Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #590892 > unrolled thread
| Started by | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-07-26 21:25 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-07-29 12:04 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 97 — 9 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 21:25 -0700
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 07:49 -0500
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-27 13:42 +0000
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 07:26 -0700
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 09:29 -0500
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-27 15:08 +0000
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 10:37 -0700
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 12:04 -0700
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-27 20:48 +0000
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 05:04 -0700
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 07:12 -0700
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom B Gates <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-07-28 19:43 -0400
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-28 14:16 +0000
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 09:35 -0500
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 09:43 -0700
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-28 18:02 +0000
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 14:27 -0500
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 14:28 -0700
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-29 05:20 +0000
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 06:30 -0700
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-29 15:18 +0000
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 08:23 -0700
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 10:49 -0500
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-29 18:12 +0000
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom brandonahenley9@gmail.com - 2016-07-29 12:08 -0700
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 19:37 -0700
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-30 05:52 +0000
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-07-30 05:07 -0700
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-30 17:12 -0400
Processes that _consume_ energy. HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 11:57 -0700
Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 12:19 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-05 19:51 +0000
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 13:01 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 15:36 -0500
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 15:28 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 18:36 -0500
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-06 01:18 +0000
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 20:45 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-06 13:49 +0000
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-06 07:05 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-06 11:38 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-06 11:51 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-06 11:59 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-06 22:31 +0000
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-08-06 16:09 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-07 00:01 +0000
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-06 17:10 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-07 05:15 +0000
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 05:38 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 06:23 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-07 22:44 +0000
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 16:58 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-08 01:48 +0000
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 19:03 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-08 03:58 +0000
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-08 00:57 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-08 07:54 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-08 15:24 +0000
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-08 15:15 +0000
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-08 10:29 -0500
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-08 14:47 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-08 17:13 -0500
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-08 19:13 -0400
waves-ies noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-08-09 13:24 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-07 13:24 +0000
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 06:32 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 06:45 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 09:01 -0500
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 08:05 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 13:30 -0500
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 13:32 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-08 10:19 -0500
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-07 22:24 +0000
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-08 18:00 -0400
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-08 15:07 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-06 23:10 +0000
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-06 01:00 +0000
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 15:16 -0500
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-05 16:12 -0400
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 13:32 -0700
Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-05 19:23 -0400
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-30 12:48 -0500
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-30 12:54 -0500
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-30 13:21 -0500
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-31 23:01 +0000
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-01 06:26 -0700
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-01 08:54 -0500
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-01 14:32 +0000
waves alfvenic, slow, fast, nedium noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-08-01 15:47 -0700
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 09:06 -0500
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-27 19:05 +0000
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 14:22 -0500
dictions of pre-that-and-this noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 17:22 -0700
Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 07:04 -0700
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom B Gates <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-07-28 19:39 -0400
