Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #553795 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-02-17 07:58 +0100 |
| Last post | 2016-02-22 18:59 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 309 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-17 07:58 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-17 10:38 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-17 19:31 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-17 11:55 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-17 14:04 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-17 12:11 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-18 07:25 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-18 01:44 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-18 09:46 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-18 07:57 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-02-18 15:18 +0000
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-18 10:22 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-18 08:33 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-18 21:20 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-18 13:36 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-17 14:03 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-17 12:11 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-18 07:20 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-17 11:45 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-17 09:17 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe, DoW #2) - 2016-02-17 17:23 +0000
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-17 12:35 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-17 19:54 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-17 12:10 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-17 16:19 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-17 13:41 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-17 16:55 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-18 06:36 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-18 18:35 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-18 19:08 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-18 20:57 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-18 22:58 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-02-19 06:32 +0000
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-18 23:50 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. pandora <pandora@peak.org> - 2016-02-19 10:09 -0600
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-19 11:13 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-19 09:31 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-19 10:45 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-02-19 17:58 +0000
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-19 10:12 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-19 11:19 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. pandora <pandora@peak.org> - 2016-02-19 19:31 -0600
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-19 11:14 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-19 13:17 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-02-19 18:46 +0000
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-19 12:17 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-19 10:17 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. pandora <pandora@peak.org> - 2016-02-19 19:24 -0600
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2016-02-19 20:29 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. pandora <pandora@peak.org> - 2016-02-19 19:46 -0600
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-19 17:48 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2016-02-19 20:58 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-19 21:07 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-19 20:09 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. pandora <pandora@peak.org> - 2016-02-20 12:09 -0600
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-20 05:59 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-20 01:38 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-19 22:52 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-20 19:06 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-20 13:24 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-20 11:30 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-20 10:55 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-20 12:36 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-20 22:22 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-20 23:10 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-20 18:19 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-20 16:18 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-21 06:05 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-21 16:00 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-22 06:09 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-27 01:51 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-26 23:38 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-27 19:37 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-27 11:48 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-28 02:14 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-27 23:47 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe, DoW #2) - 2016-02-28 10:22 +0000
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-28 22:57 +0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-28 07:23 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-28 19:10 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-29 07:08 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-29 10:23 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-28 18:54 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-29 02:11 +0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-28 11:24 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-28 13:59 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-28 11:16 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-28 14:26 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-28 11:28 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe, DoW #2) - 2016-02-28 19:30 +0000
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-28 14:57 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-29 03:30 +0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-29 07:28 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-29 01:51 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-29 19:03 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-29 23:00 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-01 06:13 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-03-01 11:11 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-01 09:55 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-02 06:45 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-01 21:05 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-01 13:40 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-03-01 16:06 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-02 06:05 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-28 11:23 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-28 14:09 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-29 07:13 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-29 01:36 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-29 18:19 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-29 12:35 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-01 06:24 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-01 07:50 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-01 20:28 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-01 13:39 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-02 07:15 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-01 16:16 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-02 08:21 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-03 07:40 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-28 13:56 -0500
Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIb Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-28 19:10 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIb kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-28 14:11 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIb Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-29 07:33 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIb kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-29 01:58 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIb Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-29 17:30 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIb Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-29 09:46 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIb Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-29 07:33 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIb Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-29 18:04 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIb Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-01 08:28 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIb Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-01 19:32 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIb Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-01 11:50 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIb kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-03-01 16:10 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIb "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-01 16:29 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIb Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-02 06:00 +0100
Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-28 19:30 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-29 07:13 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-28 23:45 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-29 20:10 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-29 23:01 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-01 05:41 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-03-01 00:08 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-29 21:33 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-01 07:10 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-03-01 11:24 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-01 12:25 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-03-01 12:51 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-01 10:38 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-01 21:58 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-01 16:27 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-02 07:10 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-02 01:52 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-02 18:59 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-01 20:44 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-01 13:38 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-01 16:17 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-01 13:50 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-01 15:06 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-01 16:08 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-01 17:13 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-01 23:37 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-02 06:45 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-02 01:04 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-02 18:16 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-02 06:24 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-02 00:26 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-02 18:42 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-02 12:32 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-02 11:50 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-03 06:52 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-03 07:40 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-01 08:05 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-03-01 11:26 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-01 09:59 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-01 19:26 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-01 13:40 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-01 11:55 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-01 16:02 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-02 06:12 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-02 00:48 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-02 06:12 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-02 00:48 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-02 19:40 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-02 14:47 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-03-02 15:31 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-02 15:45 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-02 12:47 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-03-02 16:57 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-02 17:46 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2016-03-02 21:21 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-03-02 22:33 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2016-03-02 22:54 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-03-02 23:48 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-03-02 22:31 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-02 20:47 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-03-02 23:52 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-02 20:57 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-03-03 00:15 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-03 06:41 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-03 08:54 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-03 13:17 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-04 03:44 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa liquid <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-03 22:29 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-01 11:52 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-02 06:30 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Janithor <Janithor@comcast.net> - 2016-03-01 00:14 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-01 20:18 +0100
Fakey see's the light. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-01 13:34 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-01 05:46 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-01 08:44 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-03 06:46 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-01 06:45 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIa Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-29 07:33 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-22 06:19 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-27 01:55 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-26 23:48 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-27 04:41 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-27 04:10 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-27 07:23 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-27 12:57 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-27 21:10 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-27 19:48 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-27 12:18 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-27 19:15 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-27 11:41 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-27 20:48 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-27 13:07 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-28 19:00 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-28 11:22 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-28 11:13 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe, DoW #2) - 2016-02-28 19:16 +0000
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-29 07:23 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-28 14:14 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-28 14:17 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-28 11:26 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-29 12:38 +0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-29 07:23 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-29 01:46 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-29 17:20 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-29 12:00 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-29 18:19 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-29 10:47 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-29 11:13 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe, DoW #2) - 2016-02-29 19:41 +0000
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-01 04:06 +0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-28 02:17 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-28 19:58 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part I Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-28 12:13 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-22 05:30 +0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2016-02-21 16:42 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-22 05:47 +0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-17 20:05 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-17 22:39 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. mariposas rand mair fheal <mair_fheal@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-17 20:17 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-18 06:47 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-18 09:19 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-18 07:57 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-18 21:10 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-18 15:27 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-20 05:37 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-18 13:28 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-18 18:39 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-18 18:44 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-20 06:20 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-18 17:20 +0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-18 02:26 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-02-18 09:53 +0000
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-18 18:14 +0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-18 10:19 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe, DoW #2) - 2016-02-18 15:22 +0000
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-18 08:33 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-18 06:28 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-18 11:29 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-02-18 16:33 +0000
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-18 09:45 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-19 01:18 +0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-18 18:45 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-19 03:52 +0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-18 18:55 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-18 22:04 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-20 06:09 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-20 01:04 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-20 01:00 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-20 05:20 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-19 20:36 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-19 21:40 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-19 22:44 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-20 05:48 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> - 2016-02-19 23:43 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-18 13:11 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-19 04:32 +0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-18 13:41 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-18 15:41 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-18 19:02 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "%" <persent@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 20:06 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-02-19 05:53 +0000
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-02-19 00:57 -0500
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-20 05:37 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-21 18:32 +0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-22 05:49 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-22 15:04 +0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe, DoW #2) - 2016-02-22 07:37 +0000
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. mariposas rand mair fheal <mair_fheal@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-22 00:48 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-02-22 09:20 +0000
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-02-22 02:29 -0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-22 09:04 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-22 18:54 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-22 11:23 -0700
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-02-23 02:35 +0800
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-23 07:10 +0100
Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-02-22 18:59 +0100
Page 6 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 16 Next page →
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-01 21:05 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II |
| Message-ID | <08e0c2df4da774000c3707c8b4d341e3@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #558298 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
Ko0O0oki kensi the LunkHeaded LibTard, in
<news:nb4f03$dor$1@gioia.aioe.org> did thusly jump head first into the
wood chipper again:
> On 01/03/2016 12:13 AM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler
> Emeritus wrote:
>> Ko0O0oki kensi the LunkHeaded LibTard, in
>> <news:nb344n$279$1@gioia.aioe.org> did thusly jump head first into the
>> wood chipper again:
>>> On 29/02/2016 1:03 PM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler
>>> Emeritus wrote:
>>>>> 4 ----
>>>>> 3 ----
>>>>>
>>>>> 2 ----
>>>>> 1 ----
>>>>>
>>>>> and absorb a higher energy photon to jump from 2 to 3, and then a lower
>>>>> energy one to jump the smaller gap from 3 to 4.
