimensional.com!not-for-mail No, not at all. Think about it. Imagine you have a big ball and a small ball is stuck to the side of it. If you rotate the big ball once per second, the small ball also rotates once per second. Now if while you are spinning the ball, the small one breaks free (and if you are out in space at the time this happens) then the small ball will drift out into space still spinning at one revolution per second, same as the big ball. The moon of course didn't go drifting out into space since it was attracted to the earth by gravity but this had absolutely no effect on its already established rotation. Ken Jax wrote: > hmm, perhaps not, but if the moon was part of a chunk on the surface, then I > think its almost certain it would have a different spin to earth... and even > if a chunk spun off, I think its spin might possible be different due to the > mass of the object or its diameter? Just a hunch, I could be wrong... > ###### From: "Jay" Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? Date: 3 Nov 1999 23:21:44 GMT Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Lines: 10 Message-ID: <01bf2652$5b979de0$952267cf@default> References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380A6B91.5BDB@not-here.net> <380A753D.BEA9D7D3@Home.com> <380AAB35.18E7B29B@mcn.org> <380AC0D0.6CB2@not-here.net> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com> <8_DT3.522$5W2.14846@news.clear.net.nz> <01bf2586$adbdb680$742267cf@default> NNTP-Posting-Host: async149.starlinx.com X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1161 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!newspeer.te.net!news.indigo.ie!diablo.theplanet.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!pln-w!spln!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!enews3 Jax wrote: > I guess what your saying is that light the medium could propagate at the > same speed, but to an observer the frequency of those peaks would change > according to the speed of the source/viewer...? that makes a kind of sense I > suppose... That is the current theory, well backed-up by observations. ###### Message-ID: <38219FAF.1B5C@not-here.net> From: Janice X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380A6B91.5BDB@not-here.net> <380A753D.BEA9D7D3@Home.com> <380AAB35.18E7B29B@mcn.org> <380AC0D0.6CB2@not-here.net> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com> <8_DT3.522$5W2.14846@news.clear.net.nz> <01bf2586$adbdb680$742267cf@default> <6ubt9bbcoj.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <7BfU3.841$5W2.21484@news.clear.net.nz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 23 NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.103.34.8 X-Trace: typ12.nn.bcandid.com 941727588 207.103.34.8 (Thu, 04 Nov 1999 09:59:48 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 09:59:48 EST Organization: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http://bCandid.com Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 10:01:03 -0500 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!newspeer.te.net!news.indigo.ie!diablo.theplanet.net!colt.net!news-x.support.nl!remarQ-easT!remarQ.com!supernews.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!gw12.nn.bcandid.com!gate.bCandid.com!hub12.nn.bcandid.com!typ12.nn.bcandid.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Jax wrote: > > my word wrap is set to 76 characters. If you want to tell me how to get > Outlook Express to put a CRLF at the end of the line, if thats what your > asking, then feel free... I'll try reducing it to 70 and see if that > helps... If you reduce to 70, though, when you reply to someone who's using a wider margin, then THEIR quoted material will end up in broken lines. So there will almost always be some of that. I just INCREASED my margin to keep your quote from breaking up, so if someone with a smaller margin than mine replies to this, it will all break up again. > Actually, I prefer the convention where if the reply message is short, it is > quoted at the top, with the previous threads below. This saves a lot on > scrolling time, especially with big threads with lots of little messages. I agree - sometimes adding new material at the top is better, so I don't have to scroll through a bunch of stuff I've already read to see the new stuff. Different newsgroups have different conventions. I don't think that it's a big deal either way unless it's a technical support group, where following the thread precisely may be important. ###### Reply-To: "Jax" From: "Jax" Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380A6B91.5BDB@not-here.net> <380A753D.BEA9D7D3@Home.com> <380AAB35.18E7B29B@mcn.org> <380AC0D0.6CB2@not-here.net> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com> <8_DT3.522$5W2.14846@news.clear.net.nz> <01bf2586$adbdb680$742267cf@default> <6ubt9bbcoj.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? Lines: 113 Organization: l X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Message-ID: <7BfU3.841$5W2.21484@news.clear.net.nz> Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 02:07:28 +1300 NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.97.53.124 X-Complaints-To: abuse@clear.net.nz X-Trace: news.clear.net.nz 941721027 203.97.53.124 (Fri, 05 Nov 1999 02:10:27 NZDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 02:10:27 NZDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!newsfeed.icl.net!news-feed.fnsi.net!netnews.