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

Groups > sci.physics > #522238 > unrolled thread

The Circlon theory, explained

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  The Circlon theory, explained "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 10:44 -0700
    Re: The Circlon theory, explained Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-20 12:33 -0700
      Re: The Circlon theory, explained snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) - 2015-09-20 22:01 +0100
        Re: The Circlon theory, explained Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-20 14:02 -0700
          Re: The Circlon theory, explained snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) - 2015-09-20 22:08 +0100
            Re: The Circlon theory, explained Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-20 14:49 -0700
        Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-20 17:11 -0400
          Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-20 14:57 -0700
      Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. DoW #10" <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-20 17:10 -0400
        Re: The Circlon theory, explained snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) - 2015-09-20 22:19 +0100
          Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. DoW #10" <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-20 18:08 -0400
            Re: The Circlon theory, explained snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) - 2015-09-20 23:12 +0100
              Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-20 18:32 -0400
        Re: The Circlon theory, explained Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 14:31 -0700
          Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 00:54 -0700
            Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Kurt Smith" <invalid@example.com> - 2015-09-21 07:41 -0700
            Re: The Circlon theory, explained Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 13:20 -0700
              Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 21:55 -0700
                Re: The Circlon theory, explained Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 10:33 -0700
                  Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 11:47 -0700
                    Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Mapihal" <invalid@example.com> - 2015-09-22 23:36 -0700
                      Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 02:43 -0700
                        Re: The Circlon theory, explained Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 08:16 -0700
                          Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 08:33 -0700
                            Re: The Circlon theory, explained Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 09:38 -0700
                              Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 23:38 -0700
                                Re: The Circlon theory, explained Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 16:40 -0700
                                  Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Buck Futter" <invalid@example.com> - 2015-09-25 07:24 -0700
                                  canonical curvature & intrinsical noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 18:16 -0700
                                    Re: canonical curvature & intrinsical "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-26 00:50 -0700
                                      *mathematica is four subjects at mimimum noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-26 17:24 -0700
                                        not including arithmetic, *mathematica is four subjects at mimimum noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-26 17:51 -0700
                                        Re: *mathematica is four subjects at mimimum "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-26 22:29 -0700
                                          logic, grammar, rhetoric noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-27 15:55 -0700
                      Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 08:39 -0700
                      Re: The Circlon theory, explained Nomen Nesco <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-23 13:16 -0500
                        Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 23:20 -0700
                  Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Chet Smith" <invalid@example.com> - 2015-09-22 17:38 -0700
          Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Burt Smith" <invalid@example.com> - 2015-09-21 07:39 -0700
        Re: The Circlon theory, explained Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-20 14:47 -0700
          Re: The Circlon theory, explained snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) - 2015-09-20 23:01 +0100
            Re: The Circlon theory, explained Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-20 16:34 -0700
              Re: The Circlon theory, explained snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) - 2015-09-21 00:51 +0100
                Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. DoW #10" <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-20 19:57 -0400
                  Re: The Circlon theory, explained snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) - 2015-09-21 01:01 +0100
                    Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. DoW #10" <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-20 20:19 -0400
                      Re: The Circlon theory, explained snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) - 2015-09-22 08:37 +0100
                  Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-20 21:32 -0700
          Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. DoW #10" <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-09-20 18:15 -0400
        Re: The Circlon theory, explained R Kym Horsell <kym@kymhorsell.com> - 2015-09-21 00:39 +0000
    Re: The Circlon theory, explained 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> - 2015-09-20 21:04 +0100
      Re: The Circlon theory, explained Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-20 14:33 -0700
        Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-20 14:42 -0700
      Re: The Circlon theory, explained Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-09-21 17:31 +0200
        Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 08:21 -0700
      Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 04:04 -0700
    Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-09-20 14:12 -0700
      Re: The Circlon theory, explained "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 04:23 -0700

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#522322

Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:

> In article <2v7uvadqgm8h95upf5c1avd4ipha61e1jr@4ax.com>,
>  "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. DoW #10" <greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 12:33:47 -0700, 
> > Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > 
> > >In article <mtmraj$620$1@speranza.aioe.org>, 
> > >"Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> 
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > >> My circlon theory is is circular, in the traditional 
> > >> ... 
> > >> I am a raving lunatic.
> > >
> > >But you make so much sense. You have inspired my trianglon theory.
> > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHuvW7YaGjQ
> > >
> > >Phi on you.
> > 
> > Not too good at geometry are you, China Blew?
> > 
> > When it comes to circles it's Pi not Phi.
> >
>
> phi = (1 + sqrt 5)/2
> phi = a/b where a/b = (a+b)/a
> 
> So in a sense phi represents balanced growth where the center of mass,
> weight, bouyancy, etc does not change as the object grow. In a vague,
> handwaving sense.
> 
> Fibonacci numbers are very good integer approximation of the phi power
> series.
> 
> >
> > Pi is a Greek letter that looks like two small t's
> > side by side.
> 
> The Sacred Geometry of Spirit Science is obsessed with phi, not pi.
>

Mmm, Pi. When come back, bring Pi.      ~~ Weebl

<http://www.weebls-stuff.com/weebl-bob/video/pie.html>

-- 
^Ï^.      Sn!pe,  PTB     <snipe@notforspam.fsnet.co.uk> 

My pet rock Gordon just is.

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

#522385

In article <1mb2l4l.1ic8jmcqnl7kiN%snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk>,
 snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) wrote:

> Mmm, Pi. When come back, bring Pi.      ~~ Weebl

pi is often used in graph theory for _p_ath in the graph. The capital Pi is used 
as the _p_roduct symbol. I vaguely remember some other uses in math and physics, 
but I can't be arsed to look them up.


Wanderring off into the windswept tangent planes of Illium, I was increasingly 
irritating with Dumb Brown's the Lost Symbol trying to figure out why dorkus 
thought tatooing his body would do anything and why revealing a dot in a circle 
would be so climatic.

In math symbols are essentially meaningless. What is important is the axioms 
which relate the symbols to each other. It is the relations that matter not the 
symbols.

-- 
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
When is a Kenyan not a Kenyan? When he's a Canadian.
That's People's Commissioner Siri Cruz now. Punch!

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

#522390

Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:

> In article <1mb2l4l.1ic8jmcqnl7kiN%snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk>,
>  snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) wrote:
> 
> > Mmm, Pi. When come back, bring Pi.      ~~ Weebl
> 
> pi is often used in graph theory for _p_ath in the graph. The capital Pi
> is used as the _p_roduct symbol. I vaguely remember some other uses in
> math and physics, but I can't be arsed to look them up.
> 
> 
> Wanderring off into the windswept tangent planes of Illium, I was
> increasingly irritating with Dumb Brown's the Lost Symbol trying to figure
> out why dorkus thought tatooing his body would do anything and why
> revealing a dot in a circle would be so climatic.
> 
> In math symbols are essentially meaningless. What is important is the
> axioms which relate the symbols to each other. It is the relations that
> matter not the symbols.
>

In the end, everything boils down to relationships. 
Symbols are merely an attempt at describing them. 

The above is a Sn!pe Profundanity; rather a prime example 
thereof too, even though I say so myself. 

I'd like to see Mr Overqualified For Mensa do half as well.

-- 
^Ï^.      Sn!pe,  PTB     <snipe@notforspam.fsnet.co.uk> 

My pet rock Gordon just is.

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

#522393

On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 00:51:16 +0100, snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) wrote:
>Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> In article <1mb2l4l.1ic8jmcqnl7kiN%snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk>,
>>  snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) wrote:
>> 
>> > Mmm, Pi. When come back, bring Pi.      ~~ Weebl
>> 
>> pi is often used in graph theory for _p_ath in the graph. The capital Pi
>> is used as the _p_roduct symbol. I vaguely remember some other uses in
>> math and physics, but I can't be arsed to look them up.
>> 
>> Wanderring off into the windswept tangent planes of Illium, I was
>> increasingly irritating with Dumb Brown's the Lost Symbol trying to figure
>> out why dorkus thought tatooing his body would do anything and why
>> revealing a dot in a circle would be so climatic.
>> 
>> In math symbols are essentially meaningless. What is important is the
>> axioms which relate the symbols to each other. It is the relations that
>> matter not the symbols.
>
>In the end, everything boils down to relationships. 
>Symbols are merely an attempt at describing them. 

