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

Groups > sci.physics > #598250 > unrolled thread

"Opposite spin"

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 04:19 -0700
    Re: "Opposite spin" moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-25 16:44 +0000
      Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 10:05 -0700
        Re: "Opposite spin" moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-26 01:26 +0000
          Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 05:10 -0700
            Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 05:16 -0700
              Re: "Opposite spin" moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-26 16:57 +0000
                Re: "Opposite spin" "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-26 10:11 -0700
                  Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 12:20 -0700
                    Re: "Opposite spin" "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-26 12:37 -0700
                      Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 13:34 -0700
                        Re: "Opposite spin" "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-26 14:58 -0700
                    Re: "Opposite spin" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 06:11 -0500
                  Re: "Opposite spin" poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-09-27 04:42 -0700
      Re: "Opposite spin" poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-09-27 04:39 -0700
    Re: "Opposite spin" Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-09-25 13:15 -0700
      Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 13:38 -0700
        Re: "Opposite spin" Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-09-25 14:50 -0700
          Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 17:37 -0700
            Re: "Opposite spin" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 08:13 -0500
              Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 06:52 -0700
                Re: "Opposite spin" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 09:05 -0500
                Re: "Opposite spin" Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-09-26 14:43 -0700
    Re: "Opposite spin" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 16:44 -0500
    Re: "Opposite spin" "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 15:35 -0700
      Re: "Opposite spin" "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-25 16:09 -0700
    Re: "Opposite spin" "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 15:06 -0700
      Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 17:28 -0700
        Re: "Opposite spin" moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-27 01:07 +0000
          Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 19:46 -0700
            Re: "Opposite spin" moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-27 03:13 +0000
        Re: "Opposite spin" "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 18:18 -0700
          Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 19:49 -0700
            Re: "Opposite spin" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 09:03 -0500
              Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 07:08 -0700
                Re: "Opposite spin" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 09:21 -0500
                  Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 07:41 -0700
                    Re: "Opposite spin" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 10:12 -0500
                    Re: "Opposite spin" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 11:18 -0500
                      Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 09:29 -0700
                        Re: "Opposite spin" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 12:10 -0500
                          Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 10:18 -0700
                            Re: "Opposite spin" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 12:24 -0500
                              Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 13:07 -0700
                                Re: "Opposite spin" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 16:06 -0500
                                Re: "Opposite spin" poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-09-28 00:08 -0700
                            Re: "Opposite spin" poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-09-28 00:01 -0700
                              Re: "Opposite spin" moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-29 01:51 +0000
                                Re: "Opposite spin" HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 06:23 -0700
                                  Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 07:41 -0700
            Re: "Opposite spin" "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 17:51 -0700
              Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 18:05 -0700
                Re: "Opposite spin" moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-28 03:42 +0000
                Re: "Opposite spin" "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 02:24 -0700
                Re: "Opposite spin" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 09:36 -0500
                  Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 10:54 -0700
                    Re: "Opposite spin" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 14:37 -0500
                Re: "Opposite spin" "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 11:54 -0700
                  Re: "Opposite spin" "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-29 11:59 -0700
              Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 18:12 -0700
                Re: "Opposite spin" john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 19:10 -0700
                Re: "Opposite spin" moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-28 03:49 +0000
      Re: "Opposite spin" moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-27 01:02 +0000
    Re: "Opposite spin" Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-09-27 15:24 +1000
      Re: "Opposite spin" noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 14:07 -0700

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

#598473

On 9/27/2016 11:29 AM, john wrote:
> Odd
> "
> Now, John, you may think this is nonsense, and that your common sense
> tells you that physics since Galileo and Newton is all bogus. "
>
> Yes.
> A particle continues.
> Unless Space ISN'T Nothing.
> In which case it is slowed down by
> the interaction, gradually.

Sorry, no. That's true. Space can be Something and not deliver a net 
unbalanced force on the particle.

Where did you ever get the idea that all Somethings will deliver a net 
unbalanced force on a particle passing through it?

> In the case of a photon, this would
> be revealed by the photon
> slowly red-shifting.
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

#598479

PD said
"Where did you ever get the idea that .....?"

Classic PDism.
I love it.

PD, you get ideas by observations and
questioning and thought. Try it.

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

#598484

On 9/27/2016 12:18 PM, john wrote:
> PD said
> "Where did you ever get the idea that .....?"
>
> Classic PDism.
> I love it.
>
> PD, you get ideas by observations and
> questioning and thought. Try it.
>

I'm not PD, I'm Odd Bodkin. I apologize for saying something that 
reminded you of a former demon.