>>>> You fecking moron. If such were the case, it'd be an easy matter to
>>>> ionize all matter using low energy photons... fortunately for all of
>>>> us, the universe isn't a moron like you.
>>>>
>>>> The electron orbital states are a form of negative potential energy.
>>>> An ionized electron has potential energy of 0, whereas bound electrons
>>>> have a lower (negative) potential energy, said potential energy being
>>>> lower (more negative) with lower orbital states.
>>>>
>>>> The formula to determine orbital state energy:
>>>> En = -hcR_inf (Z^2/n^2)
>>>> Where R_inf = Rydberg constant
>>>> Z = atomic number
>>>> n = principal quantum number
>>>> h = Planck's constant
>>>> c = speed of light
>>>>
>>>> So what *you're* k'laming is that electrons can attain any orbit at
>>>> all merely by continually absorbing low-energy photons, which violates
>>>> Hund's Rule, the Aufbau Principle, the diagonal rule, and the Pauli
>>>> Exclusion Principle.
>>>>
>>>> So yet again LunkHead finds himself 180 degrees out from reality.
>>>> Because he's not an astrophysicist, he's a lumpy dumpy frumpy slumpy
>>>> shroomtard.
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>> You fecking moron. The wider gaps prevent that.
>> Bwahahahaaa! Moron k'lames the energy gaps between shells are *wider*
>> the higher up in shell level one goes! Yet again, LunkHead is 180
>> degrees out from reality because his puny little brain doesn't have
>> the horsepower to process reality!
>>
>> And this bit of retardation is another desperate attempt by LunkHead
>> to deny quantum physics and k'lame that lower-energy photons can
>> excite higher-energy molecules. LOL
>>
>> I guess LunkHead's never heard of electron shielding of the
>> electronegativity of the nucleus by lower-shell electrons, which is
>> the reason *why* successively higher shells are spaced more closely
>> together, thereby requiring less energy to jump between shells.
>>
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shielding_effect>
>> "The shielding effect describes the attraction between an electron and
>> the nucleus in any atom with more than one electron shell. Shielding
>> effect can be defined as a reduction in the effective nuclear charge
>> on the electron cloud, due to a difference in the attraction forces of
>> the electrons on the nucleus. It is also referred to as the screening
>> effect or atomic shielding."
>>
>> Which means LunkHead has no idea what Effective Nuclear Charge is:
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_nuclear_charge>
>> "The effective nuclear charge (often symbolized as Z_{\mathrm{eff}} or
>> Z^\ast) is the net positive charge experienced by an electron in a
>> multi-electron atom. The term "effective" is used because the
>> shielding effect of negatively charged electrons prevents higher
>> orbital electrons from experiencing the full nuclear charge of the
>> nucleus due to the repelling effect of inner-layer electrons."
>>
>> Which means LunkHead has no fucking clue how atoms work. So it's
>> little wonder the thickwit keeps proving he's a fucking moron who
>> can't possibly be an astrophysicist.
>>
>> SPNAK!