Attempt to describe them would have been better. You
see, Old Bean, one generally attempts to rather than
attempts at.

>The above is a Sn!pe Profundanity; rather a prime example 
>thereof too, even though I say so myself. 

Agreed, but it would have been more profound with
the use of proper grammar.

>I'd like to see Mr Overqualified For Mensa do half as well.

I think I just did. LOL!

-- 
Sir Gregory

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

#522396

Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. DoW #10 <greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:

[...]

> >In the end, everything boils down to relationships. 
> >Symbols are merely an attempt at describing them. 
                      ^^ ^^^^^^^
Noun, not verb.

> 
> Attempt to describe them would have been better. You
> see, Old Bean, one generally attempts to rather than
                               ^^^^^^^^ ^^
The verb form.  

> attempts at.                 
> 
> >The above is a Sn!pe Profundanity; rather a prime example 
> >thereof too, even though I say so myself. 
> 
> Agreed, but it would have been more profound with
> the use of proper grammar.
> 
> >I'd like to see Mr Overqualified For Mensa do half as well.
> 
> I think I just did. LOL!
>

Hahah. Think that if it makes you happy.

-- 
^Ï^.      Sn!pe,  PTB     <snipe@notforspam.fsnet.co.uk> 

My pet rock Gordon just is.

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

#522401

On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 01:01:00 +0100, snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) wrote:

>Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. DoW #10 <greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>> >In the end, everything boils down to relationships. 
>> >Symbols are merely an attempt at describing them. 
>                      ^^ ^^^^^^^
>Noun, not verb.

A non sequitur, my dear sir. Typing *an attempt at* 
is colloquial spoken English at best. Noun or verb, 
an attempt to is more correct English than an
attempt at. Why type *an attempt at describing* 
when an *attempt to describe* is more succinct,
expeditious and enlightening? It's a matter of
the more correct alternative.

>> 
>> Attempt to describe them would have been better. You
>> see, Old Bean, one generally attempts to rather than
>                               ^^^^^^^^ ^^
>The verb form.  

See above.
>> attempts at.                 
>> 
>> >The above is a Sn!pe Profundanity; rather a prime example 
>> >thereof too, even though I say so myself. 
>> 
>> Agreed, but it would have been more profound with
>> the use of proper grammar.
>> 
>> >I'd like to see Mr Overqualified For Mensa do half as well.
>> 
>> I think I just did. LOL!
>>
>
>Hahah. Think that if it makes you happy. 

It gives me a great deal of happiness to not only
think but know that I have smacked you down.

See also: https://www.englishforums.com/English/AttemptToVsAttemptAt/wzrwh/post.htm

-- 
Sir Gregory 

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

#522650

Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. DoW #10 <greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:

