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


Groups > sci.physics > #548424 > unrolled thread

Neutral result charges up antimatter research

Started bySam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com>
First post2016-01-26 16:53 -0600
Last post2016-01-29 00:47 -0500
Articles 15 — 6 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics


Contents

  Neutral result charges up antimatter research Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 16:53 -0600
    Re: Neutral result charges up antimatter research jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-27 00:02 +0000
      Re: Neutral result charges up antimatter research "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 21:48 -0800
        Re: Neutral result charges up antimatter research jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-27 06:19 +0000
          Re: Neutral result charges up antimatter research benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 02:23 -0500
        Re: Neutral result charges up antimatter research benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 02:18 -0500
      Re: Neutral result charges up antimatter research Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 16:36 -0600
        Re: Neutral result charges up antimatter research jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-28 23:12 +0000
          Re: Neutral result charges up antimatter research Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 17:23 -0600
            Re: Neutral result charges up antimatter research jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-29 01:31 +0000
              Re: Neutral result charges up antimatter research Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 19:54 -0600
                Re: Neutral result charges up antimatter research jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-29 02:16 +0000
              Re: Neutral result charges up antimatter research jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-29 02:16 +0000
    Re: Neutral result charges up antimatter research Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-01-28 14:35 -0800
    Re: Neutral result charges up antimatter research Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2016-01-29 00:47 -0500

#548424 — Neutral result charges up antimatter research

FromSam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-26 16:53 -0600
SubjectNeutral result charges up antimatter research
Message-ID<Ovudne2Lj4NuZTrLnZ2dnUU7-XudnZ2d@giganews.com>
Neutral result charges up antimatter research
> http://phys.org/news/2016-01-neutral-result-antimatter.html


> Scientists of the international ALPHA Collaboration have once again
> pushed the boundaries of antimatter research with their latest
> breakthrough studying the properties of antihydrogen. Published today
> in the prestigious journal Nature, the collaboration's result
> improved the measurement of the charge of antihydrogen, essentially
> zero, by a factor of 20. Their work is the latest contribution in the
> quest to chase down the answer to the basic antimatter question, "If
> matter and antimatter were created in equal amounts during the Big
> Bang, where did all the antimatter go?"


-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#548437

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2016-01-27 00:02 +0000
Message-ID<g1elnc-t37.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#548424
Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
> Neutral result charges up antimatter research
>> http://phys.org/news/2016-01-neutral-result-antimatter.html
> 

 
"For all other non-commercial uses of Phys.org content, such as blogs,
Web sites and the like, we rely on the parameters of "Fair Use" as set
forth in the Copyright Act. Users may copy, transfer or reproduce up
to 200 words of an article or story and then insert a hyperlink back
to the original Phys.org content. By following these steps, no prior
written or oral permission is required."

http://phys.org/help/contactus/

What is Fair Use?

"In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted
material done for a limited and 'transformative' purpose, such as to
comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work."

http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/

Where is your required commentary on the material you copied, shit head?
 

-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#548488

From"nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-26 21:48 -0800
Message-ID<45e5d231-d8fe-4cd4-825f-766f979e3f73@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#548437
On Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 4:16:07 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Neutral result charges up antimatter research
> >> http://phys.org/news/2016-01-neutral-result-antimatter.html
>  
> "For all other non-commercial uses of Phys.org content, such as blogs,
> Web sites and the like, we rely on the parameters of "Fair Use" as set
> forth in the Copyright Act. Users may copy, transfer or reproduce up
> to 200 words of an article or story and then insert a hyperlink back
> to the original Phys.org content. By following these steps, no prior
> written or oral permission is required."
> 
> http://phys.org/help/contactus/
> 
> What is Fair Use?
> 
> "In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted
> material done for a limited and 'transformative' purpose, such as to
> comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work."
> 
> http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/
> 
> Where is your required commentary on the material you copied, shit head?

  Same place it's always been and always will be; beyond his competence.

  He has said that he learned from his teaching (assisting) experience to refrains from commenting lest he contaminate other's thinking with his own.

  On the one hand, he's abstaining from being an Authority to which to Appeal.

  On the other hand, he's abstaining from participating in the best part of science, *fertilizing* others' minds with one's own thoughts.

  On the gripping hand, I think he's afraid to back something that later turns out to be wrong.


