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

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #687801 > unrolled thread

Re: Modern cosmology's crises

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Modern cosmology's crises Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-03-22 11:43 -0500
    Re: Modern cosmology's crises x <x@x.org> - 2025-03-22 13:25 -0700
      Re: Modern cosmology's crises % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-03-22 13:28 -0700
        Re: Modern cosmology's crises x <x@x.org> - 2025-03-22 15:43 -0700
          Re: Modern cosmology's crises % <pursent100@gmail.com> - 2025-03-22 16:12 -0700
            Re: Modern cosmology's crises x <x@x.org> - 2025-03-23 15:55 -0700
    Re: Modern cosmology's crises bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (Bertitaylor) - 2025-03-22 22:15 +0000
      Re: Modern cosmology's crises Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-03-23 10:25 -0400

#687801 — Re: Modern cosmology's crises

On 3/21/25 11:38 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> On 03/21/2025 12:28 PM, The Starmaker wrote:

>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Researchers in foundations and physics know that
>>> the data thusly makes it so that the theories of
>>> mechanics and the optical sort of demand a retro-classical
>>> super-classical account of that the theory is a theory
>>> of fields of potential, and that optical light is special
>>> and is not the same as electromagnetic or nuclear radiation,
>>> and that the mechanical has "worlds turn" or for the
>>> free rotational, with space/frames and frame/spaces, and
>>> while still setting up the Galilean and Newtonian and
>>> Lorentzian in the middle, though not necessarily keeping
>>> the gravitational equivalence principle, with regards to
>>> the orbifold instead of the geodesy, and that there's
>>> that momentum isn't a conserved quantity, and that
>>> it's a continuum mechanics what makes any quantum mechanics,
>>> with wave/resonance dichotomy above particle/wave duality,
>>> so that it results the old linear classical is just a
>>> mere differential time-slice, that is itself always
>>> a sum-of-histories sum-of-potentials least-action least-gradient,
>>> theory.
>>
>>
>>
>> The truth is...particles do not behave like waves.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> And your 'one sentence paragrah' looks like it was writen by a girl with
>> her panties in a knot.
>>
>>
>>
> 
> Yeah, shut the fuck up, you frivolous moron.
> 
> 



I see Kosmanson does not like a much more efficiently active rival :)

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#687810

On 03/22/2025 09:43 AM, Physfitfreak wrote:
> On 3/21/25 11:38 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
>> On 03/21/2025 12:28 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Researchers in foundations and physics know that
>>>> the data thusly makes it so that the theories of
>>>> mechanics and the optical sort of demand a retro-classical
>>>> super-classical account of that the theory is a theory
>>>> of fields of potential, and that optical light is special
>>>> and is not the same as electromagnetic or nuclear radiation,
>>>> and that the mechanical has "worlds turn" or for the
>>>> free rotational, with space/frames and frame/spaces, and
>>>> while still setting up the Galilean and Newtonian and
>>>> Lorentzian in the middle, though not necessarily keeping
>>>> the gravitational equivalence principle, with regards to
>>>> the orbifold instead of the geodesy, and that there's
>>>> that momentum isn't a conserved quantity, and that
>>>> it's a continuum mechanics what makes any quantum mechanics,
>>>> with wave/resonance dichotomy above particle/wave duality,
>>>> so that it results the old linear classical is just a
>>>> mere differential time-slice, that is itself always
>>>> a sum-of-histories sum-of-potentials least-action least-gradient,
>>>> theory.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The truth is...particles do not behave like waves.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> And your 'one sentence paragrah' looks like it was writen by a girl with
>>> her panties in a knot.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, shut the fuck up, you frivolous moron.
>>
> 
> I see Kosmanson does not like a much more efficiently active rival :)
> 

Yea there is a religion called 'psychology' or the
worship of Psyche, the wife of Cupid, that has terms
called 'word salad'.

There are words like 'point' and 'curve' in analytical
geometry, but are they supposed to be the same as
'particle' or 'wave'?  Yes?  No?  Maybe?  People
are jumping up and down in physics and shouting 'no
one can understand me because I AM WORD SALAD.
I am not just esoteric, people should actually
pay me more money!!!  The second that someone
asks someone else - what is a particle and
what is a wave?  How is it similar to point
or curve in mathematics and how is it different?
Then people shout 'baby' 'baby' 'stupid' 'stupid'.

