studiot

Thanks guys, I will try out your ideas and report back. A correction, the keyboard has a normal line of numberers above the querty line. It just has no separate number pad. Sorry for mixing up pad and board. Curioser and curioser. I tried Sensei's safe mode suggestion. This has 3 users, Studiot, the former Owner and the built in administrator. It is the studiot account that is duff, the keyboard operates normally on the other two, both in safe and normal modes. The studiot account misbehaves as shown in both safe and normal modes.

This laptop has no numeric keyboard. It is an Acer Travelmate 4051 LMi. Here is a sceenshot of typing the top letter line with both the laptop and an external usb keyboard connected. The usb kb. is OK

Actually, you are right. I did miss your point, having read it, again. Sorry about that. Do you have links for this claim, of yours? I would be very interested in it. Sure, though most of my material lies in published and vetted hard copy, not ephemeral links. First and foremost, when we calculate a 'quantum' of something it is a something with a classical definition. Most usually, that something is Energy. But not any old energy. Quantum theory does not restrict 'any old energy' to specific values, say 1 unit or 2 units , but never 1.5 or 1.3 or 1.86742 units. What is does do is make such a restriction for a specific system. And of course, the energy is the same ML2T-2 quantity that appears in 'classical' theory. We still have to multiply a classical force by a classical distance to obtain it. So when we analyse the quantum mechanics of vibration of the carbon dioxide molecule to obtain its infra red spectrum we still consider little balls on springs. The point is that the solutions have special characteristics at certain frequencies, leading to 'quantisation' of response. We can even introduce Relativity and calculate a relativistic Doppler shift due to the oscillation of the little balls about a mean centre of mass. Again consider Boltzman, Statistical Mechanics, the Partition theorem and classical Thermodynamics. They all offer analysis of a system in standard states, with fixed transition energies in terms of the distribution of the energy carriers in the system throughout those states. Does that sound at all like QM to you?

But what is this news... even though its laser it talks about photons and speeds in vacume: sent a pulse of laser light through cesium vapor so quickly that it left the chamber before it had even finished entering. The pulse traveled 310 times the distance it would have covered if the chamber had contained a vacuum. Researchers say it is the most convincing demonstration yet that the speed of light — supposedly an ironclad rule of nature — can be pushed beyond known boundaries, at least under certain laboratory circumstances. “This effect cannot be used to send information back in time,” said Lijun Wang, a researcher with the private NEC Institute. “However, our experiment does show that the generally held misconception that ‘nothing can travel faster than the speed of light’ is wrong.” The results were published in Thursday’s issue of the journal Nature. What does this have to do with my post that you quoted? Nothing as far as I can see. @Strange. I wonder if this fixation with Pi is to do with the fact that 4Pi appears in many formulae where a volume integral is taken ? Yes I often take advantage of the fact that Pi is very nearly the square root of 10 when knocking out quick back of envelope estimates of something. Phi is often used as the golden ratio symbol by numerologists and other mystics from La La Land.

How can I take your comments seriously when you fail to display even primary school understanding about percentages. You cannot add two different things and obtain a valid % of anything like that combination.

I have gained an old Acer travelmate laptop that has some useful stuff on it. But I think the previous owner may have used it with a plug in keyboard. The problem is that most of the keys present the correct letters when pressed but some are off the wall. For instance the 'o' appears as a 6. The microsoft onscreen keyboard works just fine, but is cumbersome. Device manager (windows XP) reports that there is a standard 101/102 keyboard that is 'working fine' No other keyboard is shown. I uninstalled it and let it find and reinstall the keyboard, but the problem remains. Any suggestions welcome.

You could look into "The Catt Anomaly" I don't know that has been satisfactorilly resolved yet. https://www.google.co.uk/search?ei=H1ICXKj_M8a_gQajtZfIBg&q=catt+anomaly&oq=catt+anomaly&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0j0i22i30.62502.65526..65950...0.0..0.114.1076.9j3......0....1..gws-wiz.......0i67j0i131j0i131i67j0i10.AZd5yR9VUSs

Unfortunately you have entirely missed my point

This was rather confusing. I am also a bit confused between your thread and conjuror's thread about a similar matter and may have mixed them up a bit. Anyway you haven't answered my question and my development was meant eventually to show why the postulates of SR are necessary. It did not start with them, and in fact it specifically excluded them. So it would eventually answer your questions, but since you don't seem to want to pursue it never mind.

Sorry this one does not come out so well due to teh coloured background.