> On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 01:01:00 +0100, snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) wrote:
> 
> >Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. DoW #10 <greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
> >
> >[...]
> >
> >> >In the end, everything boils down to relationships. 
> >> >Symbols are merely an attempt at describing them. 
> >                      ^^ ^^^^^^^
> >Noun, not verb.
> 
> A non sequitur, my dear sir. Typing *an attempt at* 
> is colloquial spoken English at best. Noun or verb, 
> an attempt to is more correct English than an
> attempt at. Why type *an attempt at describing* 
> when an *attempt to describe* is more succinct,
> expeditious and enlightening? It's a matter of
> the more correct alternative.
> 
> >> 
> >> Attempt to describe them would have been better. You
> >> see, Old Bean, one generally attempts to rather than
> >                               ^^^^^^^^ ^^
> >The verb form.  
> 
> See above.
> >> attempts at.                 
> >> 
> >> >The above is a Sn!pe Profundanity; rather a prime example 
> >> >thereof too, even though I say so myself. 
> >> 
> >> Agreed, but it would have been more profound with
> >> the use of proper grammar.
> >> 
> >> >I'd like to see Mr Overqualified For Mensa do half as well.
> >> 
> >> I think I just did. LOL!
> >>
> >
> >Hahah. Think that if it makes you happy. 
> >
> 
> It gives me a great deal of happiness to not only
> think but know that I have smacked you down.
> 
> See also:<https://www.englishforums.com/English/AttemptToVsAttemptAt/wzrwh/post.htm>
>

And?

-- 
^Ï^.      Sn!pe,  PTB     <snipe@notforspam.fsnet.co.uk> 

My pet rock Gordon just is.

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

#522425

In article <jnhuva9r4a3rictrf2prv931vbjgnbin6f@4ax.com>, 
greghall@yacht_master.fake says...


> 
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 00:51:16 +0100, snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) wrote:
> >Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> In article <1mb2l4l.1ic8jmcqnl7kiN%snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk>,
> >>  snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) wrote:
> >> 
> >> > Mmm, Pi. When come back, bring Pi.      ~~ Weebl
> >> 
> >> pi is often used in graph theory for _p_ath in the graph. The capital Pi
> >> is used as the _p_roduct symbol. I vaguely remember some other uses in
> >> math and physics, but I can't be arsed to look them up.
> >> 
> >> Wanderring off into the windswept tangent planes of Illium, I was
> >> increasingly irritating with Dumb Brown's the Lost Symbol trying to figure
> >> out why dorkus thought tatooing his body would do anything and why
> >> revealing a dot in a circle would be so climatic.
> >> 
> >> In math symbols are essentially meaningless. What is important is the
> >> axioms which relate the symbols to each other. It is the relations that
> >> matter not the symbols.
> >
> >In the end, everything boils down to relationships. 
> >Symbols are merely an attempt at describing them. 
> 
> Attempt to describe them would have been better. You
> see, Old Bean, one generally attempts to rather than
> attempts at.
> 
> >The above is a Sn!pe Profundanity; rather a prime example 
> >thereof too, even though I say so myself. 
> 
> Agreed, but it would have been more profound with
> the use of proper grammar.
> 
> >I'd like to see Mr Overqualified For Mensa do half as well.
> 
> I think I just did. LOL!

You did half as well?

-- 
Checkmate, AUK DoW #1
Official AUK Award Giver-Outer
Copyright © 2015 
all rights reserved 

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

#522329

On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 14:47:12 -0700, Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:

>In article <2v7uvadqgm8h95upf5c1avd4ipha61e1jr@4ax.com>,
> "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. DoW #10" <greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 12:33:47 -0700, Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> 
>> >In article <mtmraj$620$1@speranza.aioe.org>, "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> 
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> My circlon theory is is circular, in the traditional 
>> >> ... 
>> >> I am a raving lunatic.
>> >
>> >But you make so much sense. You have inspired my trianglon theory.
>> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHuvW7YaGjQ
>> >
>> >Phi on you.
>> 
>> Not too good at geometry are you, China Blew?
>> 
>> When it comes to circles it's Pi not Phi.
>
>phi = (1 + sqrt 5)/2
>phi = a/b where a/b = (a+b)/a
>
>So in a sense phi represents balanced growth where the center of mass, weight, 
>bouyancy, etc does not change as the object grow. In a vague, handwaving sense.
>
>Fibonacci numbers are very good integer approximation of the phi power series.
>
>> Pi is a Greek letter that looks like two small t's
>> side by side.
>
>The Sacred Geometry of Spirit Science is obsessed with phi, not pi.

