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

Groups > sci.physics > #643029 > unrolled thread

On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 20:49 -0700
    Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff poraty350@gmail.com - 2017-07-27 20:57 -0700
      Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 23:16 -0700
        Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff poraty350@gmail.com - 2017-07-28 02:20 -0700
    Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-07-28 01:04 -0700
      Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-07-28 03:20 -0700
    Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-07-28 16:43 +0000
      Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-07-28 10:32 -0700
        Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff poraty350@gmail.com - 2017-07-29 22:35 -0700
          Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-07-30 14:21 -0700
            Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff poraty350@gmail.com - 2017-07-30 21:53 -0700
      Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-07-30 07:51 -0700
        Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff poraty350@gmail.com - 2017-07-30 21:45 -0700
        Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-07-31 18:41 +0000
        Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-02 10:18 -0500
          Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-02 13:37 -0700
            Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-03 10:27 -0500
    On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-07-30 07:54 -0700
      On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-07-30 08:26 -0700
      Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-07-31 12:37 +0000
      Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-08-03 09:11 -0700
    Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-07-31 11:40 +0000
      Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-07-31 05:03 -0700
        Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-07-31 12:40 +0000
          Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-07-31 05:45 -0700
            Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-07-31 06:39 -0700
              Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-07-31 11:56 -0700
                Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-07-31 14:27 -0700
                  Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-08-03 09:10 -0700
            Re: On attraction between atoms, electrons as rubber bands, and powerful stuff Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-07-31 10:16 -0500

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#644199

On Sunday, July 30, 2017 at 7:54:50 AM UTC-7, john wrote:
> Arindam
> All the electrons are lying so as to form a disc- exactly like galaxies.
> Now look at how contorted some galaxies can be.

Evidence?

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

#643564

Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:
> Every atom is surrounded by one or more electrons.
> So unless joined by valency etc. every atom should repel every other atom.
> But this does not happen. In any solid of any element, the atoms are happy to 
> stick together.

And you obviously have no idea why.  Never educated about fermions I guess.


> Now why should they, as they all have outer electrons creating negative
> charges for repulsion?
> They should all be apart!
> The answer I gave this morning. It is about the electron acting as a cloud 
> around the nucleus, and this cloud can stretch.
> When it stretches, the atom becomes a dipole with the nucleus with protons on
> one side and give a positive field and the electrons dense on the other side
> giving a negative field.
> Thus the positive side of an atom attracts the negative side of the other atom
> Depending upon how strongly this is done, the material is strong.
> 
> Okay so far?
> 
> Now the stunning thing, if the above is accepted, is that the electrons in 
> general and an electron in particular is acting as a flexible RUBBER BAND.
> 
> This picture of the electron as a rubber band is going to be useful when I 
> start a topic about how the hydrogen bomb works.
> 
> The way the hydrogen bomb works is crucial to our understanding how the 
> uranium bomb works.
> 
> You may think that I am going the other way around as the a bomb came before
> the h bomb.  Also, how the hell can I explain something which no one ever
> understood.
> 
> Ah, the glorious simplicity of all will be evident, for it results from the 
> mind of 
> 
> Arindam (bin Einstein ban Gandi) Banerjee, greatest genius of all time, sole
> god among lotsa devils.
> 



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

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

#643574

On Monday, July 31, 2017 at 9:40:25 PM UTC+10, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Every atom is surrounded by one or more electrons.
> > So unless joined by valency etc. every atom should repel every other atom.
> > But this does not happen. In any solid of any element, the atoms are happy to 
> > stick together.
> 
> And you obviously have no idea why.  Never educated about fermions I guess.

When one holds that modern physicists cannot be trusted as they have bungled
with e=mcc and quantum, who wants to be educated about fermions, quarks,
black holes, big bang, etc. They are on the same level as fairies, unicorns,
goblins, gnomes, etc. in the imaginary sense but much less satisfying 
psychologically.

