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

Groups > sci.physics > #543872 > unrolled thread

Groundhog Day and the Science of Water

Started byJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
First post2016-01-08 11:37 -0800
Last post2016-01-31 22:30 -0800
Articles 11 on this page of 31 — 4 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Groundhog Day and the Science of Water James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-08 11:37 -0800
    Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-08 19:25 -0600
      Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-08 17:40 -0800
        Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-08 18:35 -0800
          Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-08 21:41 -0600
            Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-08 20:10 -0800
            Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-09 05:20 -0800
              Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-09 19:48 -0800
                Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-10 09:05 -0800
                  Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-10 11:03 -0800
                    Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-10 12:23 -0800
                      Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-10 13:00 -0800
                        Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-10 13:50 -0800
                          Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-10 15:22 -0800
                            Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-10 16:45 -0800
                              Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-10 18:35 -0800
                                Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-12 21:20 -0600
                      Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 10:23 -0800
                        Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-12 19:30 -0600
          Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 18:12 -0800
            Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-12 21:22 -0600
              Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-13 19:09 -0800
                Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-15 19:19 -0800
                  Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-17 14:51 -0600
                    Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 19:22 -0800
                      Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-21 21:54 -0600
                        Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 09:01 -0800
    Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 00:26 -0800
    Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 11:35 -0800
      Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 22:34 -0800
    Re: Groundhog Day and the Science of Water James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 22:30 -0800

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#544976

FromSergio <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-01-12 21:22 -0600
Message-ID<n74fv1$1kvs$3@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#544964
On 1/12/2016 8:12 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> On Friday, January 8, 2016 at 6:35:51 PM UTC-8, Mahipal wrote:
>
> As much as I love Sergio, formerly known as gilber34, ...
>
> You make a nice couple.
>

james, you are bored sh*tless, go write another book, or try to rename 
your old one.

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

#545250

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-13 19:09 -0800
Message-ID<7c593e83-6e72-4fef-944d-1037ca0613cb@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#544976
On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 at 7:23:23 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
> On 1/12/2016 8:12 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> > On Friday, January 8, 2016 at 6:35:51 PM UTC-8, Mahipal wrote:
> >
> > As much as I love Sergio, formerly known as gilber34, ...
> >
> > You make a nice couple.
> >
> 
> james, you are bored sh*tless, go write another book, or try to rename 
> your old one.

Do you reciprocate Mahipal?

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

#545781

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-15 19:19 -0800
Message-ID<b5232d7e-a8f3-47ae-a87d-a3e4b7ec125c@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#545250
On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 7:09:19 PM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 at 7:23:23 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
> > On 1/12/2016 8:12 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> > > On Friday, January 8, 2016 at 6:35:51 PM UTC-8, Mahipal wrote:
> > >
> > > As much as I love Sergio, formerly known as gilber34, ...
> > >
> > > You make a nice couple.
> > >
> > 
> > james, you are bored sh*tless, go write another book, or try to rename 
> > your old one.
> 
> Do you reciprocate Mahipal?

Birds of a feather, or fish of a feather,  . . .

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

#546118

FromSergio <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-01-17 14:51 -0600
Message-ID<n7gute$sec$3@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#545781
On 1/15/2016 9:19 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 7:09:19 PM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
>> On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 at 7:23:23 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
>>> On 1/12/2016 8:12 PM, James McGinn wrote:
>>>> On Friday, January 8, 2016 at 6:35:51 PM UTC-8, Mahipal wrote:
>>>>
>>>> As much as I love Sergio, formerly known as gilber34, ...
>>>>
>>>> You make a nice couple.
>>>>
>>>
>>> james, you are bored sh*tless, go write another book, or try to rename
>>> your old one.
>>
>> Do you reciprocate Mahipal?
>
> Birds of a feather, or fish of a feather,  . . .
>