> http://chemsite.lsrhs.net/bonding/images/orbital_energy_diag_large.gif
>
> Note that sometimes wider gaps are above narrower gaps, as is the case
> with the 4p to 5s gap above the 3d to 4p gap.
You fecking moron, now you're backpedaling with "sometimes wider gaps"
because you got caught being a fucking moron who k'lamed that *all*
energy gaps got wider as the shell number increased. You can no more
explain those two exceptions to the rule than you could defend your
kooky k'lame that energy gaps got wider as the shell number increased,
which was your kooky attempt at denying quantum physics so you could
further k'lame that atoms could absorb photons of any energy, even if
the photon's energy was below the energy of the atom.
But I do note your tacit admission that you were *wrong*, LunkHead.
SPNAK!
> Note that the bottom four energy levels are spaced quite similarly to my
> own crude ASCII diagram, with a narrower gap to either side of a wider one.
Which you have no idea of the reason for... if you did, you'd realize
you just got SPNAK!'d on yet another topic, and you'd shut your stupid
gob, you moron.
SPNAK!
> Note that you have been proved wrong for the umpteenth time already
You'll be providing the MIDs and relevant text where you purport this
has ever happened, Spankard.
> about electron energy levels *and* about water molecules -- I guess
> chemistry just isn't your subject, any more than climatology,
> meteorology, general relativity, HTTP, HTML, Javascript, thermodynamics,
> electrical engineering, trigonometry, Fourier analysis, politics, or any
> of the other things you've recently given a whirl are.
You fucking moron, you're lying to try to salve your bootfucked ass.
You k'lamed that water is tetrahedral, it's not except under an old
and discredited water model. You k'lamed the energy gaps increased as
shell number increased, it doesn't except for the change in electron
density probability geometry causing a slight decrease in electron
shielding of the electronegativity of the nucleus between two
sub-shells. You k'lamed a web page had to be loaded to view its title,
except you forgot about third party plug-ins that already *have* the
title of the web page, said plug-ins rating the web pages for
security.
As for all the rest, you can refer to the stupidity you spewed, as
outlined in my .sig.
You're well and truly SPNAK!'d, and now you're backpedaling and
lying... because butthurt kooks must backpedal and lie to assuage the
cognitive dissonance they experience from being proven *wrong*.
SPNAK!
> SPN<SMACKAKOOK!>
Spankard.
> But if I were a betting woman
shroomtard
> I'd put my money on your losing streak continuing instead.
You're projecting, Spankard. Why can't you address any of the myriad
topics you got SPNAK!'d on, as outlined in my .sig, Spankard?
<snicker>
--
Kensi the moron wrote:
================================
The sphere's Gaussian curvature is 1/r^2, and its area is 4*pi*r^2, so
the curvature is 4*pi
================================
Kensi the moron said the Gaussian curvature = 1 / r^2 *and* the
Gaussian curvature = 4 * pi.
Therefore, 1 / r^2 = 4 * pi
Therefore, r = 0.28209479176
Kensi the moron says every sphere in the entire universe has a radius
of 0.28209479176. Of course, being a moron, kensi didn't specify the
units.
The moron also said the Gaussian curvature of a sphere is dependent
upon that sphere's radius. Wholly incorrect.
Kensi the moron was corrected:
================================
Did... did you just say "the Gaussian curvature = 1/r^2" *and* "the
Gaussian curvature = 4*pi" therefore "1/r^2 = 4*pi"? Now you
backpedal, LunkHead.
You mean the Gaussian curvature = 1/r^2 * (4*pi*r^2) therefore =
(4*pi), and therefore the Gaussian curvature of a sphere is
independent of r due to its symmetry, thereby proving your original
"The sphere's Gaussian curvature is 1/r^2" blather *wrong*?
================================
But Kensi the moron persists in insisting that what he wrote isn't
fucked up, and that the Gaussian curvature of a sphere *does* depend
upon its radius, because he doesn't understand the equations he's
trying to use, he doesn't know the difference between 'constant
curvature' and 'Gaussian curvature', he doesn't know what an integral
is, and he's a halfwit who can't figure out even basic geometry
problems.