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
> 
> 
> > Now why should they, as they all have outer electrons creating negative
> > charges for repulsion?
> > They should all be apart!
> > The answer I gave this morning. It is about the electron acting as a cloud 
> > around the nucleus, and this cloud can stretch.
> > When it stretches, the atom becomes a dipole with the nucleus with protons on
> > one side and give a positive field and the electrons dense on the other side
> > giving a negative field.
> > Thus the positive side of an atom attracts the negative side of the other atom
> > Depending upon how strongly this is done, the material is strong.
> > 
> > Okay so far?
> > 
> > Now the stunning thing, if the above is accepted, is that the electrons in 
> > general and an electron in particular is acting as a flexible RUBBER BAND.
> > 
> > This picture of the electron as a rubber band is going to be useful when I 
> > start a topic about how the hydrogen bomb works.
> > 
> > The way the hydrogen bomb works is crucial to our understanding how the 
> > uranium bomb works.
> > 
> > You may think that I am going the other way around as the a bomb came before
> > the h bomb.  Also, how the hell can I explain something which no one ever
> > understood.
> > 
> > Ah, the glorious simplicity of all will be evident, for it results from the 
> > mind of 
> > 
> > Arindam (bin Einstein ban Gandi) Banerjee, greatest genius of all time, sole
> > god among lotsa devils.
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

#643589

Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, July 31, 2017 at 9:40:25 PM UTC+10, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Every atom is surrounded by one or more electrons.
>>> So unless joined by valency etc. every atom should repel every other atom.
>>> But this does not happen. In any solid of any element, the atoms are happy to 
>>> stick together.
>> 
>> And you obviously have no idea why.  Never educated about fermions I guess.
> 
> When one holds that modern physicists cannot be trusted as they have bungled
> with e=mcc and quantum, who wants to be educated about fermions, quarks,
> black holes, big bang, etc. They are on the same level as fairies, unicorns,
> goblins, gnomes, etc. in the imaginary sense but much less satisfying 
> psychologically.
> 
> Cheers,
> Arindam Banerjee

You are happy then to lift up a straw man that metals and other solids are
a mystery not understood by physicists, because you see no point in
studying the explanations they claim to have. 

Arindam says: "What they claim is obviously false, and so they must be in
fact puzzled by why solids do not blow apart, as their simple ideas must
suggest, and so I will solve their problem by showing them how solids can
be."

Have I got all that right? 

>> 
>> 
>>> Now why should they, as they all have outer electrons creating negative
>>> charges for repulsion?
>>> They should all be apart!
>>> The answer I gave this morning. It is about the electron acting as a cloud 
>>> around the nucleus, and this cloud can stretch.
>>> When it stretches, the atom becomes a dipole with the nucleus with protons on
>>> one side and give a positive field and the electrons dense on the other side
>>> giving a negative field.
>>> Thus the positive side of an atom attracts the negative side of the other atom
>>> Depending upon how strongly this is done, the material is strong.
>>> 
>>> Okay so far?
>>> 
>>> Now the stunning thing, if the above is accepted, is that the electrons in 
>>> general and an electron in particular is acting as a flexible RUBBER BAND.
>>> 
>>> This picture of the electron as a rubber band is going to be useful when I 
>>> start a topic about how the hydrogen bomb works.
>>> 
>>> The way the hydrogen bomb works is crucial to our understanding how the 
>>> uranium bomb works.
>>> 
>>> You may think that I am going the other way around as the a bomb came before
>>> the h bomb.  Also, how the hell can I explain something which no one ever
>>> understood.
>>> 
>>> Ah, the glorious simplicity of all will be evident, for it results from the 
>>> mind of 
>>> 
>>> Arindam (bin Einstein ban Gandi) Banerjee, greatest genius of all time, sole
>>> god among lotsa devils.
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> 
> 



