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

Groups > sci.physics > #562055

Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

James McGinn, in
<news:f126f473-b95c-46bc-af87-e3a16ea886f2@googlegroups.com> did
thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> On Thursday, March 10, 2016 at 11:06:01 PM UTC-8,
> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

>> James McGinn, in
>> <news:4a0a359d-ed09-43ea-ac66-ca231a8c19ba@googlegroups.com> did
>> thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

>>> On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 11:38:24 AM UTC-8,
>>> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

>>>> It has been measured that to create any degree of ionization in a 
>>>> water vapor atmosphere you need to have electrons with energy of at 
>>>> least around 12 electron volts. (See Ref. below) That means that if 
>>>> you want to ionize the water (make a plasma) 

>>> You are interpreting my use of the word plasma too literally.

>> No, you're just a Dunning-Kruger afflicted kooktard attempting to
>> redefine words to make your kooky theory work. It's what D-K sufferers
>> like you do, Jim.

>>> There is no ionization associated with my plasma.

>> Then it's not plasma, Jim.

> Plasma is just a word, dumbass.

You're backpedaling, Jim. That means that through the fog of your
insanity, you've gotten a faint glimpse at how wrong and insane you
are.

> Semantics are trivial. Only simpleton's bother to dispute semantics.  

No, Jim. Only simpletons attempt to redefine well-known and long-held
definitions as a desperate attempt at making their kooky conspiracy
theory work, Jim.

>>> Ionization is associated with ionic bonds. My plasma is a
>>> consequence of H bonds and wind shear.

>> Aww, Jim didn't know that the dissociation energy and nuclear binding
>> energy of water is identical at 940.8 kJ/mol, 

> You don't have an substantive argument.  All you have is a trivial
> semantic dispute.  

All you have is magical "plasma not-a-plasma" that cannot exist, Jim.
Hence your kooky conspiracy theory cannot reflect reality. Hence
you're a moronic kooktard blathering fantasy. Deal with that reality,
Jim.

>> thus water will
>> preferentially dissociate into hydrogen and oxygen rather than ionize.
>> That's one of the anomalous properties of water, Jim.

> You have no idea what the "plasma" is of my scenario.  

There is no other "plasma" but what is strictly defined as plasma,
Jim... your kooky "plasma not-a-plasma" isn't plasma... it's a
mythical invention by a Dunning-Kruger afflicted kooktard desperately
backpedaling as he tries to salvage his kooky conspiracy theory *and*
his faltering sanity.

>> How is your "water plasma" forming your purported "droplets" if it's 
>> plasma, Jim? And given that the dissociation energy and nuclear 
>> binding energy of water are identical at 940.8 kJ/mol, you're saying 
>> that your water has actually dissociated into hydrogen and oxygen... 
>> so how is this hydrogen and oxygen forming your purported "droplets", 
>> Jim?

Jim? No answer, Jim? Are you there, Jim? Reality is dry-fucking you as
it donkey-punches your retarded skull, Jim.

<snicker>

>>> See my videos for details.

>> Referring to your own kooky blather doesn't make you right, Jim. It
>> only means you're clue-repellant because you're screaming at the top
>> of your lungs in your own little Dunning-Kruger lined echo chamber in
>> attempting to convince *yourself* that you're "not wrong".
>> 
>> But you *are* wrong, Jim. I've used more than a half dozen different
>> avenues to utterly destroy your kooky conspiracy theory.

> You are a bozo.

I am right. You are a moron who is desperately backpedaling and
inventing fairy-tale "plasma not-a-plasma" as a desperate means of
salvaging your kooky conspiracy theory *and* your sanity, Jim.

>> Deal with that reality, Jim.

> You idiots get so flabbergasted with semantics that you can't
> follow a mildly complex argument.

There is no argument, Jim. It's been proven via more than a half-dozen
different avenues that you're a moron with only the flimsiest of
grasps upon reality, that you don't have the education or the
brainpower to construct a theory that reflects reality, and hence
you've instead concocted your kooky "plasma not-a-plasma" theory which
consists of substances that cannot exist, created by energy sources
which do not exist in the troposphere.

