



Results 31 to 45 of 86
-
23rd December 2010, 11:35 AM #31
-
23rd December 2010, 11:46 AM #32
-
23rd December 2010, 12:27 PM #33
some excellent ideas
exactly what i woudl expect in this section of the forum !
Reading and understanding also does not seem to necessarily have close correlation
Steve, if you want to prove me wrong, please explain how can the formula that describes the Snell's law be resolved if both the angle of refraction is dependant on the speed and at the same time the speed is dependant on the angle of refraction.
For extra difficulty, you explanation is not allowed to refer to your training, past or current experiences, number of thousands of musical instruments that you have worked on, your thoughts on my knowledge or character or introduce any additional factors or coefficients into the formula.
BTW what is wrong with wanting to have the last word.
If only Steve would go away and let me have the last word ...
but then some of you lot would come in just to spoil it for meBranko
---------------------------------------------------
Nothing to see here, move on !
-
23rd December 2010, 12:32 PM #34
Cool, so of all the issues and topics, you want to run with snells law, Im not going to throw theorys out there but physically prove that what I say is correct.
However I am curious as the issues you had in the original topic was magnets / magnetic fields / electro magnetic fields / eddy currents and so forth, snells law is something I said on my last post on the way out and that was in reference to the fact that sound moves at different speeds within a material which via pm you disagreed,,that point where the different speeds occur can be measured with the formula in snells law.. So lets clarify what it is in snells law you want me to prove to you, regarding dodgy science
Very good, I havent exercised my brain muscles for a while, but I can feel a mental flexing happening
Now it may take a day to prove as I will need to do a test example and show pictures of defined results, and I have about 400 musical instrument in at the moment that Im repairing as well
-
23rd December 2010, 01:00 PM #35
-
23rd December 2010, 04:09 PM #36
Youve been online for a while, Im surprised you havent clarified what it is that I earlier referred to in snells law that is dodgy, rather you have posted an extract of a definition of snells law and then simply reversed the statement. Its not about proving you wrong, its about clarifing as you put it good science bad science and twaddle and the need as you point out at the start of this thread to call people on any said notions
-
23rd December 2010, 04:29 PM #37
Your comment "you have not missed one opportunity to point out that you are luthier," is definetly over-exaggerated, I am but a humble musical instrument repairer.
However my history is slightly different, lets identify there are qualifications and certifications, qualified for me means I have undertaken a course of study at a recognised institution like universitys etc, certification means Ive been endorsed by a governing body to carry out that qualification in a commercial aspect. Ive worked my whole life and have been fortunate enough to have some interesting jobs from education that I recieved through my life
# First Im a qualified and certified private investigator (means I investigate false and misleading information)
# Secomd Im a qualified and Certified Aircraft mechanical engineer
# Im also a Qualified and Certified inspector of Aircraft for Casa - civiil aviation safety authority of australia
# Im also a qualified and certified Jet engine mechanic
I carry other qualifications and certifications but they are not relevant to the topic at hand..
How ever you will note I only refer to myself as a musical instrument repairer, thats my hobby that became a business that Im passionate about and now carry out on a commercial scale...
Im also very passionate about wood, hence why I post on this forum, Ive built most of my furniture at home and I build guitars and other items
-
23rd December 2010, 06:04 PM #38
-
23rd December 2010, 06:18 PM #39
Yes sadly my moral high ground is rarely above the ten year floodplain. That's why it pays to invest in a pair of waders. Also helps when you need to wade through some of the BS that is bandied about
"I don't practice what I preach because I'm not the kind of person I'm preaching to."
-
24th December 2010, 01:01 AM #40
I actually did. That was the first thing that i pulled you up on it. If you go back to the PMs that i sent you I quite specifically stated that
a) contrary to your post, a speed of a wave through a material is not affected by an angle the wave is introduced into the material
b) snell's law specifies that a refraction angle will depend on a ratio of speeds between the two materials (more specificalle a ration of sines or two angles (of incidence and of refraction) is directly proportional to the ration of speeds of the said wave in the exiting material and entering material). It does not specify the speed in the entered material as a function of the entry angle.
you have stated:
I am asking you to demonstrate ( either theoretically, experimentally or empirically ) that speed of a wave (sound, light ...) though a homogeneous material can be varied by the angle of entry of that wave into that material.
I also stated that the only way that the speed of a wave could depend on the an angle of travel is if the density of the material varies with the direction away from the point of entry. In that case the speed is not really a function of an angle but of the density of the material. The angle is just an incidental factor.
I hope that this is a clear enough statement.Branko
---------------------------------------------------
Nothing to see here, move on !
-
24th December 2010, 01:20 AM #41
You really try to manipulate it and confuse it dont you, I notice your now adding little waivers, like it cant be different unless .....
So simply put, the discussion on hand is that you believe a sound wave travels at only one speed *velocity* within a material. Is that correct. Anyone that believes otherwise is providing dodgy science as you put it and should be debunked accordingly,
and if that doesnt work for you, we will start another thread again..
-
24th December 2010, 08:14 AM #42
One good indicator that two people are letting their emotions take over a discussion is when spelling and grammar start to degenerate. It's the unfortunate downside of typing furiously with steam coming out your collar.
Whatever note you blow youre never more than a semitone away from the correct one....(Miles Davis)
-
24th December 2010, 08:50 AM #43
-
24th December 2010, 09:25 AM #44
-
24th December 2010, 11:11 AM #45
Ive always been bad at english. No steaming happening at this end, Im just letting him dig a deeper hole as we go, Im actually finding it amusing in a way, Getting ready to SQUAT that fly
Similar Threads
-
The Heaviest Element Known to Science
By watson in forum JOKESReplies: 2Last Post: 25th January 2009, 11:57 PM -
Breaktrough in Science
By Breslauer in forum JOKESReplies: 11Last Post: 16th December 2008, 02:56 PM -
Science of Cats & Buttered Bread
By Eastie in forum JOKESReplies: 3Last Post: 9th November 2002, 11:31 AM
Bookmarks