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!newsfeed.clear.net.nz!news.clear.net.nz.POSTED!not-for-mail Neil Franklin wrote in message news:6ubt9bbcoj.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch... > "Jax" writes: > > > > Yeah, but since wavelength is nothing more than the number of troughs/peaks > > per X period, for a shift to appear to occur, wouldn't there have to be a > > change in the speed of the light? Otherwise how are we getting fewer/more > > peaks per X period? > > I guess what your saying is that light the medium could propagate at the > > same speed, but to an observer the frequency of those peaks would change > > according to the speed of the source/viewer...? that makes a kind of sense I > > suppose... > > > > wrote in message > > > > > > Jax wrote: > > > > speed regardless of the speed of the observer, what about the phenomonen > > > of > > > > red shift? I still dont understand how if lights speed is constant how > > we > > > > can percieve different shifts in it just because an object is moving > > away > > > > quickly. Surely this would go AGAINST the theory that light is always > > the > > > > same speed regardless of the observers velocity? > > > > > > Wavelength is one thing, velocity another. > > > > > > and compaired. Hubble found that the universe was expanding because the > > > light from other galaxies was red-shifted, meaning the bands in the > > Ah, another victim of that pesky Doppler effect. > > To make this post easier to understand I will use the example of sound. > > If you have air (all of the same pressure) and a sound source (say a > police siren) you will notice its sound being higher frequency when > nearing you and then fall to lower frequency when going away from you. > > Now sound speed in same-pressure air is constant. But we end up with > lower frequency (= longer wavelength). How this? Because the source is > moving in the time between producing the sound peaks. So that distance > is subtracted from (when nearing) or added to (when going away) the > wavelength of the sound and, if the movement is fast enough, that > shows up as an audible change in pitch. Unfortunately, sound is NOT a good example (I dont think). Mainly because the speed of sound IS relative to the speed of the observer. I find it very easy to understand the doppler effect as it relates to sound waves. However, the speed that the sound propagates past that observer changes according to the source/observer. Since you just said (or to be precise, Einstein said) that light speed is always constant, its only the frequency that changes, sound is not really the best example, because sound speed IS relative to observer etc. Light is a bit different...? > The same effect also happens with light (at much higher speeds, as the > frequency is a lot higher), making nearing objects blue-shift and > objects going away red-shift. But the actual (already discoloured) > light then travels to you runns at the constant light speed. Yeah, ok. But sound does NOT... thats the interesting bit about light I guess... Also im still a bit sketchy on how moving quickly away from a light source can cause that source's wavelength to appear changed when theres no propagation speed change... > > P.S: could you please improve 2 things in your posting style: > > 1. restrict the line lenghts to something around 70 characters. This > gets rid of them silly one word lines that appear as soon as your > post has been quoted, making it difficult to read and lengthening it > to double length and so increasing scrolling work for readers. my word wrap is set to 76 characters. If you want to tell me how to get Outlook Express to put a CRLF at the end of the line, if thats what your asking, then feel free... I'll try reducing it to 70 and see if that helps... > 2. could you when quoting others in reply posts write your replies > _beneath_ their stuff. This would be fitting with the social > convention of putting later stuff below, which leads to the > convention of reading from top to bottom. It would get rid of the > confusing order of parts of post 3,1,2,4 appearing in that order, > forcing the reader to jump up and down. It would also allow people to > put their replies to your posst direct with your writing, without > producing 3,4,1,2. Actually, I prefer the convention where if the reply message is short, it is quoted at the top, with the previous threads below. This saves a lot on scrolling time, especially with big threads with lots of little messages. If the message im about to send is long, then I put it at the bottom. If the thread gets big, then I think putting the reply at the top is actually superior in saving time since you no longer have to flip through pages of old messages. I dont quite see how this prevents people putting their replies in with my quoted message... The bit about getting them out of order is probably valid, but I dont really care. If people can't work out from the number of quote symbols how old that message is, then thats their problem... a little