Spirit Science and its Sacred Geometry are not based upon 
reality. Anybody who claims Phi (the 21st letter in the
Greek alphabet) is some sort of balance of mythological
forces is simply a delusional dumbfuck pretender who has
probably smoked too much marijuana out there in the cabin
in the woods.

But, back to the original point . . . 

The post you replied to with your ignorant Phi had to
do with circles. Phi simply doesn't apply to circles
in any real sense. Pi does. You were stupid and wrong
so admit it or STFU! 

-- 
Sir Gregory

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

#522403

In sci.physics Sir Gregory Hall, Esq. DoW #10 <greghall@yacht_master.fake> wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 12:33:47 -0700, Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>In article <mtmraj$620$1@speranza.aioe.org>, "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> 
>>wrote:
>>> My circlon theory is is circular, in the traditional 
>>> ... 
>>> I am a raving lunatic.
>>But you make so much sense. You have inspired my trianglon theory.
>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHuvW7YaGjQ
>>Phi on you.
> Not too good at geometry are you, China Blew?
> When it comes to circles it's Pi not Phi.
> Pi is a Greek letter that looks like two small t's
> side by side.

Haw haw. I love dis kinna tin.

"Pi" is not da "golden" ratio, you drongo.

-- 
It's easy to lose track of the initial question when people start
obfuscating and blustering. 

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

#522272

Y.Porat wrote:

> My circlon theory is is circular, in the traditional
> manner - the sense of it is being round.  When it
> circles, it travels on a diameter back to where it
> originally started, in a sort of arc path which is
> curved.

That assumes space is linear which it doesn't have to be.
And since it isn't there is nothing to specify 
what keeps your circles in cicular form, and if there
was something to keep it in circular form, then that something is 
not understood, which also implies you don't understand
what it is that motivates your circles to be non circular
in non linear space.

I am happy for you that that is as clear as it can ever be - OK?!

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

#522305

In article <9jELx.3689$Yw6.1996@fx27.am4>,
 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> wrote:

> Y.Porat wrote:
> 
> > My circlon theory is is circular, in the traditional
> > manner - the sense of it is being round.  When it
> > circles, it travels on a diameter back to where it
> > originally started, in a sort of arc path which is
> > curved.
> 
> That assumes space is linear which it doesn't have to be.

A circle is the same thing in any metric space: the set of points a fixed 
distance from a given point called its center.

> And since it isn't there is nothing to specify 
> what keeps your circles in cicular form, and if there
> was something to keep it in circular form, then that something is 

What does circular mean?

> not understood, which also implies you don't understand
> what it is that motivates your circles to be non circular
> in non linear space.

You can't define circularity in terms of tangents becoming parallel, because 
elliptical spaces don't have parallels and hyperbolic have too many. Maybe you 
can say that as perimeter points remain distinct but approach each other, their 
tangents intersect and the inner product of either tangent with the intersection 
angle bisector approaches zero.

-- 
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
When is a Kenyan not a Kenyan? When he's a Canadian.
That's People's Commissioner Siri Cruz now. Punch!

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

#522309

In article <chine.bleu-AAE05F.14334520092015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu>, 
chine.bleu@yahoo.com says...


> You can't define circularity in terms of tangents becoming parallel, because 
> elliptical spaces don't have parallels and hyperbolic have too many. Maybe you 
> can say that as perimeter points remain distinct but approach each other, their 
> tangents intersect and the inner product of either tangent with the intersection 
> angle bisector approaches zero.
> 
> -- 
> :-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
> 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
> When is a Kenyan not a Kenyan? When he's a Canadian.
> That's People's Commissioner Siri Cruz now. Punch!
> 

    <3  <3  <3

-- 
Checkmate, AUK DoW #1
Official AUK Award Giver-Outer
Copyright © 2015 
all rights reserved 

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

#522484

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Tr!pe the Hypoxic ChickenFucker (aka Steve Hall), in
<news:1mb2iu6.izrxq5103603rN%snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk> did thusly
jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> wrote:

>> Y.Porat wrote:

>>> My circlon theory is is circular, in the traditional
>>> manner - the sense of it is being round.  When it
>>> circles, it travels on a diameter back to where it
>>> originally started, in a sort of arc path which is
>>> curved.

