Slashdot Mirror

Maxwell's equations force E=0 inside perfect conductors, which means that vacuum fluctuations with a half-wavelength longer than the separation between the plates can't exist between the plates.

By the way: If you are going to refer to Maxwell's equations, you should use caution. Because often what are referred to as "Maxwell's Equations" are actually just Maxwell's simplifications of Heaviside's and Hamilton's quaternion equations, with introductions of arbitrary "constants" to cancel out inconveniences, much like Einstein's "cosmological constant". There is a good deal of modern evidence that Maxwell's attempt to simplify things may have been wishful thinking, and that Heaviside and Hamilton had it right all along. We rely much on Maxwell, but his conclusions are assumptions. Not only are they not proven, there is significant counter-evidence. [Jane Q. Public]

Good grief. Electric fields are zero in perfect conductors. I explain this fact to freshman physics students by asking: what would happen if we tried to place an electric field across a conductor? Electrons would move opposite the field, and positive electron holes would move with the electric field, exactly enough to cancel out the original field inside the conductor. Better conductors cancel out faster, so electric fields are zero in perfect conductors.

Mentioning that this fact can be derived from Maxwell's equations is meant to be helpful, because all physics students should be familiar with the first theory that emerged in a Lorentz-invariant form. In other words, Maxwell's equations were consistent with special relativity before relativity even existed. They're the basis of all radio equipment, and the correspondence principle checks that quantum electrodynamics (one of the most accurate theories in history) is identical to Maxwell's equations for large systems. If your reaction to hearing "Maxwell's equations" is to spray chaff about quaternions, you'll be disappointed to find that core classes based on junior-level Griffiths and graduate-level Jackson are almost exclusively about Maxwell's equations.

Quaternion notation is useful when desribing 3D rotations, but it's not used in electrodynamics because vector notation is more intuitive. That doesn't stop crackpots from insisting that Maxwell's equations are wishful thinking.

Physicists use Maxwell's vector equations despite the fact that we're well aware of quaternion notation. John Baez even wrote a paper on octonians. As Baez quips, if the noncommutative quaternions are like a shunned eccentric cousin, then the nonassociative octonians are like the crazy old uncle nobody lets out of the attic.

In fact, look at p542 of Griffiths 3rd edition: "Equation 12.136 combines our previous results into a single 4-vector equation-- it represents the most elegant (and the simplest) formulation of Maxwell's equations."

Page 555 of

>>As hard as it is to get a law onto the books, it's almost impossible to get a law off the books

Robert Heinlein's suggestion from "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" kind of resonates here:

“I note one proposal to make this Congress a two-house body. Excellent -- the more impediments to legislation the better. But, instead of following tradition, I suggest one house of legislators, another whose single duty is to repeal laws. Let the legislators pass laws only with a two-thirds majority... while the repealers are able to cancel any law through a mere one-third minority. Preposterous? Think about it. If a bill is so poor that it cannot command two-thirds of your consents, is it not likely that it would make a poor law? And if a law is disliked by as many as one-third is it not likely that you would be better off without it?”

( http://www.halexandria.org/dward272.htm )

...the gross expansion of a fiat currency...

Emphasized that for you.

RTFA The Radiation Poisoning Of America. It's based on scientific research done by several reputable scientists and research institutes. Check the NOTES section for a complete list of references.

If you still believe RF radiation is completely harmless within FCC approved exposure limits, consider this:

Current FCC exposure limit in the US:
580 microW / cm^2 = 5.8 W/m^2

Current exposure limits in Russia for the 0.3-178.4 GHz frequency band (as reported by a friend of mine from Russia who works as a telecommunications engineer on cell phone towers and other types of RF equipment):
0.1 W/m^2 - for 24 hours at the most
0.1-1 W/m^2 - for no more than 2 hours
1-10 W/m^2 - for no more than 10 minutes

You may also want to know why Microwave ovens were banned in Russia in 1976 and read Dr. Mercola's Ten Reasons to Throw out your Microwave Oven.

For even more information check Wireless Networks (Wi-Fi): Consumer Health and Safety Advice.

There you go, scientific evidence as requested.

No, but enforcing income tax is illegal - please read about Joe(Joseph) Banister, Larken Rose, and House Resolution 2525:

http://www.halexandria.org/dward295.htm
http://www.halexandria.org/dward294.htm
http://www.halexandria.org/dward293.htm
http://www.rense.com/general66/irstrial.htm
http://www.royalrife.com/banister.html
http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPLawsuit/Update2005 -06-28.htm
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTI CLE_ID=44956

No, but enforcing income tax is illegal - please read about Joe(Joseph) Banister, Larken Rose, and House Resolution 2525:

http://www.halexandria.org/dward295.htm
http://www.halexandria.org/dward294.htm
http://www.halexandria.org/dward293.htm
http://www.rense.com/general66/irstrial.htm
http://www.royalrife.com/banister.html
http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPLawsuit/Update2005 -06-28.htm
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTI CLE_ID=44956