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 19:12 -0700
Re: Predictions of Galaxy Model for the Atom Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-07-29 12:04 -0700
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-08 14:47 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. |
| Message-ID | <8784ec18-a691-4225-8ff3-691d45e702cf@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #592334 |
Odd Pretty soon your back will be to the wall.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-08 17:13 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. |
| Message-ID | <nob06g$1tii$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #592388 |
On 8/8/2016 4:47 PM, john wrote: > Odd > Pretty soon your back will be to the wall. > How so, John? So far, all you've demonstrated is that you can't read. Not only are you oblivious to all the data that shows the galaxy does not rotate as a unit, but you MISINTERPRET a sound bite from a press article about a scientific finding to mean that it does show the galaxy moves as a unit (as though all that data to the contrary did not exist). So, how does the near term future play out in your head, John? That all of a sudden, scientists will say, "All of our data about the Milky Way was WRONG! New findings show it rotates as a unified disc and precesses to boot!"? -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-08 19:13 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. |
| Message-ID | <57a91232$0$40875$b1db1813$15bdbe48@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #592388 |
On 8/8/2016 5:47 PM, john wrote: > Odd > Pretty soon your back will be to the wall. > His back is always to the wall. He loves showing his "manhood" by taking on multiple "kooks" at once and arguing them all into submission with his clever debating techniques.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-09 13:24 -0700 |
| Subject | waves-ies |
| Message-ID | <3f547064-17bd-48eb-884d-d4a0bf5575d5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #592259 |
that is really fairly simple, viz-a-vu plasma > they orbit the center. It resembles a standing wave more than anything > else.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-07 13:24 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. |
| Message-ID | <no7cqf$5sl$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #592183 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >Hey, Mickey, you're so fine >http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/astronomers-discover-dizzying-spin= >-of-the-milky-way-galaxy-s-halo=20 >"Astronomers at the University of Michigan=E2=80=99s College of Literature,= > Science, and the Arts (LSA) discovered for the first time that the hot gas= > in the halo of the Milky Way galaxy is spinning in the same direction and = >at comparable speed as the galaxy's disk, which contains our stars, planets= >, gas, and dust" Moved the goalposts, I see. We were discussing globular clusters, not gas. Also nothing about counterrotating whatever. And from: http://calgary.rasc.ca/globulars.htm "Question: What is a "Globular Cluster" Answer: A globular cluster is an independent collection of many stars (usually in a spherical shape) which orbits a galaxy. The orbit of the globular is not always aligned with the "plane" of the galaxy, and may be at almost any angle and at any large distance from the centre of the galaxy. The distance is usually measured in light years or kiloparsecs." A quick search found about a half dozen sites with similar descriptions.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-07 06:32 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. |
| Message-ID | <d3db0afb-e3ea-4964-bc98-c743f66a90d1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #592187 |
Mickey We were discussing the halo. It rotates WITH the disc. AT THE SAME RATE. NEW observation- this summer. Don't like spinny things? That's what atoms and galaxies ARE. Tard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-07 06:45 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. |
| Message-ID | <cb6de06d-0816-426a-b99c-870522e1eec8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #592189 |
Btw, Michael and Odd This shows that a galaxy turns AS A UNIT. Yes, Odd, it DOES have a rotation. Suck it up
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-07 09:01 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. |
| Message-ID | <no7f05$8sc$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #592190 |
On 8/7/2016 8:45 AM, john wrote: > Btw, Michael and Odd > This shows that a galaxy turns > AS A UNIT. You seem to have lost track of your own claims. You said that anomalous galactic rotation rates differ from one side of the galaxy to the other. Which means that galaxies cannot be turning as a unit. Now you say they are turning as a unit. By the way, John, what about the galaxies that don't turn? > Yes, Odd, it DOES have a rotation. > Suck it up > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-07 08:05 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. |
| Message-ID | <3d98285a-5443-4bef-8a34-97f1a815ab49@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #592191 |
Odd tarded "You seem to have lost track of your own claims. You said that anomalous galactic rotation rates differ from one side of the galaxy to the other. Which means that galaxies cannot be turning as a unit. Now you say they are turning as a unit. " You say they don't. This latest observation says they do. You are proven wrong. Anomalous galactic rotation rates- I SAID- are because the TURNING DISC UNIT is also precessing. Which means one side of the TURNING DISC UNIT is always approaching while the other side of the TURNING DISC UNIT is receding. Look up any words that you are unfamiliar with in a DICTIONARY, Odd.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-07 13:30 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. |
| Message-ID | <no7uo0$1gm3$5@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #592194 |
On 8/7/2016 10:05 AM, john wrote: > Odd tarded > > "You seem to have lost track of your own claims. > You said that anomalous galactic rotation rates differ from one side of > the galaxy to the other. Which means that galaxies cannot be turning as > a unit. Now you say they are turning as a unit. " > > You say they don't. > This latest observation says they do. > You are proven wrong. > > Anomalous galactic > rotation rates- I SAID- are because the > TURNING DISC UNIT is also precessing. > Which means one side of the TURNING > DISC UNIT is always approaching while > the other side of the TURNING DISC UNIT > is receding. This wouldn't change the rotation rate around the center of the galaxy. Pay attention. > Look up any words that you are unfamiliar > with in a DICTIONARY, Odd. > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-07 13:32 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. |