>> That assumes space is linear which it doesn't have to be.
>> And since it isn't there is nothing to specify 
>> what keeps your circles in cicular form, and if there
>> was something to keep it in circular form, then that something is 
>> not understood, which also implies you don't understand
>> what it is that motivates your circles to be non circular
>> in non linear space.
>> 
>> I am happy for you that that is as clear as it can ever be - OK?!

> WooWoo! This one's a real k00k, I've seen him before. 
> Who's good at science around here? I reckon he's ripe for hooking. 

The Circlon Theory isn't even his. James Carter developed the theory
of Circlon Synchronicity using three trash cans, rubber sheets and a
disco ball.

The basic premise behind his theory is that the neutron is an "egg"
which produces protons and electrons. The theory states that there is
no mass-energy equivalency, that the energy released during fission or
fusion is due solely to inter-molecular inertia being converted from
rotational to linear, like billions of tiny watch springs being
instantly unwound. He actually states that if one were to gather up
all the bits and pieces of a nuclear bomb after it's exploded, one
could reassemble the bomb because none of the mass has been converted
to energy... of course, every reaction in which energy is released is
subject to the well-known mathematically and empirically-proven
mass-energy equivalency (notated equationally as E^2=P^2c^2+m^2c^4)...
*every* reaction.

Under the Circlon Theory, chemical explosions would be utterly unable
to release an EMP... and we known that's not true (when a ton of TNT
explodes, 0.47e-10 kg worth of TNT is converted directly to energy).
That's how flux compression generators work, and they were developed
in the 1950s.

And of course, under the Circlon Theory, radiation couldn't exist, so
I expect the kooks will be vacationing at Hotel Fukushima. And they
won't be taking their radios... their radios can't pick up any signals
anyway, according to the Circlon Theory.

If you like, I can get into a mathematical dissection of this
whackadoodle theory... but it's so laughably wrong there's little
point.

<snicker>

-- 

---------------------------------------------
Tr!pe the Hypoxic ChickenFucker squawked, in
<news:1l9enri.1boemg21mhmo5lN%snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk>:
"If you want to know about bird sex, just ask me."

Steve Hall fucks birds. LOL

Slow bird sex... if Tr!pe chickenfucks fast, he turns blue. LOL
Too much chickenspooge clogging up his lungs. LOL
That's why he's too stupid to do simple math. Lack of oxygen. LOL
That also explains his rampant paranoia. Hypoxic brain damage. LOL
And his segue to human penis... birds aren't enough for him now. LOL

Maths Fail:
Message-ID: <07f2598e7078240cb9a4b25fa701c861@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <444e1cce007418ec5345daa93ec0ba38@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <1aefd4d212571584185eacda6e6750d8@dizum.com>

Paranoia Will Destroy Ya:
Message-ID: <6620b273ab1a048aaaff3acbf2583ca9@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <9db516a6a44943053aed3107df34af86@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <0793f311af986182080222026eab9325@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <6b28ba3566b3f36fa69ff1cb311d4d89@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <aa840a32fa3dc7050cc69f1dda0de7e3@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <938a2d9957c61a788fcbfd0f613aa92d@dizum.com>

Tr!pe The Penis Obsessed Poof:
Message-ID: <48bc243b312b3999403a6ab8b26ea0b0@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <0eb75ae7a93df2df718219c1ccd622a6@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <9a5d3b92c9841c7e71a07f484653a125@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <a4c326b191a39afe57a747dc51e7166b@dizum.com>
---------------------------------------------