Now remember, this is the same moron who k'lames he's an
astrophysicist... yet he's stated that the Riemann curvature tensor
concept being the central mathematical tool in the theory of general
relativity and the modern theory of gravity, and the curvature of
space-time being described by the geodesic deviation equation, is
"science fiction" and "a howler".
In addition, the moron k'lamed that 4-D Minkowski space-time was
mostly positive Gaussian curvature, with only small areas of negative
Gaussian curvature, which proves the moron has no idea of the effects
of mass or magnetism upon the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold.
He has k'lamed that the Gaussian curvature of the universe is
predominantly positive, which means Lunkhead believes that massive
objects such as planets, stars and black holes ride *above* the
tangential plane of the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, thereby
making the planes of principal curvature positive Gaussian curvature,
and thus causing gravity to *repel*.
Lunkhead the moron has k'lamed that magnetism has "*no* effect" upon
the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, then backpedaled and said there
was a "small amount of positive curvature due to the energy density in
the field", thereby proving he doesn't know how magnetism affects the
4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, and denies the existence of
magnetic attraction.
Thus, Kensi the moron has described a universe in which planets could
not maintain their orbits, a universe in which magnets could not work,
and therefore a universe which could not exist.
Kensi is the same moron who k'lames that snow at a colder temperature
than the surrounding atmosphere is somehow violating the First and
Second Laws of Thermodynamics and giving off "blackbody radiation".
Kensi is the same moron who k'lames that snow gives off "blackbody
radiation" at wavelengths that would put the temperature of the snow
at 489 F.
Kensi is the same moron who first denied the existence of the
~11-micron infrared atmospheric window, then backpedaled and k'lamed
that snow emitted outside that ~11-micron window, and was proven
wrong. Then the spankard moron tried to use the backpedal of
"blackbody radiation" being at a different wavelength than spectral
emission, yet again demonstrating that the moron has no clue how
spectral absorption and emission works.
Kensi is the same moron who denies the NASA SABER study proving that
CO2 is a global *cooling* gas _because_ of the ~11-micron infrared
atmospheric window.
The reality exposed by the NASA SABER study also proves the Klimate
Katastrophe Kook Anthropogenic Global Warming k'lame of CO2 being a
global warming gas is a fairy tale that violates the First and Second
Laws of Thermodynamics, thus destroying CO2-induced AGW, yet this same
moron continues to cling to his delusions.
Kensi is the same moron who continues to cling to his delusion that
global warming causes more intense hurricanes, despite three
peer-reviewed studies proving the exact opposite.
Kensi is not an astrophysicist, he's far too stupid to be. He's just a
slumpy dumpy frumpy lumpy loser trying to pretend that he's
intelligent... and failing badly.
That would be because Kensi is a moron with an underpowered brain that
struggles (and fails) to understand reality.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-01 13:40 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II |
| Message-ID | <3hvbdblr1b8q34ieqbnobaqqkvd76cmvea@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #558399 |
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 21:05:17 +0100 (CET), Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote: The most common arrangement of liquid water (H2O) molecules is tetrahedral with two hydrogen atoms covalently attached to oxygen and two attached by hydrogen bonds.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-01 16:06 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II |
| Message-ID | <nb509a$1g41$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #558399 |
On 01/03/2016 3:05 PM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote: > you got caught being a fucking moron who k'lamed that *all* > energy gaps got wider as the shell number increased. Did not, liar. > You're projecting, Spankard. ...says the lighthouse. -- "To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks "I get fooled all the time by the constant hosiery parade in here." ~Checkmate
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-02 06:05 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II |
| Message-ID | <0007a47dc5c6217b3e69f096f54cedf3@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #558414 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
Ko0O0oki kensi the LunkHeaded LibTard, in
<news:nb509a$1g41$1@gioia.aioe.org> did thusly jump head first into
the wood chipper again:
> On 01/03/2016 3:05 PM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler
> Emeritus wrote:
>> You fecking moron, now you're backpedaling with "sometimes wider gaps"
>> because you got caught being a fucking moron who k'lamed that *all*
>> energy gaps got wider as the shell number increased. You can no more
>> explain those two exceptions to the rule than you could defend your
>> kooky k'lame that energy gaps got wider as the shell number increased,
>> which was your kooky attempt at denying quantum physics so you could
>> further k'lame that atoms could absorb photons of any energy, even if
>> the photon's energy was below the energy of the atom.