  Mark L. Fergerson

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


#548497

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2016-01-27 06:19 +0000
Message-ID<844mnc-p49.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#548488
nuny@bid.nes <Alien8752@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 4:16:07 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Neutral result charges up antimatter research
>> >> http://phys.org/news/2016-01-neutral-result-antimatter.html
>>  
>> "For all other non-commercial uses of Phys.org content, such as blogs,
>> Web sites and the like, we rely on the parameters of "Fair Use" as set
>> forth in the Copyright Act. Users may copy, transfer or reproduce up
>> to 200 words of an article or story and then insert a hyperlink back
>> to the original Phys.org content. By following these steps, no prior
>> written or oral permission is required."
>> 
>> http://phys.org/help/contactus/
>> 
>> What is Fair Use?
>> 
>> "In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted
>> material done for a limited and 'transformative' purpose, such as to
>> comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work."
>> 
>> http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/
>> 
>> Where is your required commentary on the material you copied, shit head?
> 
>   Same place it's always been and always will be; beyond his competence.
> 
>   He has said that he learned from his teaching (assisting) experience to refrains from commenting lest he contaminate other's thinking with his own.
> 
>   On the one hand, he's abstaining from being an Authority to which to Appeal.
> 
>   On the other hand, he's abstaining from participating in the best part of science, *fertilizing* others' minds with one's own thoughts.
> 
>   On the gripping hand, I think he's afraid to back something that later turns out to be wrong.
> 
> 
>   Mark L. Fergerson

Mostly I think he has delusions of competence but subconsciously knows
if he opens his mouth he will expose his incompetence as is shown by
his refusal to ever actually debate anything.

-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#548505

Frombenj <none@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-27 02:23 -0500
Message-ID<2g_py.212917$qz7.148573@fx01.iad>
In reply to#548497
On 01/27/2016 01:19 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> nuny@bid.nes <Alien8752@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 4:16:07 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Neutral result charges up antimatter research
>>>>> http://phys.org/news/2016-01-neutral-result-antimatter.html
>>>
>>> "For all other non-commercial uses of Phys.org content, such as blogs,
>>> Web sites and the like, we rely on the parameters of "Fair Use" as set
>>> forth in the Copyright Act. Users may copy, transfer or reproduce up
>>> to 200 words of an article or story and then insert a hyperlink back
>>> to the original Phys.org content. By following these steps, no prior
>>> written or oral permission is required."
>>>
>>> http://phys.org/help/contactus/
>>>
>>> What is Fair Use?
>>>
>>> "In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted
>>> material done for a limited and 'transformative' purpose, such as to
>>> comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work."
>>>
>>> http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/
>>>
>>> Where is your required commentary on the material you copied, shit head?
>>
>>    Same place it's always been and always will be; beyond his competence.
>>
>>    He has said that he learned from his teaching (assisting) experience to refrains from commenting lest he contaminate other's thinking with his own.
>>
>>    On the one hand, he's abstaining from being an Authority to which to Appeal.
>>
>>    On the other hand, he's abstaining from participating in the best part of science, *fertilizing* others' minds with one's own thoughts.
>>
>>    On the gripping hand, I think he's afraid to back something that later turns out to be wrong.
>>
>>
>>    Mark L. Fergerson
>
> Mostly I think he has delusions of competence but subconsciously knows
> if he opens his mouth he will expose his incompetence as is shown by
> his refusal to ever actually debate anything.

Which is made doubly funny by his constant posting of the Sci.physics 
charter saying the newsgroup is for discussion of physics topics!



-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

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


#548503

Frombenj <none@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-27 02:18 -0500
Message-ID<wb_py.212915$qz7.173844@fx01.iad>
In reply to#548488
On 01/27/2016 12:48 AM, nuny@bid.nes wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 4:16:07 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Neutral result charges up antimatter research
>>>> http://phys.org/news/2016-01-neutral-result-antimatter.html
>>
>> "For all other non-commercial uses of Phys.org content, such as blogs,
>> Web sites and the like, we rely on the parameters of "Fair Use" as set
>> forth in the Copyright Act. Users may copy, transfer or reproduce up
>> to 200 words of an article or story and then insert a hyperlink back
>> to the original Phys.org content. By following these steps, no prior
>> written or oral permission is required."
>>
>> http://phys.org/help/contactus/
>>
>> What is Fair Use?
>>
>> "In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted
>> material done for a limited and 'transformative' purpose, such as to
>> comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work."
>>
>> http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/
>>
>> Where is your required commentary on the material you copied, shit head?
>
>    Same place it's always been and always will be; beyond his competence.
>
>    He has said that he learned from his teaching (assisting) experience to refrains from commenting lest he contaminate other's thinking with his own.
>
>    On the one hand, he's abstaining from being an Authority to which to Appeal.
>
>    On the other hand, he's abstaining from participating in the best part of science, *fertilizing* others' minds with one's own thoughts.
>
>    On the gripping hand, I think he's afraid to back something that later turns out to be wrong.
>
>
>    Mark L. Fergerson