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

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

#643591

On Monday, July 31, 2017 at 10:40:15 PM UTC+10, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, July 31, 2017 at 9:40:25 PM UTC+10, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >> Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Every atom is surrounded by one or more electrons.
> >>> So unless joined by valency etc. every atom should repel every other atom.
> >>> But this does not happen. In any solid of any element, the atoms are happy to 
> >>> stick together.
> >> 
> >> And you obviously have no idea why.  Never educated about fermions I guess.
> > 
> > When one holds that modern physicists cannot be trusted as they have bungled
> > with e=mcc and quantum, who wants to be educated about fermions, quarks,
> > black holes, big bang, etc. They are on the same level as fairies, unicorns,
> > goblins, gnomes, etc. in the imaginary sense but much less satisfying 
> > psychologically.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Arindam Banerjee
> 
> You are happy then to lift up a straw man that metals and other solids are
> a mystery not understood by physicists, because you see no point in
> studying the explanations they claim to have. 

From what I have read of your posts, they can be safely ignored, for I do not
give you any credibility whatsoever. You are blind to reason, and I am sure 
they are too. Anyone who believe in the invariance of the speed of light has
to be a criminal.
> 
> Arindam says: "What they claim is obviously false, and so they must be in
> fact puzzled by why solids do not blow apart, as their simple ideas must
> suggest, and so I will solve their problem by showing them how solids can
> be."
> 
> Have I got all that right? 

It is impossible to debate with you and other e=mcc types for you all are
completely wrong in every way.
So I will try to make my points clear to the world that is still honest.
> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >>> Now why should they, as they all have outer electrons creating negative
> >>> charges for repulsion?
> >>> They should all be apart!
> >>> The answer I gave this morning. It is about the electron acting as a cloud 
> >>> around the nucleus, and this cloud can stretch.
> >>> When it stretches, the atom becomes a dipole with the nucleus with protons on
> >>> one side and give a positive field and the electrons dense on the other side
> >>> giving a negative field.
> >>> Thus the positive side of an atom attracts the negative side of the other atom
> >>> Depending upon how strongly this is done, the material is strong.
> >>> 
> >>> Okay so far?
> >>> 
> >>> Now the stunning thing, if the above is accepted, is that the electrons in 
> >>> general and an electron in particular is acting as a flexible RUBBER BAND.
> >>> 
> >>> This picture of the electron as a rubber band is going to be useful when I 
> >>> start a topic about how the hydrogen bomb works.
> >>> 
> >>> The way the hydrogen bomb works is crucial to our understanding how the 
> >>> uranium bomb works.
> >>> 
> >>> You may think that I am going the other way around as the a bomb came before
> >>> the h bomb.  Also, how the hell can I explain something which no one ever
> >>> understood.
> >>> 
> >>> Ah, the glorious simplicity of all will be evident, for it results from the 
> >>> mind of 
> >>> 
> >>> Arindam (bin Einstein ban Gandi) Banerjee, greatest genius of all time, sole
> >>> god among lotsa devils.
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> -- 
> >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

#643596

Ari 
"
It is impossible to debate with you and other e=mcc types for you all are 
completely wrong in every way. 
So I will try to make my points clear to the world that is still honest. "
Haha.
Well at least it's just a hobby for Odd.
He should have had those books explained to him- or had a good teacher. Hey, Odd?

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

#643647

On Monday, July 31, 2017 at 6:40:00 AM UTC-7, john wrote:
> Ari 
> "
> It is impossible to debate with you and other e=mcc types for you all are 
> completely wrong in every way. 
> So I will try to make my points clear to the world that is still honest. "
> Haha.
> Well at least it's just a hobby for Odd.
> He should have had those books explained to him- or had a good teacher. Hey, Odd?

It would be pointless.  Trolls don't understand well enough for it to be worth trying to educate them.  

It's really that bad. 

Mostly it's Darwin's fault. He killed religion. In the old days somebody like Odd would be a bible thumper. He would be telling us about all the "truths" that are revealed by God in the bible.  He wouldn't necessarily have read the bible or even read it.  But if you dispute any of this truths he will be quick to point out the passage that "proves" you wrong. 