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

#522833

On Monday, September 21, 2015 at 6:35:06 PM UTC+3, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:
> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
> 
> Tr!pe the Hypoxic ChickenFucker (aka Steve Hall), in
> <news:1mb2iu6.izrxq5103603rN%snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk> did thusly
> jump head first into the wood chipper again:
> 
> > 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> wrote:
> 
> >> Y.Porat wrote:
> 
> >>> My circlon theory is is circular, in the traditional
> >>> manner - the sense of it is being round.  When it
> >>> circles, it travels on a diameter back to where it
> >>> originally started, in a sort of arc path which is
> >>> curved.
> 
> >> That assumes space is linear which it doesn't have to be.
> >> And since it isn't there is nothing to specify 
> >> what keeps your circles in cicular form, and if there
> >> was something to keep it in circular form, then that something is 
> >> not understood, which also implies you don't understand
> >> what it is that motivates your circles to be non circular
> >> in non linear space.
> >> 
> >> I am happy for you that that is as clear as it can ever be - OK?!
> 
> > WooWoo! This one's a real k00k, I've seen him before. 
> > Who's good at science around here? I reckon he's ripe for hooking. 
> 
> The Circlon Theory isn't even his. James Carter developed the theory
> of Circlon Synchronicity using three trash cans, rubber sheets and a
> disco ball.
> 
 =======================================
you didn t notice a ''little difference''..
MY THEORY IS 
THE Y CIRCLON *****MECHANISM**** !!
not Carter and not Schmarter 

Y.Porat mechanism !!!
see
Google 
The Y Porat model an abstract
---------------
AT ITS APPENDIX !!!
-----------------------
(an unknown yet property of ** mass** )
while 
 described schematically there 
===========================================
and  plus :
NO MASS - THE ONLY MASS - NO REAL PHYSICS !!!
=============================================
as a new most new basic rule of physics 
TIA
Y.Porat
=============================

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

#522814

On Sunday, September 20, 2015 at 11:04:24 PM UTC+3, 7 wrote:
> Y.Porat wrote:
> 
> > My circlon theory is is circular, in the traditional
> > manner - the sense of it is being round.  When it
> > circles, it travels on a diameter back to where it
> > originally started, in a sort of arc path which is
> > curved.
> 
> That assumes space is linear which it doesn't have to be.
> And since it isn't there is nothing to specify 
> what keeps your circles in cicular form, and if there
> was something to keep it in circular form, then that something is 
> not understood, which also implies you don't understand
> what it is that motivates your circles to be non circular
> in non linear space.
> 
> I am happy for you that that is as clear as it can ever be - OK?!

==============================
see my threads 
1
The moment that curved space died '
2
see the Y Circlon mechanism ''
by me 

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

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

#522292

In article <mtmraj$620$1@speranza.aioe.org>, y.y.porat@gmail.com says...


> Subject: The Circlon theory, explained
> From: Y.Porat <y.y.porat@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: sci.physics, alt.usenet.kooks
> 
> My circlon theory is...

Now in the appropriate group. 


-- 
Checkmate, AUK DoW #1
Official AUK Award Giver-Outer
Copyright © 2015 
all rights reserved 

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

#522454

On Monday, September 21, 2015 at 12:12:33 AM UTC+3, Checkmate, DoW #1 wrote:
> In article <mtmraj$620$1@speranza.aioe.org>, y.y.porat@gmail.com says...
> 
> 
> > Subject: The Circlon theory, explained
> > From: Y.Porat <y.y.porat@gmail.com>
> > Newsgroups: sci.physics, alt.usenet.kooks
> > 
> > My circlon theory is...
> 
> Now in the appropriate group. 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Checkmate, AUK DoW #1
> Official AUK Award Giver-Outer
> Copyright © 2015 
> all rights reserved

===========================
nasty anonymous  P D gang gangster 
 better go fuck your mother 
criminal against  mankind 
---------------------
see my response above 
next 
to human beings
---
it is not just the circlon
it is 

 Eng Yehiel .Porat (the real original 
and his historic :-

 ****the Y Circlon mechanism **
the imbecile crook pig  moron gangster 
did not notice the  'little ' difference 
(
=================== 

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

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web