Mark has hit the nail on the head with regard to Warmley's lack of any 
discussion. However, under the terms of the phys.org permission no 
discussion is needed. While they "rely" of the terms of "fair use" they 
make no requirement of it. In fact they give anyone permission to copy 
up to 200 words of any of their so-called "material" regardless of 
purpose provided a hyperlink back to the original content. While I 
haven't counted Wormley's words I don't think they exceed 200.

Note that this is not a restriction to 200 words or even providing a 
hyperlink IF the copying falls under fair use. For example you could 
copy the entire piece with NO link back to the original legally for the 
purpose of parody which courts have uniformly upheld as "fair use" (and 
the articles at phys.org REALLY need to turned into more parody than 
they already are!) Other "fair use" is far more restrictive by courts.

So while jimp whines about Sam violating copyrights, in the case of 
phys.org trash he clearly has their permission to distribute 200 words 
and a link which they appear to feel is advertising for their screed.

Sam's other copies though are not so off the hook as they have for the 
most part NOT provided permission like phys.org and thus Sam MUST comply 
with terms of fair use which in general are quite restrictive these days.



-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

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


#548886

FromSam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-28 16:36 -0600
Message-ID<wM-dnbn0j6qUBTfLnZ2dnUU7-cudnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#548437
On 1/26/16 6:02 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> Where is your required commentary on the material you copied, shit head?


   Now, now, jimp, your *obsessive-compulsive* behavior is outta control,
   and your absolute contempt and total disgust are addressed in these
   Anger Management classes. You, jimp, need these services:
 > http://yellowpages.com/rancho-cucamonga-ca/anger-management-classes

Neutral result charges up antimatter research
 > http://phys.org/news/2016-01-neutral-result-antimatter.html


 > Scientists of the international ALPHA Collaboration have once again
 > pushed the boundaries of antimatter research with their latest
 > breakthrough studying the properties of antihydrogen. Published today
 > in the prestigious journal Nature, the collaboration's result
 > improved the measurement of the charge of antihydrogen, essentially
 > zero, by a factor of 20. Their work is the latest contribution in the
 > quest to chase down the answer to the basic antimatter question, "If
 > matter and antimatter were created in equal amounts during the Big
 > Bang, where did all the antimatter go?"


-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

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


#548902

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2016-01-28 23:12 +0000
Message-ID<esjqnc-amn.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#548886
Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/26/16 6:02 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> Where is your required commentary on the material you copied, shit head?
> 
> 
>   Now, now, jimp, your *obsessive-compulsive* behavior is outta control,

Where is your copyright required commentary on the material you copied,
shit head?


-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#548909

FromSam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-28 17:23 -0600
Message-ID<wM-dnbf0j6p3PzfLnZ2dnUU7-cudnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#548902
On 1/28/16 5:12 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> Where is your copyright required commentary on the material you copied,
> shit head?
>


   Now, now, jimp, your *obsessive-compulsive* behavior is outta control,
   and your absolute contempt and total disgust are addressed in these
   Anger Management classes. You, jimp, need these services:
 > http://yellowpages.com/rancho-cucamonga-ca/anger-management-classes

Neutral result charges up antimatter research
 > http://phys.org/news/2016-01-neutral-result-antimatter.html


 > Scientists of the international ALPHA Collaboration have once again
 > pushed the boundaries of antimatter research with their latest
 > breakthrough studying the properties of antihydrogen. Published today
 > in the prestigious journal Nature, the collaboration's result
 > improved the measurement of the charge of antihydrogen, essentially
 > zero, by a factor of 20. Their work is the latest contribution in the
 > quest to chase down the answer to the basic antimatter question, "If
 > matter and antimatter were created in equal amounts during the Big
 > Bang, where did all the antimatter go?"

