Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #609126 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-12-14 21:59 -0800 |
| Last post | 2016-12-24 09:23 -0800 |
| Articles | 5 on this page of 25 — 6 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Iceland leading the world in energy while USA goes with dirty coal//Stefan Boltzmann law: Geothermal, is it 4 to 1 superior to Solar or 5000 to 1 Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 21:59 -0800
Iceland leading the world in energy while USA goes with dirty coal//Stefan Boltzmann law: Geothermal, is it 4 to 1 superior to Solar or 5000 to 1 Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-12-15 13:56 -0800
Re: Iceland leading the world in energy while USA goes with dirty coal//Stefan Boltzmann law: Geothermal, is it 4 to 1 superior to Solar or 5000 to 1 noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-12-15 18:39 -0800
Science Council that rules the World//Stefan Boltzmann law: Geothermal, is it 4 to 1 superior to Solar or 5000 to 1 Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-12-15 23:25 -0800
Re: Science Council that rules the World//Stefan Boltzmann law: Geothermal, is it 4 to 1 superior to Solar or 5000 to 1 "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-12-16 13:22 -0800
Re: Science Council that rules the World to 1 "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-16 13:41 -0800
Science Council that rules the World//Stefan Boltzmann law: Geothermal, is it 4 to 1 superior to Solar or 5000 to 1 Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-12-16 16:05 -0800
Re: Science Council that rules the World// Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-12-16 20:14 -0800
Re: Science Council that rules the World// Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-12-17 18:33 -0800
Is geothermal 4 to 1 or 5000 to 1 superior to Solar, and is hydrothermal 4 to 1 superior to geothermal? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-12-17 23:27 -0800
Re: Is geothermal 4 to 1 or 5000 to 1 superior to Solar, and is hydrothermal 4 to 1 superior to geothermal? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-12-18 18:38 -0800
Re: Is geothermal 4 to 1 or 5000 to 1 superior to Solar, and is hydroelectric 4 to 1 superior to geothermal? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-12-19 19:35 -0800
Re: Is geothermal 4 to 1 or 5000 to 1 superior to Solar, and is hydroelectric 4 to 1 superior to geothermal? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 19:52 -0800
Iceland should win the Nobel prize in physics for leading the world to geothermal Re: Is geothermal 4 to 1 or 5000 to 1 superior to Solar, and is hydroelectric 4 to 1 superior to geothermal? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 22:45 -0800
Re: Iceland should win the Nobel prize in physics for leading the world to geothermal Re: Is geothermal 4 to 1 or 5000 to 1 superior to Solar, and is hydroelectric 4 to 1 superior to geothermal? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 13:02 -0800
Re: Iceland should win the Nobel prize in physics for leading the world to geothermal Re: Is geothermal 4 to 1 or 5000 to 1 superior to Solar, and is hydroelectric 4 to 1 superior to geothermal? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-23 13:15 -0800
Re: Is geothermal 4 to 1 or 5000 to 1 superior to Solar, and is hydroelectric 4 to 1 superior to geothermal? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-23 16:40 +0000
How dumb and stupid is Moroney in physics? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 13:39 -0800
Re: How dumb and stupid is Moroney in physics? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 17:36 -0800
Re: How dumb and stupid is Moroney in physics? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-24 02:44 +0000
Re: How dumb and stupid is Moroney in physics? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 18:57 -0800
Re: How dumb and stupid is Archimedes Plutonium in physics? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-24 21:39 +0000
Re: How dumb and stupid is Archimedes Plutonium in physics? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-12-24 19:08 -0800
Re: How dumb and stupid is Archimedes Plutonium in physics? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-25 05:55 +0000
Re: How dumb and stupid is Moroney in physics? James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-12-24 09:23 -0800
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
| From | Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-23 18:57 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: How dumb and stupid is Moroney in physics? |
| Message-ID | <6f84761d-20c4-45c1-b5ae-452ba2b6f131@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #610251 |
On Friday, December 23, 2016 at 8:44:12 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote: > Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> writes: > > <snip crap> > > So all you have is insults, no actual science? Typical for you. > > Admit it, you were fooled by a "This Old House" type show where they > use a high-tech sounding buzzword to impress people who don't know any > better. > > Just answer one question, if you can. If it's really geothermal, why > is the temperature only 51 degrees, but in Iceland, where there's real > geothermal, they're accessing temperatures of hundreds of degrees? Physics failure does not know that geothermal comes from Earth interior, and has a gradient, so as it approaches the crust, it tapers off to 51 F. Failures of physics cannot think in terms of science, but only spew out what they read in a magazine. Creeps like Moroney do not belong in sci.physics as posters, only as readers to learn, but MM is so dumb that he cannot help himself in posting and proving he is an ignorant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-24 21:39 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: How dumb and stupid is Archimedes Plutonium in physics? |
| Message-ID | <o3mpv8$k3a$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #610252 |
Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> writes: >On Friday, December 23, 2016 at 8:44:12 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote: >> Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> writes: >> >> <snip crap> >> >> So all you have is insults, no actual science? Typical for you. >> >> Admit it, you were fooled by a "This Old House" type show where they >> use a high-tech sounding buzzword to impress people who don't know any >> better. >> >> Just answer one question, if you can. If it's really geothermal, why >> is the temperature only 51 degrees, but in Iceland, where there's real >> geothermal, they're accessing temperatures of hundreds of degrees? >Physics failure does not know that geothermal comes from Earth interior, >and has a gradient, so as it approaches the crust, it tapers off to 51 F. Yes it is a gradient, which has decreased to essentially zero at that rather shallow depth, since the temperature is quite cool, about the average of summer and winter temperatures. >Failures of physics cannot think in terms of science, but only spew out >what they read in a magazine. You really shouldn't talk about yourself that way. >Creeps like Plutonium do not belong in sci.physics as posters, only as >readers to learn, but AP is so dumb that he cannot help himself in >posting and proving he is an ignorant. There. I fixed your post for you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-24 19:08 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: How dumb and stupid is Archimedes Plutonium in physics? |
| Message-ID | <412cdb7e-203d-458d-bdf3-63a0ce8b4117@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #610287 |
On Saturday, December 24, 2016 at 3:39:56 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote: > Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> writes: > > > Yes it is a gradient, which has decreased to essentially zero at that > rather shallow depth, since the temperature is quite cool, about the > average of summer and winter temperatures. > Physics failure never was in a mine, underground before with its gradient temperature. What a hideous Boston fool he is
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 05:55 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: How dumb and stupid is Archimedes Plutonium in physics? |
| Message-ID | <o3nn13$rgh$3@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #610328 |
Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> writes: >On Saturday, December 24, 2016 at 3:39:56 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote: >> Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> writes: >> >> >> Yes it is a gradient, which has decreased to essentially zero at that >> rather shallow depth, since the temperature is quite cool, about the >> average of summer and winter temperatures. >> >Physics failure never was in a mine, underground before with its >gradient temperature. You were never in a mine, Archie? I've been in caves, one is a constant 52 F year round, and the explanation FROM A GEOLOGIST is it's that temperature because that's the average temperature of the climate in the area (NY State) but the insulation of the ground is sufficient such that there is very little change between winter and summer in the cave.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-24 09:23 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: How dumb and stupid is Moroney in physics? |
| Message-ID | <bccf00b7-a360-460e-8083-a809ded2f6c0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #610251 |
On Friday, December 23, 2016 at 6:44:12 PM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote: > Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> writes: > > <snip crap> > > So all you have is insults, no actual science? Typical for you. It's typical for you too Moroney.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web