Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #590412
| Newsgroups | sci.physics |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-22 18:09 -0700 |
| References | <e8503c4a-fcb9-4b07-b8ac-efae66bd79cf@googlegroups.com> |
| Message-ID | <11e5b1fc-e0df-40ce-985f-95c8cfdfb23e@googlegroups.com> (permalink) |
| Subject | Re: Small enough- to be zero? |
| From | "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> |
On Wednesday, July 20, 2016 at 11:11:41 AM UTC-7, john wrote: > Some posters, here, think that > at small enough scales, there > are no more particles. Just energy > of some sort, I suppose. > I'm guessing these are the same > ones who deny that organization > might be found on a Cosmic scale. > And, probably, the same ones > who think that Humans are a total fluke > on our Earth alone, and chances > of it happening on some other planet > are nil to none. And probably, also, > total atheists. > > Hmm. Just trying to see the pattern: > they're in pattern-denial Probing Jupiter's inner moons can be done now.They could land scope up 50 pounds and take it back to Earth's lab.It would be done cheaper than those Micky Mouse shuttles that cost billions and billions for 40 years,and just a waste of time and $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ TreBert
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 11:11 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 13:18 -0500
Re: Small enough- to be zero? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-20 12:57 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-20 16:30 -0500
Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 14:45 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:06 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:16 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:42 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:59 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:58 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 16:32 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-20 18:39 -0500
Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 17:03 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-20 20:06 -0500
Re: Small enough- to be zero? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-21 14:20 +0000
Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 07:51 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 08:25 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-22 16:36 -0400
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-07-22 14:05 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-07-22 14:52 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-21 15:25 +0000
Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 11:25 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-22 00:48 +0000
haxacontaDELTAhedronic noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 13:47 -0700
stab a guess (or an i.s.i.s): hexacontaDELTAhedron a.k.a C_sixty noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 11:52 -0700
stab a guess (or those flamethrowers): hexacontaDELTAhedron a.k.a C_sixty noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 19:27 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-20 20:55 -0400
Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 18:04 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-20 20:37 -0400
Re: Small enough- to be zero? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 07:44 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-22 16:33 -0400
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-20 18:39 -0500
Re: Small enough- to be zero? "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-07-24 02:08 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? "Eduardo J. Berringer" <invalid@example.com> - 2016-07-24 11:21 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-07-24 12:48 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 09:39 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 15:21 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-22 16:49 -0400
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-07-22 12:04 +1000
Re: Small enough- to be zero? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-21 23:54 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-07-23 11:57 +1000
Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-23 17:01 -0400
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-07-24 10:52 +1000
Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-23 21:25 -0400
Re: Small enough- to be zero? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-22 18:09 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-23 13:31 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-23 17:20 -0400
csiph-web