All I was really observing is that air is not an isotropic medium because of gravity as the pressure drops with height.

If you want to study this stuff, read this preface to Computability and logic by Boolos and Jeffrey It will give you a roadmap or guide of what to look for.

Q1 1, theoretically yes. Q2 You don't need gravity for this to happen, and it also happens horizontally with vehicles, whose engine sound chages as it approaches, passes and then recedes. Elevators tend to make broad band noise, not fixed frequency engine noise. Q3 Why should it? I think that in air, as in water, thermal effects that cause rays of sound to adopt curved paths will be orders of magnitude greater than any gravitational effect. https://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/demos/refract/refract.html

Like, #String Junky, I'm not convinced it's encryption type ransomware. Can you post a screenshot? Have you found any documents now unavailable or gobbdegook? If you look at the files in 'explorer' is there a proliferation of shortcuts? If not then it is probably an old fashioned fake anti virus which can be salvaged without reinstallation. This type of nusiance often acts as a gateway for spyware (e.g. Babylon) which follows shoppers around the net and therefore often targets women. This type does not want to lock your computer, it want to sell your shopping and browsing habits to others, and although it seems clean on your own account, can monitor all accounts on the computer. So, following cleaning, a search and destroy also need to be made for this rubbish.

Yes wave transmission is more complicated (I try to use the word complicated in preference to complex for mathematical association reasons). Particularly as and when you introduce Relativity into the equations of motion (as Dirac's equation is more complicated than Schrodinger's). However there is no medium induced Doppler effect, the effect of the medium was an off topic aside. Nonlinearity of the medium is another complication, as is the nature and characteristic of the signal itself.

(Bold by me). I'll give it a try... I will repeat arguments already given, but maybe it helps to see the different causes of redshift all together in comparison. Strange already said that in the case of light there are more possible causes of redshift. So I have no idea why there should be only one cause for redshift. (There is of course just one cause for cosmological redshift.) Doppler effect when source and observer are moving away from each other light 'climbing' out of a gravity field expanding space I'd like to add to your Doppler list. We also have what is known as The Thermal Doppler Effect, whre the observer is at rest in rest frame, but the source oscillates in that frame. We have a further type of Doppler called the transverse Doppler effect in Special Relativity, due to the viewing angle of the observer, even when the relative velocity is zero. Both of these have been experimentally confirmed. Following on from the discussion about the influence of transmission medium it is important to distinguish between light, where the speed is fixed, and other waves, where the speed is variable. A good example of the variable speed is the so called helium speech experienced by divers breathing specialist atmospheres, due to the change of density and therefore speed in the medium.

Every observer would measure the photon to be at c. None would travel with the photon. Have you never heard of a hypothetical thought experiment? If not then just calculate (do the transformation - you do dance?) from the photon's point of view.

Metals normally have a positive temperature ceofficient, semiconductors a negative one but may be doped to be different. Were the explanations enough or would you like more? Perhaps including some simple mathematics.

Surely the cosmological redshit is only an apparent 'loss of energy' due to the observer (us). A different observer would see a differnt 'loss' and one travelling with the photon would see none at all. Should we not be considering conservation of the energy-momentum four vector here?

?

I think it kinda depends upon your reactants. You need a solution for the formation of the intermediate iminium ion. When you are looking at the literature the modern term for Schiff Base is imine.

I'm glad to hear your are looking for ways to test out your hypotheses. Early successes of the Quantum Theory was the explanation of work functions and spectroscopic phenomena and prediction of the numeric data. Since these are known and yours is a quantum type hypothesis, perhaps you could start here and see if you can calculate the correct values? As to the link between classical and quantum theory, there is no clear boundary but a smooth merging from one into the other. Quantisation arises naturally out of the solution of many classical physical equations, as does an uncertaintly principle.

You are completely right of course, which makes me wrong. Thank you for the correction. +1 But your comment goes further since it raises the important fact that the members of the power set are sets, not the original members of the original set. Perhaps you would like to comment further ?

So glad you got to it quickly. Keep at it.

Glad you saw it that way. Pure set theory is not my prime area, but straight thinking certainly is, which is why I said I am not sure. I am a great fan of Russell. Russell introduced type theory to cope with/get around sets which were to ornery to fit standard set theory and kept throwing up paradoxes. So I wondered if there was an underlying paradox similar to the "An all powerful God can set himself the task of finding a task he cannot perform." for an all knowing God. If wtf is in a good mood perhaps he might have something to say here. I know that terminology has moved on in this subject.