you smoke-um too much dope-um,

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

#547106

FromSolving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-21 19:22 -0800
Message-ID<5de9ce7d-0d81-43dd-9d09-a3d58effb2c9@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#546118
On Sunday, January 17, 2016 at 12:52:03 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
> On 1/15/2016 9:19 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> > On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 7:09:19 PM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 at 7:23:23 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
> >>> On 1/12/2016 8:12 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> >>>> On Friday, January 8, 2016 at 6:35:51 PM UTC-8, Mahipal wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> As much as I love Sergio, formerly known as gilber34, ...
> >>>>
> >>>> You make a nice couple.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> james, you are bored sh*tless, go write another book, or try to rename
> >>> your old one.
> >>
> >> Do you reciprocate Mahipal?
> >
> > Birds of a feather, or fish of a feather,  . . .
> >
> 
> you smoke-um too much dope-um,

Is that possible?

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

#547120

FromSergio <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-01-21 21:54 -0600
Message-ID<n7s978$1i6k$5@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#547106
On 1/21/2016 9:22 PM, Solving Tornadoes wrote:
> On Sunday, January 17, 2016 at 12:52:03 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
>> On 1/15/2016 9:19 PM, James McGinn wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 7:09:19 PM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 at 7:23:23 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
>>>>> On 1/12/2016 8:12 PM, James McGinn wrote:
>>>>>> On Friday, January 8, 2016 at 6:35:51 PM UTC-8, Mahipal wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As much as I love Sergio, formerly known as gilber34, ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You make a nice couple.

>>>>>
>>>>> james, you are bored sh*tless, go write another book, or try to rename
>>>>> your old one.
>>>>
>>>> Do you reciprocate Mahipal?

>>> Birds of a feather, or fish of a feather,  . . .
>>>
>>
>> you smoke-um too much dope-um,
>
> Is that possible?
>
just keeping your posts at the top, i see.
that is why you respond to your own posts,
you must be scoring it by # of views.

JSH did that but he was a master at keeping threads going, up to 130 
responces on a single thread, not looks either.

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

#547544

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-23 09:01 -0800
Message-ID<f31c1330-10eb-45e5-a99a-847caada70fd@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#547120
On Thursday, January 21, 2016 at 7:55:25 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
> On 1/21/2016 9:22 PM, Solving Tornadoes wrote:
> > On Sunday, January 17, 2016 at 12:52:03 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
> >> On 1/15/2016 9:19 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 7:09:19 PM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
> >>>> On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 at 7:23:23 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
> >>>>> On 1/12/2016 8:12 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> >>>>>> On Friday, January 8, 2016 at 6:35:51 PM UTC-8, Mahipal wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As much as I love Sergio, formerly known as gilber34, ...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> You make a nice couple.
> 
> >>>>>
> >>>>> james, you are bored sh*tless, go write another book, or try to rename
> >>>>> your old one.
> >>>>
> >>>> Do you reciprocate Mahipal?
> 
> >>> Birds of a feather, or fish of a feather,  . . .
> >>>
> >>
> >> you smoke-um too much dope-um,
> >
> > Is that possible?
> >
> just keeping your posts at the top, i see.
> that is why you respond to your own posts,
> you must be scoring it by # of views.
> 
> JSH did that but he was a master at keeping threads going, up to 130 
> responces on a single thread, not looks either.

XV DSXC

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

#548237

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-26 00:26 -0800
Message-ID<162d1b5b-ef9e-4ba5-9bda-88545cfc08f7@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#543872
On Friday, January 8, 2016 at 11:37:54 AM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
https://zenodo.org/record/37224