>>
>> But I do note your tacit admission that you were *wrong*, LunkHead.
>>
>> SPNAK!
> Did not, liar.
And now you're lying to cover up your lies to cover up your stupidity.
LOL
===========================================================
>>>> So what *you're* k'laming is that electrons can attain any orbit at
>>>> all merely by continually absorbing low-energy photons, which violates
>>>> Hund's Rule, the Aufbau Principle, the diagonal rule, and the Pauli
>>>> Exclusion Principle.
>>>>
>>>> So yet again LunkHead finds himself 180 degrees out from reality.
>>>> Because he's not an astrophysicist, he's a lumpy dumpy frumpy slumpy
>>>> shroomtard.
>>>>
>>>> SPNAK!
>>> You fecking moron. The wider gaps prevent that.
>> Bwahahahaaa! Moron k'lames the energy gaps between shells are *wider*
>> the higher up in shell level one goes! Yet again, LunkHead is 180
>> degrees out from reality because his puny little brain doesn't have
>> the horsepower to process reality!
>>
>> And this bit of retardation is another desperate attempt by LunkHead
>> to deny quantum physics and k'lame that lower-energy photons can
>> excite higher-energy molecules. LOL
>>
>> I guess LunkHead's never heard of electron shielding of the
>> electronegativity of the nucleus by lower-shell electrons, which is
>> the reason *why* successively higher shells are spaced more closely
>> together, thereby requiring less energy to jump between shells.
>>
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shielding_effect>
>> "The shielding effect describes the attraction between an electron and
>> the nucleus in any atom with more than one electron shell. Shielding
>> effect can be defined as a reduction in the effective nuclear charge
>> on the electron cloud, due to a difference in the attraction forces of
>> the electrons on the nucleus. It is also referred to as the screening
>> effect or atomic shielding."
>>
>> Which means LunkHead has no idea what Effective Nuclear Charge is:
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_nuclear_charge>
>> "The effective nuclear charge (often symbolized as Z_{\mathrm{eff}} or
>> Z^\ast) is the net positive charge experienced by an electron in a
>> multi-electron atom. The term "effective" is used because the
>> shielding effect of negatively charged electrons prevents higher
>> orbital electrons from experiencing the full nuclear charge of the
>> nucleus due to the repelling effect of inner-layer electrons."
>>
>> Which means LunkHead has no fucking clue how atoms work. So it's
>> little wonder the thickwit keeps proving he's a fucking moron who
>> can't possibly be an astrophysicist.
>>
>> SPNAK!
===========================================================
Then you tried to reiterate your k'lame using a graphic showing a
slightly larger gap between two subshells, then you blathered about
"sometimes wider gaps", proving you're a backpedaling moron
desperately trying to catch up to your Usenet Lord and Master, and
failing badly at it... you're *so* stupid you don't even realize your
k'lame of a 'lower-energy photon being able to excite a higher-energy
atom', and your k'lame of the 'energy gaps between electron orbital
shells being wider at successively higher shells' are mutually
exclusive.
You are, after all, the self-spanking anti-science nitwit.
SPNAK!
<snicker>
>> You're projecting, Spankard.
> ...says the lighthouse.
You're projecting, Spankard.