-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

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


#548942

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2016-01-29 01:31 +0000
Message-ID<e1sqnc-veo.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#548909
Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/28/16 5:12 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> Where is your copyright required commentary on the material you copied,
>> shit head?
>>
> 
> 
>   Now, now, jimp, your *obsessive-compulsive* behavior is outta control,

Follow the charters of USENET groups and the law; quit being a copyright
violating, cut and paste, spamming shit head.


-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#548954

FromSam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-28 19:54 -0600
Message-ID<ueKdnXbuu7jLWzfLnZ2dnUU7-bmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#548942
On 1/28/16 7:31 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> Follow the charters of USENET groups and the law; quit being a copyright
> violating, cut and paste, spamming shit head.


   Now, now, jimp, your *obsessive-compulsive* behavior is outta control,
   your *language inappropriate* and your absolute contempt and total
   disgust are addressed in these Anger Management classes. You, jimp,
   need these services:
 > http://yellowpages.com/rancho-cucamonga-ca/anger-management-classes


Neutral result charges up antimatter research
 > http://phys.org/news/2016-01-neutral-result-antimatter.html


 > Scientists of the international ALPHA Collaboration have once again
 > pushed the boundaries of antimatter research with their latest
 > breakthrough studying the properties of antihydrogen. Published today
 > in the prestigious journal Nature, the collaboration's result
 > improved the measurement of the charge of antihydrogen, essentially
 > zero, by a factor of 20. Their work is the latest contribution in the
 > quest to chase down the answer to the basic antimatter question, "If
 > matter and antimatter were created in equal amounts during the Big
 > Bang, where did all the antimatter go?"

-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

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


#548964

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2016-01-29 02:16 +0000
Message-ID<bluqnc-voo.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#548954
Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/28/16 7:31 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> Follow the charters of USENET groups and the law; quit being a copyright
>> violating, cut and paste, spamming shit head.
> 
> 
>   Now, now, jimp, your *obsessive-compulsive* behavior is outta control,

Your copyright violating, cut and paste, spamming is out of control.

-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#548961

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2016-01-29 02:16 +0000
Message-ID<5kuqnc-voo.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#548942
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 1/28/16 5:12 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> Where is your copyright required commentary on the material you copied,
>>> shit head?
>>>
>> 
>> 
>>   Now, now, jimp, your *obsessive-compulsive* behavior is outta control,

Your copyright violating, cut and paste spamming is out of control.


-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#548885

FromDouble-A <double-a3@hush.com>
Date2016-01-28 14:35 -0800
Message-ID<89a0ac03-d941-4d59-a0ac-4d6a3cd3ebf9@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#548424
On Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 2:53:43 PM UTC-8, Sam Wormley wrote:
> Neutral result charges up antimatter research
> > http://phys.org/news/2016-01-neutral-result-antimatter.html
> 
> 
> > Scientists of the international ALPHA Collaboration have once again
> > pushed the boundaries of antimatter research with their latest
> > breakthrough studying the properties of antihydrogen. Published today
> > in the prestigious journal Nature, the collaboration's result
> > improved the measurement of the charge of antihydrogen, essentially
> > zero, by a factor of 20. Their work is the latest contribution in the
> > quest to chase down the answer to the basic antimatter question, "If
> > matter and antimatter were created in equal amounts during the Big
> > Bang, where did all the antimatter go?"


More important is what the gravitational relationship is between matter and antimatter.

Double-A


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


#548998

FromYousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com>
Date2016-01-29 00:47 -0500
Message-ID<bJidnV9zo597YTfLnZ2dnUU7-cWdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#548424
On 26/01/2016 5:53 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> Neutral result charges up antimatter research
>> http://phys.org/news/2016-01-neutral-result-antimatter.html
>
>
>> Scientists of the international ALPHA Collaboration have once again
>> pushed the boundaries of antimatter research with their latest
>> breakthrough studying the properties of antihydrogen. Published today
>> in the prestigious journal Nature, the collaboration's result
>> improved the measurement of the charge of antihydrogen, essentially
>> zero, by a factor of 20. Their work is the latest contribution in the
>> quest to chase down the answer to the basic antimatter question, "If
>> matter and antimatter were created in equal amounts during the Big
>> Bang, where did all the antimatter go?"

So after all of that experimentation, they found that the overall charge 
of an anti-hydrogen atom is zero? Awesome result, bravo!

Really the reason for the lack of antimatter in *this* universe is 
because it's all in our twin antimatter universe, which has it's own 
mysterious "lack of matter" problem.

	Yousuf Khan

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web