Now, you were saying that you got the idea that all Somethings will 
deliver a net unbalanced force on a particle passing through it through 
observations and questioning and thought?

Please elaborate your observations and thought that led to this idea. 
You can skip the questions.

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

#598525

Odd
Sorry.
When you write, you sound
identical to PD, Absolutely Vertical, Big Dog,
The Wiz, and a few others.
I don't know why.

If Space is "not nothing", and you
send something- a particle or photon-
through it, WHY would you suppose
it never to interact with anything?

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

#598532

On 9/27/2016 3:07 PM, john wrote:
> Odd
> Sorry.
> When you write, you sound
> identical to PD, Absolutely Vertical, Big Dog,
> The Wiz, and a few others.
> I don't know why.

Not my problem, John. I can assure you that you have done a 
misalignment. Want to name a few others, so that I can correct that too?

>
> If Space is "not nothing", and you
> send something- a particle or photon-
> through it, WHY would you suppose
> it never to interact with anything?
>

Didn't say it didn't interact with anything. You are assuming that any 
interacting produces a net unbalanced force? And furthermore that any 
interacting dissipates energy?

Remember what Newton's first law (1670's) says.






-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

#598625

בתאריך יום שלישי, 27 בספטמבר 2016 בשעה 23:07:57 UTC+3, מאת john:
> Odd
> Sorry.
> When you write, you sound
> identical to PD, Absolutely Vertical, Big Dog,
> The Wiz, and a few others.
> I don't know why.
> 
> If Space is "not nothing", and you
> send something- a particle or photon-
> through it, WHY would you suppose
> it never to interact with anything?

==================
John
tell those retard half wits
that

THE PHOTON HAS MASS THE INLY MASS !!!!
-----
SEE MY CURRENT THTED 
'h f is the simple prove that
'relativistic mass '
IS NONSENSE PHYSICS !!''

TIA
Y.Porat
====================================

 

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

#598624

בתאריך יום שלישי, 27 בספטמבר 2016 בשעה 20:19:02 UTC+3, מאת john:
> PD said
> "Where did you ever get the idea that .....?"
> 
> Classic PDism.
> I love it.
> 
> PD, you get ideas by observations and
> questioning and thought. Try it.
=======================
Johan 
I demand the  copyright of
discovering that
Bodkin is actually the professional thief   Paul Draper !
=
as someone who discovered some of the most secret s of
structure of matter 
it was 
pie  nuts   job to
 discover that  real identity of  that shameless crock  thief called Bodkin 

ATB
Y.Porat
=========================================

 

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

#598740

poraty350@gmail.com writes:

>I demand the  copyright of
>discovering that
>Bodkin is actually the professional thief   Paul Draper !

Sorry, but half the posters here have been accusing the other half of
being PD for years.  I have no idea why kooks seem to be obsessed with the
idea that everyone who disagrees with them must be a PD sock.

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

#598781

Sorry, but half the posters here have been accusing the other half of 
being PD for years.  I have no idea why kooks seem to be obsessed with the 
idea that everyone who disagrees with them must be a PD sock. 
---------

Fish gotta swim. Kooks gotta kook.

Every kook is paranoid as well. Goes with the territory. BJ is a good example of a kook. He tried hard to keep his beliefs in ghosts, esp, 9/11 conspiracy, aliens on earth, etc hidden. When I busted those doors down, I was instantly branded a sekret government agent.

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

#598784

Oh, shit.
HVAC  is back with his ZERO 
contribution.
JUST when I was trying to
suggest that NOTHING doesn't
happen in reality, HVAC proves me
wrong by existing.
A Legion of Nothing.

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

#598587

On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 7:49:21 PM UTC-7, john wrote:
> Mark 

(snip distraction attempt)

  When you are asked pointed questions about your beliefs, you waffle and attempt to distract.

  Please just answer the questions I asked.

  Clearly, spin direction is NOT the sole difference between matter and antimatter. I just can't understand why you insist that it is in the face of evidence that it is not.


  Mark L. Fergerson

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

#598590

Mark
Describe the spin of matter.
How is it different from the
spin of antimatter?

I know that you can't do this,
because you have NO idea
what YOUR spin IS!!!!
You clearly say it isn't normal,
round and round spin.

I say that it's a COMBINED spin of
one rotation to two precessions.

If you can't fucking EXPLAIN your
spin, what do you think you know?

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

#598610

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>Mark
>Describe the spin of matter.
>How is it different from the
>spin of antimatter?

[I'm not Mark, but...]