Deal with that reality, Jim. Your kooky conspiracy theory is dead.

<snicker>

-- 

Shiny Tinfoil Brain (aka Bite My Shiny Metal Ass) didn't know:
=====================================
The Euler equation is a subset of equations known as the Euler-Fourier
Formulas, thus that a sinewave is a transformation of a circle (which
should have been intuitive, given that generators *rotate* to create
*sinusoids*);

That cross correlation is used with Fourier transforms;

That superposition is the same as wave interference;

That wave interference works the same for standing or traveling waves;

That RMS and peak-to-peak voltage are two different things;

That RMS isn't a DC voltage;

That 170 volt peak, 120.208 volt RMS L-N 3-phase service gives 208.207
volts RMS L-L;

That 4444525800 != 4400000000 != 1;

The difference between frequency and period of a sinewave;

That there's no difference between 'i' and 'j' in electrical
engineering, physics and control systems engineering;

What a positive or negative vector is;

That the vector sum of 3-phase AC constitutes a closed loop per
Kirchhoff's Voltage Law, thus that the three phases sum to zero;

That "mnemonic" is not spelled "mneumonic";

That his claim: "Water is tetrahedral. It actually has 4 poles, 2
positive and 2 negative." is nonsense from a blathering moron.

That water does not have negative poles. The oxygen has an
electronegativity of 8+, the hydrogens 1+.

That the term "electronegativity" denotes a *positive* nucleal charge.

What the definition of the word "equivalent" is.

That digital voltmeters do indeed take discrete instantaneous samples.

That the atmosphere (and the gaseous phase water within the
atmosphere) does indeed follow the Ideal Gas Law.

That the square of the instantaneous sample of peak-to-peak voltage of
a peak-voltage sinewave is an offset sinewave, thus its average does
*not* equal zero, as Shiny Tinfoil Brain k'lames.

That the Ideal Gas Law does not require an ideal gas because it takes
into account molar volume.

That "within 10% error" does not equal "10% error".

That water can be plasmized.

That atomic number does not equal effective nuclear charge.

That nuclear charge does not equal effective nuclear charge.

And the moron continues to demonstrate his inability to read a graph.
=====================================

SPNAK!

<snicker>

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

Thread

My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 15:49 -0800
  Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-10 18:33 -0600
    Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 16:51 -0800
      Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-10 19:27 -0600
        Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 17:33 -0800
          Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 19:40 -0600
            Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-03-11 07:40 +0100
              Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-03-11 01:07 -0800
                Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-03-11 06:38 -0800
                Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-11 09:05 -0600
      Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-11 01:22 +0000
        Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 17:36 -0800
          Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-10 19:52 -0600
          Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-11 03:13 +0000
            Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 19:44 -0800
              Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-11 05:24 +0000
                Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 21:53 -0800
                Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-11 07:12 +0000
  Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-11 00:42 +0000
    Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 16:53 -0800
      Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-10 19:29 -0600
      Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-11 01:17 +0000
        Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 17:34 -0800
          Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-10 20:34 -0600
          Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-11 03:15 +0000
    E-maniA noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 19:49 -0800
  Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 19:34 -0600
    Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-03-11 07:12 +0100
      Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 22:36 -0800
        Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-11 07:48 -0600
          Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-11 08:43 -0800
            Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-03-11 09:01 -0800
      Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 23:22 -0800
  Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-11 07:55 +0100
    Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 23:37 -0800
      Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-11 07:51 -0600
      Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-11 19:08 +0000
      Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-03-11 13:20 -0600
      Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-13 07:44 +0100
        Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-12 23:20 -0800
          Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-14 05:32 +0100
          Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 14:21 -0500
          Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-14 19:33 +0000
            Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 14:19 -0700
              Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-14 16:53 -0500
              Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-14 22:53 +0000
    Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-11 22:53 +0800
      Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-11 15:10 +0000
        Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear g8dgc <g8dgc@noneya.none> - 2016-03-11 10:15 -0500
          Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe aka g8dgc) - 2016-03-11 15:23 +0000
      Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-13 06:19 +0100
        Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-13 15:49 +0800
          Re: My plasma is a consequence of H bonds and wind shear Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-14 06:47 +0100
    wind shear?! noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-03-11 12:37 -0800

csiph-web