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

#548622

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-27 11:35 -0800
Message-ID<ae362709-169c-4200-bba8-b8abdd9cbc7d@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#543872
On Friday, January 8, 2016 at 11:37:54 AM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
> Science is confused about water because they are confused about polarity.   They see polarity as a function of "polar' bonds (a "polar" bond is a covalent bond that has an electronegativity difference).  It's not that simple.  Many molecules have "polar" bonds but are not polar (they are not dipoles).  A polar molecule is asymmetrical in addition to having electronegativity differences.  And where it really gets confusing is when you consider that with water (and only with water) symmetry is variable--AND ACTUALLY VARIES AS A CONSEQUENCE OF HYDROGEN BONDING!
> 
> 
In water polarity drops to zero when symmetry is achieved through coordinated tetrahedral bonds.  The failure to comprehend this and its implications is the reason they are so perplexed by water and its many anomalies.  For example, once you understand this it becomes immediately apparent why H2O has its high heat capacity. Strangely, the professionals have no ability to grasp the importance of symmetry to polarity.  They write paper after paper and do video after video that demonstrates their ignorance of the intricacies of polarity and then they make lists of water's anomalies, pretending they have explained something that they have not explained. The following paper tries to get beyond that same ground hog day, over and over again, glossing over, inability to grasp what is really happening at the molecular level that is so typical of the study of water:
> 
> https://zenodo.org/record/37224

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

#549015

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-28 22:34 -0800
Message-ID<b0afff5d-0fcb-4b75-8be1-074ef7eeab9d@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#548622
On Wednesday, January 27, 2016 at 11:35:39 AM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
> On Friday, January 8, 2016 at 11:37:54 AM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
> > Science is confused about water because they are confused about polarity.   They see polarity as a function of "polar' bonds (a "polar" bond is a covalent bond that has an electronegativity difference).  It's not that simple.  Many molecules have "polar" bonds but are not polar (they are not dipoles).  A polar molecule is asymmetrical in addition to having electronegativity differences.  And where it really gets confusing is when you consider that with water (and only with water) symmetry is variable--AND ACTUALLY VARIES AS A CONSEQUENCE OF HYDROGEN BONDING!
> > 
> > 
> 
In water polarity drops to zero when symmetry is achieved through coordinated tetrahedral bonds.  The failure to comprehend this and its implications is the reason they are so perplexed by water and its many anomalies.  For example, once you understand this it becomes immediately apparent why H2O has its high heat capacity. Strangely, the professionals have no ability to grasp the importance of symmetry to polarity.  They write paper after paper and do video after video that demonstrates their ignorance of the intricacies of polarity and then they make lists of water's anomalies, pretending they have explained something that they have not explained. The following paper tries to get beyond that same ground hog day, over and over again, glossing over, inability to grasp what is really happening at the molecular level that is so typical of the study of water:
> > 
> > https://zenodo.org/record/37224

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

#549645

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-31 22:30 -0800
Message-ID<2193a358-f9cf-4157-a919-ae47066afb2f@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#543872
On Friday, January 8, 2016 at 11:37:54 AM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
> Science is confused about water because they are confused about polarity.   They see polarity as a function of "polar' bonds (a "polar" bond is a covalent bond that has an electronegativity difference).  It's not that simple.  Many molecules have "polar" bonds but are not polar (they are not dipoles).  A polar molecule is asymmetrical in addition to having electronegativity differences.  And where it really gets confusing is when you consider that with water (and only with water) symmetry is variable--AND ACTUALLY VARIES AS A CONSEQUENCE OF HYDROGEN BONDING!
> 
> 
In water polarity drops to zero when symmetry is achieved through coordinated tetrahedral bonds.  The failure to comprehend this and its implications is the reason they are so perplexed by water and its many anomalies.  For example, once you understand this it becomes immediately apparent why H2O has its high heat capacity. Strangely, the professionals have no ability to grasp the importance of symmetry to polarity.  They write paper after paper and do video after video that demonstrates their ignorance of the intricacies of polarity and then they make lists of water's anomalies, pretending they have explained something that they have not explained. The following paper tries to get beyond that same ground hog day, over and over again, glossing over, inability to grasp what is really happening at the molecular level that is so typical of the study of water:
> 
> https://zenodo.org/record/37224

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web