| Message-ID | <9382aa45-e2ab-48df-85f1-a7ab358ee43a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #592227 |
Odd I'm finding that you are just too stupid to talk to. Sorry. For you. Don't be mad
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-08 10:19 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. |
| Message-ID | <noa7tv$o0s$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #592239 |
On 8/7/2016 3:32 PM, john wrote: > Odd > I'm finding that you are > just too stupid to talk to. > Sorry. > For you. > Don't be mad > I'm not mad. Nor do I really care about your assessment of my mental abilities. Do as you wish, as you always have. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-07 22:24 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. |
| Message-ID | <no8cfa$se6$3@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #592189 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> tarded: >Mickey >We were discussing the halo. Wrong. You explicitly mentioned globular clusters, in Message-ID: <cb859f33-1025-43a0-b959-27f070cfe366@googlegroups.com> : The galaxy is at the Center of a spherical : Bi-layered halo of old globular clusters- : one layer flowing one way and : the second flowing another. : How do your "laws" explain that? And you mentioned the bi-layered globular clusters in another reply as well. Should I rub your nose in that as well? I pointed out that globular clusters do not orbit in any bi-layers, they orbit in their own randomly aligned orbits. Proving your claim wrong. Quit moving the goal posts.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-08 18:00 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. |
| Message-ID | <57a90112$0$40913$b1db1813$15bdbe48@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #592135 |
On 8/6/2016 7:09 PM, HVAC wrote: > Michael Moroney > - show quoted text - > You really really need to talk to a doctor about this precession OCD > or whatever it really is. > > Seriously. I mean it. > ----------- > > John has obviously been prescribing his own medications. > Hardblow needs no medication. He is SURE that he is sane and everyone else is nuts.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-08 15:07 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. |
| Message-ID | <05ba4954-99bb-46e2-9815-ef4174004d59@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #592390 |
Benj I think HVAC is on PTSD meds.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-06 23:10 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. |
| Message-ID | <no5qq0$n5h$3@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #592072 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> tarded: >Mickey >"So when are you going to give me an answer how your retarded spinny thing >galaxies don't violate half of the laws of physics? " >Galactic rotation curves FALSIFIED the "law" >of gravity. Nope. It works just fine once we realize there is matter there that we cannot otherwise detect. >How many other "laws of physics" >are just plain wrong? Scientists are constantly testing the "laws of physics". They very rarely succeed. These laws are well established and so much of what we use daily are based on them. >The galaxy is at the Center of a spherical >Bi-layered halo of old globular clusters- >one layer flowing one way and >the second flowing another. Nope. Globular clusters are in elongated orbits at various angles with respect to the galactic plane. >How do your "laws" explain that? Since what you claimed is false, there is nothing to explain. Other than why do you allow your OCD to rule your life like that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-06 01:00 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. |
| Message-ID | <no3cri$te8$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #591995 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> tarded: >Speculating that a WHOLE NEW CLASS >of matter exists, >composed of NOT FERMIONS OR BARYONS So you don't believe in the photon? I suppose you don't believe in the pion or other mesons, the W, Z or gluons. All of those are neither fermions nor baryons. >in order to explain one particular >aspect of our matter, >is what's retarded. >Tard Wait a minute. YOU are the one who believes there are stars inside electrons?? And you call ME "tard"!?!??!?!?!?!?!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-05 15:16 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. |
| Message-ID | <no2s7e$1fbk$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #591986 |
On 8/5/2016 2:19 PM, john wrote: > Just admit that galactic > rotation curves killed suck gravity, > for cripes sakes. Did logic and common sense tell you that suck electrostatics is dead? Is a balloon clinging to hair by static electricity dead? -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-05 16:12 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. |
| Message-ID | <57a4f33f$0$40911$b1db1813$15bdbe48@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #591983 |
On 8/5/2016 2:57 PM, HVAC wrote: > Jeff-Relf.Me > Mr. hVac wrote: >> Energy doesn't run out. Ever > > The _quality_ of energy degrades, spontaneously, > per the _second_ law of Thermodynamics. > > "eXergy" ( energy that can do work ) is diminishing. > > Google "Heat Death of the Universe" and Google says: ＜＜ > > The heat death of the universe is a historically > suggested theory of the ultimate fate of the universe > in which the universe has diminished to a state of no > thermodynamic free energy and therefore can no longer > sustain processes that _consume_ energy > ( including computation and life ). ＞＞ > ----------- > > Energy doesn't run out. Ever > Energy doesn't run out because God is constantly supplying it! :-) HVAC doesn't believe in God so he believes that for ghosts to have persistence of consciousness, energy must never run out...ever! He is a man of such faith!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-05 13:32 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Processes that _consume_ energy. |
| Message-ID | <d110ca0d-fc53-4454-8623-cff68ecb0950@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #591999 |
BJ quacked Energy doesn't run out because God is constantly supplying it! :-) ------------ I don't believe in God as do you. You posit an invisible man who supplies us as if we were fish in a bowl. I disagree. HVAC doesn't believe in God so he believes that for ghosts to have persistence of consciousness, energy must never run out...ever! -------- I don't believe in ghosts as do you. If ghosts existed, as you believe, the entire physical nature of the universe would be upended. You may be convinced but no one in the field of science... Any science, agrees with you. You're alone. You're the crazy rat running around in the shithouse. Right right?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web