No, but enforcing income tax is illegal - please read about Joe(Joseph) Banister, Larken Rose, and House Resolution 2525:

http://www.halexandria.org/dward295.htm
http://www.halexandria.org/dward294.htm
http://www.halexandria.org/dward293.htm
http://www.rense.com/general66/irstrial.htm
http://www.royalrife.com/banister.html
http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPLawsuit/Update2005 -06-28.htm
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTI CLE_ID=44956

Whenever topics like this come up all the libertarians, fascist/corporatists and foaming-at-the-mouth capitalists come out of the woodwork to say that "anybody can make it in America!" even though none of them have been poor, black, suffering from disease and fleeing from hurricanes while still succeeding in business. Hey, I like kool-aid, too, but this is total horseshit. Let me be absolutely clear:

THE RICH "CREATE" POVERTY. Clear enough? Without rich people actively trying to fuck over poor people we wouldn't have the income disparity that we presently have. To see it in action, all you have to do is look at the Republican party and their collaborators in big business. They try their best to cut taxes for the rich and slash spending on social programs, no matter what the human cost. The Democrats help by increasing federal spending to obscene levels thereby necessitating increased taxation. We get fucked from both ends, like a double-sided dildo.

As amusing as it is to read white-bread, middle-class slashdotters talking about how easy it is for anybody in America to become a captain of industry, I feel compelled to take a shit on your Capitalism Cake. Fascism is alive and well in this country, which should be no surprise to anyone who knows what Fascism is: Corporatism. Basically, it's the merger of the state and big business. Fascism is the governmental system that is most favorable to business, bar none. Big Business is fascist not because they believe in Hitler's aryan fantasies but because they stand to gain from a government hopelessly devoted to improving market conditions for greedy multinationals.

The income gap is not a new thing because greed is as old as humanity. There is no such thing as being "rich enough." There is only MORE. More money, more power, more disparity. And how do you really know that you're rich unless somebody else is poor? How can you really enjoy being wealthy unless you have servants? The rich mindset is dead set on creating inequity because the rich benefit from it, and like I said, there is no limit to their desires.

This is aided, abetted and made possible by the Federal Reserve System. Each year the Fed increases the money supply, and each year money becomes worth less and less. That's the problem with fiat currency. Since it's not backed by gold the dollar bill has no intrinsic worth. It is just paper. Since it's just paper/electrons it can be created with a flick of the wrist. And so it is. When that money is created, who gets it? You? Does the government/private industry send you a check each year to account for inflation? No, the money is simply stolen from you by those who create it: The bankers. Bankers are the Kings of Capitalism. They are the new aristocracy, the ruling class that maintains control with an iron fist. They control the corporations and our government.

But this system, which appears impossibly strong from the outside, is actually rotting from within. Things are falling apart. If there was a run on the banks our economy would collapse into a pit that would make the Great Depression look like a tea party. That's because of the deposits vs. cash-on-hand ratio. Banks are able to create money simply by making loans. How? Well, they don't really have your money in the vault, you know. For each dollar you put in your savings account the bank is able to lend 10 dollars out because bankers have figured out that they only need to keep 10% of their total deposits on hand at any given time. (I'd like to have a 9x or 10x multiplier on my wealth. Maybe I should start a bank and screw you people over! It's the American way!) The Fed backs them in case of a run, but they don't have the money either. The money doesn't exist. It's imaginary. It's not backed by anything

LOL or cry in silence, it doesn't matter to me which you do. Executive Orders are not fluff or nonsense and are enforced even when they contravene the Constitution. You should read one or two before you pooh pooh them as impotent foolishness. And how do you expect anyone to take seriously your link to a crackpot website? Did you know what kind of "fluffy nonsense" that site contains, or did you find that particular page in Google and so accept it as gospel truth?

Lol...I'm afraid the men who created the system of checks and balances didn't have anything to do with the abomination that is executive orders. Perhaps a little history on the subject is in order.

Whether we should use a fiat currency (so that we can print money at-will) or a currency backed by something tangible (read: gold) is more a matter of opinion, the latter of which is often-touted by gold bugs and libertarians. Bear in mind that we used to be on the Gold Standard until Richard Nixon took us off of it in (IIRC) 1969...

Actually, the gold standard was replaced by the "gold exchange standard" shortly after WWI. The assorted participants of WWI had serious difficulties financing their efforts, and Britain went entirely off of the gold standard during the war in order to finance its WWI operations. Shortly after the war, in 1922, the Conference of Genoa (http://www.halexandria.org/dward304.htm) set the standard by which the U.S. dollar and British pound sterling were used as reserves alongside gold and silver, independent of respective issuer's reserves.

If you look at an inflation in the decade surrounding WWI (use the claculator here: http://www.bls.gov/bls/inflation.htm) you'll see that there was an enormous jump just after WWI, as the governments of America and Europe attempted to adjust to the huge debts they ran up during that period. This was the beginning of the end of a true gold standard in America, and even the gold exchange standard did not last -- in 1933 FDR made it impossible for Americans to redeem their currency and illegal for them to hold gold bullion over $100 in value. By the time Nixon "took us off the gold standard" in 1971 we had already been off of anything like an actual gold standard for decades. It was as much a token gesture as Ford's repeal of FDR's XO banning gold ownership.