Science is the troll religion.

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

#643695

James
You and Odd are similar.
It's like you're on the phone- I know your voice-
but you claim you're someone else.

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

#644198

On Monday, July 31, 2017 at 2:27:22 PM UTC-7, john wrote:
> James
> You and Odd are similar.
> It's like you're on the phone- I know your voice-
> but you claim you're someone else.

If you don't want me to consider you a troll then don't compare me to that troll.

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

#643615

On 7/31/17 7:45 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
> On Monday, July 31, 2017 at 10:40:15 PM UTC+10, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Monday, July 31, 2017 at 9:40:25 PM UTC+10, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>> Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Every atom is surrounded by one or more electrons.
>>>>> So unless joined by valency etc. every atom should repel every other atom.
>>>>> But this does not happen. In any solid of any element, the atoms are happy to
>>>>> stick together.
>>>>
>>>> And you obviously have no idea why.  Never educated about fermions I guess.
>>>
>>> When one holds that modern physicists cannot be trusted as they have bungled
>>> with e=mcc and quantum, who wants to be educated about fermions, quarks,
>>> black holes, big bang, etc. They are on the same level as fairies, unicorns,
>>> goblins, gnomes, etc. in the imaginary sense but much less satisfying
>>> psychologically.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Arindam Banerjee
>>
>> You are happy then to lift up a straw man that metals and other solids are
>> a mystery not understood by physicists, because you see no point in
>> studying the explanations they claim to have.
> 
>  From what I have read of your posts, they can be safely ignored, for I do not
> give you any credibility whatsoever. You are blind to reason, and I am sure
> they are too. Anyone who believe in the invariance of the speed of light has
> to be a criminal.
>>
>> Arindam says: "What they claim is obviously false, and so they must be in
>> fact puzzled by why solids do not blow apart, as their simple ideas must
>> suggest, and so I will solve their problem by showing them how solids can
>> be."
>>
>> Have I got all that right?
> 
> It is impossible to debate with you and other e=mcc types for you all are
> completely wrong in every way.
> So I will try to make my points clear to the world that is still honest.

Uh-huh. So when a criticism lands in your general vicinity, your 
response is to call them dishonest and criminal and declare them to be 
without credibility and to shut off the conversation.

I see.

You are SO in the wrong field if you cannot defend your thinking against 
criticism, or worse, acknowledge obvious mistakes.

>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Now why should they, as they all have outer electrons creating negative
>>>>> charges for repulsion?
>>>>> They should all be apart!
>>>>> The answer I gave this morning. It is about the electron acting as a cloud
>>>>> around the nucleus, and this cloud can stretch.
>>>>> When it stretches, the atom becomes a dipole with the nucleus with protons on
>>>>> one side and give a positive field and the electrons dense on the other side
>>>>> giving a negative field.
>>>>> Thus the positive side of an atom attracts the negative side of the other atom
>>>>> Depending upon how strongly this is done, the material is strong.
>>>>>
>>>>> Okay so far?
>>>>>
>>>>> Now the stunning thing, if the above is accepted, is that the electrons in
>>>>> general and an electron in particular is acting as a flexible RUBBER BAND.
>>>>>
>>>>> This picture of the electron as a rubber band is going to be useful when I
>>>>> start a topic about how the hydrogen bomb works.
>>>>>
>>>>> The way the hydrogen bomb works is crucial to our understanding how the
>>>>> uranium bomb works.
>>>>>
>>>>> You may think that I am going the other way around as the a bomb came before
>>>>> the h bomb.  Also, how the hell can I explain something which no one ever
>>>>> understood.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ah, the glorious simplicity of all will be evident, for it results from the
>>>>> mind of
>>>>>
>>>>> Arindam (bin Einstein ban Gandi) Banerjee, greatest genius of all time, sole
>>>>> god among lotsa devils.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> 


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

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web