Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #828574

Re: Gamma

Show all headers | View raw

On 7/22/2021 11:10 AM, John Sefton wrote:
> On Wednesday, 21 July 2021 at 11:45:20 UTC-6, whodat wrote:
>> On 7/21/2021 9:29 AM, John Sefton wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 20 July 2021 at 10:49:08 UTC-6, whodat wrote:
>>>> On 7/20/2021 9:07 AM, John Sefton wrote:
>>>>> So, there's an excess of gamma from around the galaxy's center.
>>>>> And my model indicates that the Galactic Bar is antimatter.
>>>>> Cool.
>>>>> http://users.accesscomm.ca/sefton/Bear.GIF
>>>> How about starting with the criterion for determining what
>>>> constitutes "an excess of gamma." Is there some real(tm)
>>>> basis for this latest pronouncement by you?
>>>>
>>>> Hint, your colon doesn't produce scientific fact.
>>> https://www.space.com/36696-gamma-ray-signal-not-dark-matter.html
>>> I literally typed 'excess of gamma' in Google and here's the first hit.
>>> The galactic Bar is lining up with (our?) arms, right now, and there are large clouds of Hydrogen observed- the largest of which are right above the tip of the Bar.
>>> Does the Bar produce Hydrogen, and then deliver it to the stars? (In case their 'ball of gas' is running low.)
>>>
>> You know what? I don't care how many web pages are devoted to the topic.
>>
>> I asked you to tell me what the criterion for determining "an excess of
>> gamma" is all about. I haven't seen a reply from you.
>>
>> There a good reason for that question. All sorts of faddish (and some
>> real) science stories break and become "the latest thing." So the
>> real(tm) issue is what part, of what you are providing, I should listen
>> to.
>>
>> Unfortunately, John, you haven't been doing a very good job on that.
>>
>> Just to make a point, "cold fusion" yields 333,000,000 hits.
>>
>> Content, John, not quantity.
> The end of the Bar, where it is engaging the end of an Arm, is where the most Hydrogen seems to be.
> You seem to have no interest in any of these observations.
> You're not genuous

Are you completely incapable of discussing a topic you
brought into the sci.physics and I expressed an interest
in?

This is the third round of me asking you to define a term
pertinent to the discussion you started. What is the
criterion for determining what constitutes "an excess of
gamma."

If you don't know just say so, this beating around the bush
and attempts to derail the discussion by throwing switches
to sidetrack it may work in a tavern but, but wake up man,
this isn't a tavern.

My not following in your footsteps does not make me "not
genuous." So far you get a participation trophy. Is that
what you want? If it is, we're done.

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Gamma John Sefton <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2021-07-20 07:07 -0700
  Re: Gamma Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2021-07-20 10:34 -0400
  Re: Gamma whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2021-07-20 11:48 -0500
    Re: Gamma John Sefton <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2021-07-21 07:29 -0700
      Re: Gamma whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2021-07-21 12:45 -0500
        Re: Gamma "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2021-07-21 11:19 -0700
        Re: Gamma John Sefton <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2021-07-22 09:10 -0700
          Re: Gamma whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2021-07-22 13:44 -0500
  Re: Gamma "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2021-07-20 11:04 -0700

csiph-web