Psychology also has come up with a term called
the 'Dunning Kruger effect'.  This is because
most people are fed lies on something called
'television and radio' that constantly feed
them the illusion of knowledge while constantly
feeding them lies with only the illusion of
knowledge at the same time.  People are generally
incapable of telling the difference and this
constantly has destructive effects all over
the place.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687812

x wrote:
> On 03/22/2025 09:43 AM, Physfitfreak wrote:
>> On 3/21/25 11:38 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
>>> On 03/21/2025 12:28 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Researchers in foundations and physics know that
>>>>> the data thusly makes it so that the theories of
>>>>> mechanics and the optical sort of demand a retro-classical
>>>>> super-classical account of that the theory is a theory
>>>>> of fields of potential, and that optical light is special
>>>>> and is not the same as electromagnetic or nuclear radiation,
>>>>> and that the mechanical has "worlds turn" or for the
>>>>> free rotational, with space/frames and frame/spaces, and
>>>>> while still setting up the Galilean and Newtonian and
>>>>> Lorentzian in the middle, though not necessarily keeping
>>>>> the gravitational equivalence principle, with regards to
>>>>> the orbifold instead of the geodesy, and that there's
>>>>> that momentum isn't a conserved quantity, and that
>>>>> it's a continuum mechanics what makes any quantum mechanics,
>>>>> with wave/resonance dichotomy above particle/wave duality,
>>>>> so that it results the old linear classical is just a
>>>>> mere differential time-slice, that is itself always
>>>>> a sum-of-histories sum-of-potentials least-action least-gradient,
>>>>> theory.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The truth is...particles do not behave like waves.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And your 'one sentence paragrah' looks like it was writen by a girl 
>>>> with
>>>> her panties in a knot.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, shut the fuck up, you frivolous moron.
>>>
>>
>> I see Kosmanson does not like a much more efficiently active rival :)
>>
> 
> Yea there is a religion called 'psychology' or the
> worship of Psyche, the wife of Cupid, that has terms
> called 'word salad'.
> 
> There are words like 'point' and 'curve' in analytical
> geometry, but are they supposed to be the same as
> 'particle' or 'wave'?  Yes?  No?  Maybe?  People
> are jumping up and down in physics and shouting 'no
> one can understand me because I AM WORD SALAD.
> I am not just esoteric, people should actually
> pay me more money!!!  The second that someone
> asks someone else - what is a particle and
> what is a wave?  How is it similar to point
> or curve in mathematics and how is it different?
> Then people shout 'baby' 'baby' 'stupid' 'stupid'.
> 
> Psychology also has come up with a term called
> the 'Dunning Kruger effect'.  This is because
> most people are fed lies on something called
> 'television and radio' that constantly feed
> them the illusion of knowledge while constantly
> feeding them lies with only the illusion of
> knowledge at the same time.  People are generally
> incapable of telling the difference and this
> constantly has destructive effects all over
> the place.
> 

nice user name where did you steal that idea

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687820

On 03/22/2025 01:28 PM, % wrote:
> x wrote:
>> On 03/22/2025 09:43 AM, Physfitfreak wrote:
>>> On 3/21/25 11:38 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
>>>> On 03/21/2025 12:28 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Researchers in foundations and physics know that
>>>>>> the data thusly makes it so that the theories of
>>>>>> mechanics and the optical sort of demand a retro-classical
>>>>>> super-classical account of that the theory is a theory
>>>>>> of fields of potential, and that optical light is special
>>>>>> and is not the same as electromagnetic or nuclear radiation,
>>>>>> and that the mechanical has "worlds turn" or for the
>>>>>> free rotational, with space/frames and frame/spaces, and
>>>>>> while still setting up the Galilean and Newtonian and
>>>>>> Lorentzian in the middle, though not necessarily keeping
>>>>>> the gravitational equivalence principle, with regards to
>>>>>> the orbifold instead of the geodesy, and that there's
>>>>>> that momentum isn't a conserved quantity, and that
>>>>>> it's a continuum mechanics what makes any quantum mechanics,
>>>>>> with wave/resonance dichotomy above particle/wave duality,
>>>>>> so that it results the old linear classical is just a
>>>>>> mere differential time-slice, that is itself always
>>>>>> a sum-of-histories sum-of-potentials least-action least-gradient,
>>>>>> theory.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The truth is...particles do not behave like waves.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And your 'one sentence paragrah' looks like it was writen by a girl 
>>>>> with
>>>>> her panties in a knot.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, shut the fuck up, you frivolous moron.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I see Kosmanson does not like a much more efficiently active rival :)
>>>
>>
>> Yea there is a religion called 'psychology' or the
>> worship of Psyche, the wife of Cupid, that has terms
>> called 'word salad'.
>>
>> There are words like 'point' and 'curve' in analytical
>> geometry, but are they supposed to be the same as
>> 'particle' or 'wave'?  Yes?  No?  Maybe?  People
>> are jumping up and down in physics and shouting 'no
>> one can understand me because I AM WORD SALAD.
>> I am not just esoteric, people should actually
>> pay me more money!!!  The second that someone
>> asks someone else - what is a particle and
>> what is a wave?  How is it similar to point
>> or curve in mathematics and how is it different?
>> Then people shout 'baby' 'baby' 'stupid' 'stupid'.
>>
>> Psychology also has come up with a term called
>> the 'Dunning Kruger effect'.  This is because
>> most people are fed lies on something called
>> 'television and radio' that constantly feed
>> them the illusion of knowledge while constantly
>> feeding them lies with only the illusion of
>> knowledge at the same time.  People are generally
>> incapable of telling the difference and this
>> constantly has destructive effects all over
>> the place.
>>
> 
> nice user name where did you steal that idea

The letter 'x' was added to the Latin 'alphabet'
when some Italians claimed that they 'owned'
Greece.  They were not capable of picking up
and carrying all of the rocks and dirt in
Greece at the time and carrying it over to
directly adjacent to the Italian peninsula.