<snicker>
Message-ID: <a76a23be8f4a22ea6c31dde5b3e2dd8c@dizum.com>
========================================================
========================================================
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.usenet.kooks/yhNtCQr1rpE/GlDtnrGgMxsJ>
<http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=145664837800>
From: Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid>
Newsgroups: alt.usenet.kooks
Subject: Re: A REVIEW: How much does Keith "Murphy" McElroy suck at
this Usenet thing?
Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 00:58:29 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <km1mfl$t4j$7@dont-email.me>
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org;
posting-host="67.70.58.178";
Summary: Murphy is a kook with hundreds, if not thousands, of sock
puppets
Keywords: Murphy
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
========================================================
========================================================
Nadegda got outed as that lumpy dumpy frumpy slumpy shroomtard Paul
Derbyshire by Ray Banana. When LunkHead learned of this, he
immediately started backpedaling and k'laming that "Nadegda" was
actually just "vacationing" in Pembroke. LOL!
Message-ID: <65d0f5e1ad03d42086b4a492e0eba763@dizum.com>
========================================================
========================================================
> <http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=134389570800>
Kensi was "vacationing"... in Pembroke, Ontario, Canada... quite by
coincidence, you understand... LunkHead was there with Nadegda,
apparently.
And Nadegda and Kensi most definitely were *not* there to double-team
on Paul Derbyshire's mushroom-slathered meatpole.
Paul Derbyshire is a life-long virgin, you see. He'll never touch
anything more feminine than his hand with a Barbie-doll wig glued to
it, paste-on eyes, and his mother's hooker-pink lipstick smeared
between thumb and index finger knuckle. Ironically, he's named his
f(e)isty lover "kensi". She's really hot in the sack... an expert in
getting anal. Sometimes, she takes it so deeply it pokes out of her
mouth!
Oh, here's Kensi:
<http://goo.gl/hdpXFC>
She's Paul Derbyshire's regular Saturday night thang. Ain't she purdy?
I'm sure a lot of guys have hit that. Chimpy's hit that... twice.
Strangely and quite coincidentally, Paul Derbyshire calls his right
thumb "Nadegda". I found a picture of Nadegda, too.
<https://goo.gl/sbdRcq>
You don't wanna know what she's into. *Really* kinky stuff. Suffice to
say sometimes she invites along her four sisters for what she calls
"sexy spelunking". You know what they say... fugly chicks gotta go
kinky. LOL
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdyBYSuqQBQ>
> P.S. How's the astrophysics coming along? Have you visited
> any good telescopes lately?
Ask kensi which observatories nearby have time standard control
capability. That's something every astronomer should know, right?
<snicker>
========================================================
========================================================
I note you've studiously avoided answering which observatories have
time standard control capability, LunkHead... only those who actually
work at an observatory would even know about such a thing, let alone
which observatories have that capability... but then, everyone knows
lumpy dumpy frumpy slumpy wannabes always out their womanly socks
because they're too stoooopid to play the part of the identity they've
assumed. Perhaps for your next sock, you should play the part of a mop
jockey or a streetwalker... that'd be something you could handle,
dude.
<snicker>
--
Kensi the moron wrote:
================================
The sphere's Gaussian curvature is 1/r^2, and its area is 4*pi*r^2, so
the curvature is 4*pi
================================
Kensi the moron said the Gaussian curvature = 1 / r^2 *and* the
Gaussian curvature = 4 * pi.
Therefore, 1 / r^2 = 4 * pi
Therefore, r = 0.28209479176
Kensi the moron says every sphere in the entire universe has a radius
of 0.28209479176. Of course, being a moron, kensi didn't specify the
units.
The moron also said the Gaussian curvature of a sphere is dependent
upon that sphere's radius. Wholly incorrect.
Kensi the moron was corrected:
================================
Did... did you just say "the Gaussian curvature = 1/r^2" *and* "the
Gaussian curvature = 4*pi" therefore "1/r^2 = 4*pi"? Now you
backpedal, LunkHead.