bit of thought should enlighten them. Jax ###### Reply-To: "Jax" From: "Jax" Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380A6B91.5BDB@not-here.net> <380A753D.BEA9D7D3@Home.com> <380AAB35.18E7B29B@mcn.org> <380AC0D0.6CB2@not-here.net> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com> <8_DT3.522$5W2.14846@news.clear.net.nz> <01bf2586$adbdb680$742267cf@default> <01bf2652$5b979de0$952267cf@default> Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? Lines: 21 Organization: l X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Message-ID: <9CfU3.842$5W2.21382@news.clear.net.nz> Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 02:08:44 +1300 NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.97.53.124 X-Complaints-To: abuse@clear.net.nz X-Trace: news.clear.net.nz 941721093 203.97.53.124 (Fri, 05 Nov 1999 02:11:33 NZDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 02:11:33 NZDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!newsfeed.icl.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!howland.erols.net!newspeer.monmouth.com!newsfeed.clear.net.nz!news.clear.net.nz.POSTED!not-for-mail Cheers. Its a bit easier to understand when its put like this. I guess what einstein was saying was that light has its own rules, and to assume its just like a very fast sound wave is incorrect... Jay wrote in message news:01bf2652$5b979de0$952267cf@default... > > > Jax wrote: > > I guess what your saying is that light the medium could propagate at the > > same speed, but to an observer the frequency of those peaks would change > > according to the speed of the source/viewer...? that makes a kind of > sense I > > suppose... > > That is the current theory, well backed-up by observations. ###### Reply-To: "Jax" From: "Jax" Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380A6B91.5BDB@not-here.net> <380A753D.BEA9D7D3@Home.com> <380AAB35.18E7B29B@mcn.org> <380AC0D0.6CB2@not-here.net> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com> <8_DT3.522$5W2.14846@news.clear.net.nz> <3820DCD2.6E62DFFF@privatei.com> Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? Lines: 41 Organization: l X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 02:13:51 +1300 NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.97.53.124 X-Complaints-To: abuse@clear.net.nz X-Trace: news.clear.net.nz 941721577 203.97.53.124 (Fri, 05 Nov 1999 02:19:37 NZDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 02:19:37 NZDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!isdnet!netnews.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!newsfeed.clear.net.nz!news.clear.net.nz.POSTED!not-for-mail hmm... Makes more sense like that. So your saying that even tho its on the outside surface of the big ball, it still rotates around its own axis once per second...? I think I could accept that... The Original Ken wrote in message news:3820DCD2.6E62DFFF@privatei.com... > No, not at all. Think about it. Imagine you have a big ball and a small ball > is stuck to the side of it. If you rotate the big ball once per second, the > small ball also rotates once per second. Now if while you are spinning the > ball, the small one breaks free (and if you are out in space at the time this > happens) then the small ball will drift out into space still spinning at one > revolution per second, same as the big ball. The moon of course didn't go > drifting out into space since it was attracted to the earth by gravity but this > had absolutely no effect on its already established rotation. > > Ken > > Jax wrote: > > > hmm, perhaps not, but if the moon was part of a chunk on the surface, then I > > think its almost certain it would have a different spin to earth... and even > > if a chunk spun off, I think its spin might possible be different due to the > > mass of the object or its diameter? Just a hunch, I could be wrong... > > > > > ###### Reply-To: "Jax" From: "Jax" Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380AAB35.18E7B29B@mcn.org> <380AC0D0.6CB2@not-here.net> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com> <8_DT3.522$5W2.14846@news.clear.net.nz> <01bf2586$adbdb680$742267cf@default> <6ubt9bbcoj.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <7BfU3.841$5W2.21484@news.clear.net.nz> <38219FAF.1B5C@not-here.net> Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? Lines: 57 Organization: l X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 07:12:27 +1300 NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.97.48.115 X-Complaints-To: abuse@clear.net.nz X-Trace: news.clear.net.nz 941739304 203.97.48.115 (Fri, 05 Nov 1999 07:15:04 NZDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 07:15:04 NZDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!naxos.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!newsfeed.eurocyber.net!newspump.