Using a symbol in the Latin alphabet is
generally part of that symbol system.
I give you the right to use the letter 'Z'
for the 'G' sound if you want to.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687823

x wrote:
> On 03/22/2025 01:28 PM, % wrote:
>> x wrote:
>>> On 03/22/2025 09:43 AM, Physfitfreak wrote:
>>>> On 3/21/25 11:38 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
>>>>> On 03/21/2025 12:28 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Researchers in foundations and physics know that
>>>>>>> the data thusly makes it so that the theories of
>>>>>>> mechanics and the optical sort of demand a retro-classical
>>>>>>> super-classical account of that the theory is a theory
>>>>>>> of fields of potential, and that optical light is special
>>>>>>> and is not the same as electromagnetic or nuclear radiation,
>>>>>>> and that the mechanical has "worlds turn" or for the
>>>>>>> free rotational, with space/frames and frame/spaces, and
>>>>>>> while still setting up the Galilean and Newtonian and
>>>>>>> Lorentzian in the middle, though not necessarily keeping
>>>>>>> the gravitational equivalence principle, with regards to
>>>>>>> the orbifold instead of the geodesy, and that there's
>>>>>>> that momentum isn't a conserved quantity, and that
>>>>>>> it's a continuum mechanics what makes any quantum mechanics,
>>>>>>> with wave/resonance dichotomy above particle/wave duality,
>>>>>>> so that it results the old linear classical is just a
>>>>>>> mere differential time-slice, that is itself always
>>>>>>> a sum-of-histories sum-of-potentials least-action least-gradient,
>>>>>>> theory.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The truth is...particles do not behave like waves.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And your 'one sentence paragrah' looks like it was writen by a 
>>>>>> girl with
>>>>>> her panties in a knot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, shut the fuck up, you frivolous moron.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I see Kosmanson does not like a much more efficiently active rival :)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yea there is a religion called 'psychology' or the
>>> worship of Psyche, the wife of Cupid, that has terms
>>> called 'word salad'.
>>>
>>> There are words like 'point' and 'curve' in analytical
>>> geometry, but are they supposed to be the same as
>>> 'particle' or 'wave'?  Yes?  No?  Maybe?  People
>>> are jumping up and down in physics and shouting 'no
>>> one can understand me because I AM WORD SALAD.
>>> I am not just esoteric, people should actually
>>> pay me more money!!!  The second that someone
>>> asks someone else - what is a particle and
>>> what is a wave?  How is it similar to point
>>> or curve in mathematics and how is it different?
>>> Then people shout 'baby' 'baby' 'stupid' 'stupid'.
>>>
>>> Psychology also has come up with a term called
>>> the 'Dunning Kruger effect'.  This is because
>>> most people are fed lies on something called
>>> 'television and radio' that constantly feed
>>> them the illusion of knowledge while constantly
>>> feeding them lies with only the illusion of
>>> knowledge at the same time.  People are generally
>>> incapable of telling the difference and this
>>> constantly has destructive effects all over
>>> the place.
>>>
>>
>> nice user name where did you steal that idea
> 
> The letter 'x' was added to the Latin 'alphabet'
> when some Italians claimed that they 'owned'
> Greece.  They were not capable of picking up
> and carrying all of the rocks and dirt in
> Greece at the time and carrying it over to
> directly adjacent to the Italian peninsula.
> 
> Using a symbol in the Latin alphabet is
> generally part of that symbol system.
> I give you the right to use the letter 'Z'
> for the 'G' sound if you want to.
> 
so you don't know why you copied me

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687918

Some mail systems have inline quotes.  Sorry.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687818

Problem is that while telescopes show the universe as infinite hence
eternal, the Abrahamic racist bigots who find them insist the universe
must have a beginning. Hence Big Bang and ensuing nonsenses held sacred
by the pseudo physicists.

Woof-woof what insight we doggies have!

Bertietaylor

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#687865

Bertitaylor wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:

> Problem is that while telescopes show the universe as infinite hence
> eternal, the Abrahamic racist bigots who find them insist the universe
> must have a beginning. Hence Big Bang and ensuing nonsenses held sacred
> by the pseudo physicists.
>
> Woof-woof what insight we doggies have!

    https://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Space_Science/Is_the_Universe_finite_or_infinite_An_interview_with_Joseph_Silk

-- 
The best way to make a fire with two sticks is to make sure one of them
is a match.
		-- Will Rogers

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy

csiph-web