booker

OK, a frame of reference of velocity c isn't inertial. Why is this a problem, other than that others get real upset about it?

What invalidates it?

The OP's distrust of waves pretty much sums-up Borh's Copenhagen theory of quantum mechanics. No objective reality it attached to probability amplitued, but only to the values measured. This is made evident in his answer to the EPR paper, "Can Quantum Mechanics be Considered Complete?", or some title close to it. On the other hand he wants to replace them with objective particles... This doesn't seem to work at all, but then again Einstein seems to have advocated them.

The speed of time can be purchased on Ebay.

Then do the math yourself taking v-->c, or read about it. Singular solutions in one coordinate chart are not singular in another. If you want more nonsense, in your words, consider an observer over your local event horizon. Surely we can take limits, or we can limit our discussion to physics without calculus

Well, they have the same units. A couple is independent of the choice of origin. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Couple_(mechanics)

Doh!

Good catch, big314mp! I hadn't thougth of flipping the fan over on the shaft with the motor turning the other way. It turns the usual tractor fan into a pusher fan. This is what you were thinking, right?

This is nonsense. That's pretty much it. Let's say you were to somehow travel unaccelerated, along with the peak of a lightwave. From source to destination no time will have elapsed. No distance will have been covered. Since you are interested in this sort of thing, you might want to consider what two observers would have to say about spacetime from the perspective of two different wave crests. Do they perceive that they are cojacent to each other, a finite distance away, over the horizon? As I understand it, P.A.M. Dirac had something to say about this sort of inertial frame. If you follow this language, start with a Lorentz bost in the x direction. Take the eigenvalue of the matrix. This will result in a change of coordinates to (x+ct, x-ct, y, z). In this coordinate basis a Lorentz boost is a contraction along one dimension and a dialation along the other. It seems to be the coordinate system useful in examining the conditions where v-->c.

Family abuse. There had developed a certain kind of abusive behavior such that parents of good intent and children are under the threat of separation, financial ruin, and incarceration by those who claim superior understanding should they apply disiplinary rules of their own. Did this abusive behavior result from bad upbringing by their parents? Does this behavior result from the observation of sadistic parents?

"Probability distribution" is a qualification of "radom", isn't it? Wavicle is a pop-science term that seems to have been born of the misunderstanding in order to simultaniously combine particle-like and wave-like characteristics to the same thing. Parhaps you're thinking of a wave packet, but the Schrodinger equation isn't confined to describing wave packets alone.

You have some confusion about hilbert space and space, or spacetime. Hilbert space doen't span space. It's an abstract space of probability amplitudes. The magnitude of the vector squared is the propbability that the particle will have some particular value when measured. I think DH could expain it to you better.

It would jump to the motor case, if close enough. If close enough or attached to the housing or large enough, I imagine the motor might run rough, stop, or fail to start.

Quartile, Does your original question have anything to do with two particles like electrons or photons measured at two distant places in space, usually by Alice and Bob?