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!newsfeed.clear.net.nz!news.clear.net.nz.POSTED!not-for-mail Cool... Thanks! Since its so far 1 for, 1 against, I'll change it back to 76 then. Besides, I was thinking that no matter WHAT its set to, once there gets to be a few >>>>> symbols, its going to cause those partial lines no matter what. Since 76 was just the default in Outlook Express, I may as well set it to that, that way hopefully at least OE users will be happy... Personally, It really doesn't worry me where they put their reply, but I personally prefer the top. I think it also depends a lot on the preference of the original couple of posters. If a whole lot of of the threads have been added at the bottom, i'll probably follow suit... unless perhaps its just a casual comment that I dont expect anyone to reply back too, in which case I might break convention again... hehe anything to piss em off ;-) Jax Janice wrote in message news:38219FAF.1B5C@not-here.net... > Jax wrote: > > > > > my word wrap is set to 76 characters. If you want to tell me how to get > > Outlook Express to put a CRLF at the end of the line, if thats what your > > asking, then feel free... I'll try reducing it to 70 and see if that > > helps... > > If you reduce to 70, though, when you reply to someone who's using a > wider margin, then THEIR quoted material will end up in broken lines. > So there will almost always be some of that. I just INCREASED my margin > to keep your quote from breaking up, so if someone with a smaller margin > than mine replies to this, it will all break up again. > > > Actually, I prefer the convention where if the reply message is short, it is > > quoted at the top, with the previous threads below. This saves a lot on > > scrolling time, especially with big threads with lots of little messages. > > I agree - sometimes adding new material at the top is better, so I don't > have to scroll through a bunch of stuff I've already read to see the new > stuff. Different newsgroups have different conventions. I don't think > that it's a big deal either way unless it's a technical support group, > where following the thread precisely may be important. ###### Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!usenet From: Neil Franklin Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? Date: 04 Nov 1999 21:51:03 +0100 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 70 Sender: neil@chonsp.franklin.ch Message-ID: <6u7ljy0ymg.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380A6B91.5BDB@not-here.net> <380A753D.BEA9D7D3@Home.com> <380AAB35.18E7B29B@mcn.org> <380AC0D0.6CB2@not-here.net> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com> <8_DT3.522$5W2.14846@news.clear.net.nz> <01bf2586$adbdb680$742267cf@default> <6ubt9bbcoj.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <7BfU3.841$5W2.21484@news.clear.net.nz> <38219FAF.1B5C@not-here.net> X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 Janice writes: > > > my word wrap is set to 76 characters. If you want to tell me how to get > > Outlook Express Autch. Oh, you are an Out-of-luck victim. My condolencies. > > to put a CRLF at the end of the line, if thats what your That is what I was talking about, or rather putting the CRLF in a few charcters earlier. > > asking, then feel free... I'll try reducing it to 70 and see if that > > helps... > > If you reduce to 70, though, when you reply to someone who's using a > wider margin, then THEIR quoted material will end up in broken > lines. Hmmm? Will it not take an "70 for new lines, and leave quoted ones unbroken"? That is what this particular newsreader (GNUS) does. > So there will almost always be some of that. I just INCREASED my margin > to keep your quote from breaking up, A truly broken newsreader. Just what one has come to expect from MS. > so if someone with a smaller margin > than mine replies to this, it will all break up again. I have a small margin (as clearly visible). But it accepts quoted lines to be longer, on the assumption that noting will be quoted often enough to reach 80 lines. > > Actually, I prefer the convention where if the reply message is short, it is > > quoted at the top, with the previous threads below. This saves a lot on > > scrolling time, especially with big threads with lots of little messages. > > I agree - sometimes adding new material at the top is better, so I don't > have to scroll through a bunch of stuff I've already read to see the new > stuff. Well, if the quotes are that long, then complain to the writer to cut them a bit shorter. Quotes really are only intended to help the reader recall the message you are replying to. Which is sensibly done before adding to it. And having to first scroll down to get that and then back up is a lot more work (as down-scrolling is usually by simply pressing space). Reading a message without knowing where it belongs and then finding out where and then having to mentally reread to digest is ideal to get confused. > Different newsgroups have different conventions. I don't think > that it's a big deal either way unless it's a technical support group, > where following the thread precisely may be important. Precision helps - everywhere in life. And if something is worth doing, why do it any less than your best? -- Neil Franklin, neil@franklin.ch.remove http://neil.franklin.ch/ ###### From: "Jay" Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? Date: 5 Nov 1999 02:43:21 GMT Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Lines: 13 Message-ID: <01bf2737$b35463c0$7f2267cf@default> References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380A753D.BEA9D7D3@Home.com> <380AAB35.18E7B29B@mcn.org> <380AC0D0.6CB2@not-here.net> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com> <8_DT3.522$5W2.14846@news.clear.net.nz> <01bf2586$adbdb680$742267cf@default> <6ubt9bbcoj.