They aren't different.  An electron can be spin up or spin down, a
positron can be spin up or spin down.  A proton can be spin up or spin
down.  An antiproton can be spin up or spin down.

>I know that you can't do this,
>because you have NO idea
>what YOUR spin IS!!!!

You have no idea what intrinsic particle spin is.  Instead of reading a
book, you think up retarded carnival rides.

>I say that it's a COMBINED spin of
>one rotation to two precessions.

Nobody cares what you say. It's just plain wrong.

>If you can't fucking EXPLAIN your
>spin, what do you think you know?

No, John. Things can be hard to explain yet still be true.

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

#598631

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 6:05:06 PM UTC-7, john wrote:
> Mark
> Describe the spin of matter.

  You've had the concept of quantum mechanical spin explained at you many times. I say "at" rather than "to" because you refuse to listen. I'm not going to waste more time doing it again.

> How is it different from the
> spin of antimatter?

  No reason it should be. Experiment says it's not.

> I know that you can't do this,

  You're illiterate at mindreading.

> because you have NO idea
> what YOUR spin IS!!!!

  Yes, I know, you believe it's just the same as macroscopic angular momentum despite the fact that experiment proves otherwise.

  By the way, you can't explain what macroscopic angular momentum is, and I don't need to pretend to read your mind to know that. 

> You clearly say it isn't normal,
> round and round spin.

  Yep, it's not. That's why experiment is better than belief.

> I say that it's a COMBINED spin of
> one rotation to two precessions.

  There you go, distracting again.

  This has nothing to do with you claiming that flipping the spin of an electron turns it into a positron. Are you trying to quietly back off from that?

  I'm not going to let you.

> If you can't fucking EXPLAIN your
> spin, what do you think you know?

  For you "explain" means use analogies to macroscopic mechanical models that are known not to apply to particles. All I need to be able to do is understand what it will do when it's tickled with magnetic fields and such, which is something you can't do.

  Now, go on with explaining why you claimed that flipping the spin of a particle turns it into its antiparticle when experiment shows that doesn't happen.


  Mark L. Fergerson

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

#598644

On 9/27/2016 8:05 PM, john wrote:
> If you can't fucking EXPLAIN your
> spin, what do you think you know?

John is begging someone to explain spin to him so that he doesn't have 
to read about it. Because reading makes him gag, and he feels he should 
not have to. It's unfair, he believes.

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

#598676

Odd
No- I'm trying to provide you with
a macroscopic model that
will help explain spin more simply,
that's all.
And you're bucking and biting

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

#598691

On 9/28/2016 12:54 PM, john wrote:
> Odd
> No- I'm trying to provide you with
> a macroscopic model that
> will help explain spin more simply,
> that's all.
> And you're bucking and biting
>

But there is an existing model, which you do not understand, that does 
what's really important in science -- provide an explanation in the 
language of mathematics, provides specific testable quantitative 
predictions for observable phenomena that match well against measurements.

You are looking for "macroscopic models", explanations that are simple, 
things that are important to YOU.

Those things are not important to scientists nor to me. So what you are 
trying to provide, only you are interested in.

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

#598828

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 6:05:06 PM UTC-7, john wrote:
> Mark
> Describe the spin of matter.
> How is it different from the
> spin of antimatter?
> 
> I know that you can't do this,
> because you have NO idea
> what YOUR spin IS!!!!
> You clearly say it isn't normal,
> round and round spin.
> 
> I say that it's a COMBINED spin of
> one rotation to two precessions.
> 
> If you can't fucking EXPLAIN your
> spin, what do you think you know?

Treb jumped in to say out universe is going opposite in spin to his right handed spin.Thus we are negative(electrons) and his is positive(Positrons) He has posted this often. Im glad our universe has Treb's universe to relate with. It takes two to tango.  TreBbert

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

#598831

"reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> Treb jumped in 
to say that the <http://tinyurl.com/Recalcitrant-Swine-Glazier> 
is still <http://tinyurl.com/Glazier-the-Lying-Swine>

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

#598592

Mark said
"
  If you "put" a positron into any matter it rapidly finds an electron to annihilate with regardless of their mutual spin, precession, or anything else. 
"

Our "Science" can't position an electron or a
positron or anything else ANYWHERE.
Gene therapy doesn't even 
ATTEMPT to get their genes into
the nucleus- they are dumped into the
cytoplasm through a huge hole that may
or may not kill the cell.
You.  Are. Dreaming. In. Technicolor. 
If you think what we can or cannot do
represents ANYTHING.
Yikes!
Zombie.
Walking deadbrain.
Wow.

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

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web