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <7BfU3.841$5W2.21484@news.clear.net.nz> NNTP-Posting-Host: async127.starlinx.com X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1161 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!enews.sgi.com!pln-w!spln!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!enews1 Jax wrote: > Also im still a bit sketchy on how moving quickly away from a light > source can cause that source's wavelength to appear changed when theres no > propagation speed change... Wavelengths stretch or compress in accordance with one's relative motion to the source. However, the speed of light remains the same and time and space "stretch or compress" to compensate. ###### From: "Jay" Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? Date: 5 Nov 1999 23:43:25 GMT Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Lines: 17 Message-ID: <01bf27e7$bb3981a0$ac2267cf@default> References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380AC0D0.6CB2@not-here.net> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com> <8_DT3.522$5W2.14846@news.clear.net.nz> <01bf2586$adbdb680$742267cf@default> <6ubt9bbcoj.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <7BfU3.841$5W2.21484@news.clear.net.nz> <01bf2737$b35463c0$7f2267cf@default> NNTP-Posting-Host: async172.starlinx.com X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1161 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!newspeer.te.net!news.indigo.ie!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!pln-e!spln!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!enews3 Jax wrote: > So its the time and space stretching and compressing that actually causes > the wavelength shift? I say this because I can totally understand wavelength > shifts in sound, but light seems to have slightly different rules. No. Although wavelengths happen in space and time, they appear compressed or stretched at very low speeds relative to the speed of light itself, which is a separate aspect. All the really weird effects of relativity theory on time and space happen at speeds close the the speed of light. However, I am close to my limits of understanding of such issues, so I am afraid someone else will have to start answering you if you keep asking such interesting questions. : ) ###### Reply-To: "Jax" From: "Jax" Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380AAB35.18E7B29B@mcn.org> <380AC0D0.6CB2@not-here.net> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com> <8_DT3.522$5W2.14846@news.clear.net.nz> <01bf2586$adbdb680$742267cf@default> <6ubt9bbcoj.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <7BfU3.841$5W2.21484@news.clear.net.nz> <01bf2737$b35463c0$7f2267cf@default> Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? Lines: 22 Organization: l X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 00:59:52 +1300 NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.97.53.217 X-Complaints-To: abuse@clear.net.nz X-Trace: news.clear.net.nz 941803353 203.97.53.217 (Sat, 06 Nov 1999 01:02:33 NZDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 01:02:33 NZDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!newspump.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!newsfeed.clear.net.nz!news.clear.net.nz.POSTED!not-for-mail So its the time and space stretching and compressing that actually causes the wavelength shift? I say this because I can totally understand wavelength shifts in sound, but light seems to have slightly different rules. Jay wrote in message news:01bf2737$b35463c0$7f2267cf@default... > > > Jax wrote: > > Also im still a bit sketchy on how moving quickly away from a light > > source can cause that source's wavelength to appear changed when theres > no > > propagation speed change... > > Wavelengths stretch or compress in accordance with one's relative motion to > the source. However, the speed of light remains the same and time and > space "stretch or compress" to compensate. > > ###### Reply-To: "Jax" From: "Jax" Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com> <8_DT3.522$5W2.14846@news.clear.net.nz> <01bf2586$adbdb680$742267cf@default> <6ubt9bbcoj.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <7BfU3.841$5W2.21484@news.clear.net.nz> <01bf2737$b35463c0$7f2267cf@default> <01bf27e7$bb3981a0$ac2267cf@default > Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? Lines: 29 Organization: l X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Message-ID: <%_fV3.1165$5W2.28423@news.clear.net.nz> Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 02:29:34 +1300 NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.167.242.103 X-Complaints-To: abuse@clear.net.nz X-Trace: news.clear.net.nz 941984827 203.167.242.103 (Mon, 08 Nov 1999 03:27:07 NZDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 03:27:07 NZDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!newspump.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!newsfeed.clear.net.nz!news.clear.net.nz.POSTED!not-for-mail Nope I think ive got it sussed now, at least as in a form that makes sense to me... cheers! I like to question things, because the hippy dad said in an episode of Dharma & Greg (eminent source) "we should protest everything, even our own beliefs" ;_) Jay wrote in message news:01bf27e7$bb3981a0$ac2267cf@default... > > > Jax wrote: > > So its the time and space stretching and compressing that actually causes > > the wavelength shift? I say this because I can totally understand > wavelength > > shifts in sound, but light seems to have slightly different rules. > > No. Although wavelengths happen in space and time, they appear compressed > or stretched at very low speeds relative to the speed of light itself, > which is a separate aspect. All the really weird effects of relativity > theory on time and space happen at speeds close the the speed of light. > > However, I am close to my limits of understanding of such issues, so I am > afraid someone else will have to start answering you if you keep asking > such interesting questions. : ) > ###### From: Lenny Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 21:55:42 +1300 Organization: The Internet Group Ltd Lines: 28 Message-ID: <382A848D.118B697@ihug.co.nz> References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com> <8_DT3.522$5W2.14846@news.clear.net.nz> <01bf2586$adbdb680$742267cf@default> <6ubt9bbcoj.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <7BfU3.841$5W2.21484@news.clear.net.nz> <01bf2737$b35463c0$7f2267cf@default> NNTP-Posting-Host: p313-tnt5.akl.ihug.co.nz Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news-fra1.dfn.de!news-fra.maz.net!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!ihug.co.nz!not-for-mail If you want to have a bash at really understanding the rules of light, check out QED, by Richard Feynman. Jax wrote: > So its the time and space stretching and compressing that actually causes > the wavelength shift? I say this because I can totally understand wavelength > shifts in sound, but light seems to have slightly different rules. > > Jay wrote in message > news:01bf2737$b35463c0$7f2267cf@default... > > > > > > Jax wrote: > > > Also im still a bit sketchy on how moving quickly away from a light > > > source can cause that source's wavelength to appear changed when theres > > no > > > propagation speed change... > > > > Wavelengths stretch or compress in accordance with one's relative motion > to > > the source. However, the speed of light remains the same and time and > > space "stretch or compress" to compensate. > > > > ###### Reply-To: "Jax" From: "Jax" Newsgroups: alt.dreams.lucid,alt.out-of-body References: <8mtO3.13510$0G2.502195@typ12.nn.bcandid.com> <380AC4BE.491F09E3@mcn.org> <380CB350.17DEC381@algonet.se> <380CC409.9BD@not-here.net> <380DFEBE.3593572B@algonet.se> <380E260D.2DE7@not-here.net> <380F5E7A.B1A447@algonet.se> <380F9EAE.7EC5@not-here.net> <3810B66F.53E1DAA5@algonet.se> <3810E901.1C40@not-here.net> <3811E6F2.AA18DD20@algonet.se> <3811F6A5.58A2@not-here.net> <38123EE6.AC203FB9@Home.com> <01bf1dae$90a4d5e0$722267cf@default> <38126515.545B3A9E@Home.com> <1TEQ3.836$qZ.18027@news.clear.net.nz> <6uu2nd3nrq.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <381C78EA.CA6651C9@privatei.com> <8_DT3.522$5W2.14846@news.clear.net.nz> <01bf2586$adbdb680$742267cf@default> <6ubt9bbcoj.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <7BfU3.841$5W2.21484@news.clear.net.nz> <01bf2737$b35463c0$7f2267cf@default> <382A848D.118B697@ihug.co.nz> Subject: Re: Moon rotation, was Re: A black cloud just before starting dreams? Lines: 40 Organization: l X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Message-ID: <1vAW3.1811$5W2.39737@news.clear.net.nz> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 03:38:22 +1300 NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.97.54.169 X-Complaints-To: abuse@clear.net.nz X-Trace: news.clear.net.nz 942330941 203.97.54.169 (Fri, 12 Nov 1999 03:35:41 NZDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 03:35:41 NZDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!isdnet!newspump.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!newsfeed.clear.net.nz!news.clear.net.nz.POSTED!not-for-mail Sounds interesting, but since im totally skint at this point of time, I'll have to give it a rain check for a while... cheers for the lead tho. Lenny wrote in message news:382A848D.118B697@ihug.co.nz... > If you want to have a bash at really understanding the rules of light, check out > QED, by Richard Feynman. > > > > Jax wrote: > > > So its the time and space stretching and compressing that actually causes > > the wavelength shift? I say this because I can totally understand wavelength > > shifts in sound, but light seems to have slightly different rules. > > > > Jay wrote in message > > news:01bf2737$b35463c0$7f2267cf@default... > > > > > > > > > Jax wrote: > > > > Also im still a bit sketchy on how moving quickly away from a light > > > > source can cause that source's wavelength to appear changed when theres > > > no > > > > propagation speed change... > > > > > > Wavelengths stretch or compress in accordance with one's relative motion > > to > > > the source. However, the speed of light remains the same and time and > > > space "stretch or compress" to compensate. > > > > > > >