You mean the Gaussian curvature = 1/r^2 * (4*pi*r^2) therefore =
(4*pi), and therefore the Gaussian curvature of a sphere is
independent of r due to its symmetry, thereby proving your original
"The sphere's Gaussian curvature is 1/r^2" blather *wrong*?
================================
But Kensi the moron persists in insisting that what he wrote isn't
fucked up, and that the Gaussian curvature of a sphere *does* depend
upon its radius, because he doesn't understand the equations he's
trying to use, he doesn't know the difference between 'constant
curvature' and 'Gaussian curvature', he doesn't know what an integral
is, and he's a halfwit who can't figure out even basic geometry
problems.
Now remember, this is the same moron who k'lames he's an
astrophysicist... yet he's stated that the Riemann curvature tensor
concept being the central mathematical tool in the theory of general
relativity and the modern theory of gravity, and the curvature of
space-time being described by the geodesic deviation equation, is
"science fiction" and "a howler".
In addition, the moron k'lamed that 4-D Minkowski space-time was
mostly positive Gaussian curvature, with only small areas of negative
Gaussian curvature, which proves the moron has no idea of the effects
of mass or magnetism upon the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold.
He has k'lamed that the Gaussian curvature of the universe is
predominantly positive, which means Lunkhead believes that massive
objects such as planets, stars and black holes ride *above* the
tangential plane of the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, thereby
making the planes of principal curvature positive Gaussian curvature,
and thus causing gravity to *repel*.
Lunkhead the moron has k'lamed that magnetism has "*no* effect" upon
the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, then backpedaled and said there
was a "small amount of positive curvature due to the energy density in
the field", thereby proving he doesn't know how magnetism affects the
4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, and denies the existence of
magnetic attraction.
Thus, Kensi the moron has described a universe in which planets could
not maintain their orbits, a universe in which magnets could not work,
and therefore a universe which could not exist.
Kensi is the same moron who k'lames that snow at a colder temperature
than the surrounding atmosphere is somehow violating the First and
Second Laws of Thermodynamics and giving off "blackbody radiation".
Kensi is the same moron who k'lames that snow gives off "blackbody
radiation" at wavelengths that would put the temperature of the snow
at 489 F.
Kensi is the same moron who first denied the existence of the
~11-micron infrared atmospheric window, then backpedaled and k'lamed
that snow emitted outside that ~11-micron window, and was proven
wrong. Then the spankard moron tried to use the backpedal of
"blackbody radiation" being at a different wavelength than spectral
emission, yet again demonstrating that the moron has no clue how
spectral absorption and emission works.
Kensi is the same moron who denies the NASA SABER study proving that
CO2 is a global *cooling* gas _because_ of the ~11-micron infrared
atmospheric window.
The reality exposed by the NASA SABER study also proves the Klimate
Katastrophe Kook Anthropogenic Global Warming k'lame of CO2 being a
global warming gas is a fairy tale that violates the First and Second
Laws of Thermodynamics, thus destroying CO2-induced AGW, yet this same
moron continues to cling to his delusions.
Kensi is the same moron who continues to cling to his delusion that
global warming causes more intense hurricanes, despite three
peer-reviewed studies proving the exact opposite.
Kensi is not an astrophysicist, he's far too stupid to be. He's just a
slumpy dumpy frumpy lumpy loser trying to pretend that he's
intelligent... and failing badly.
That would be because Kensi is a moron with an underpowered brain that
struggles (and fails) to understand reality.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-28 11:23 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II |
| Message-ID | <noe6dblrrbl0drtdedh1hasgvf03u1fu6e@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #557594 |
On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 18:54:59 +0100 (CET), Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote: >>> Who k'lamed that, again? The *net* transfer is in the other direction, >>> because the hot object emits more energy than it receives, and the cold >>> one receives more than it emits. But they do both radiate. Lunkhead. > >> Gee, I didn't have any problem understanding that explanation. I wonder >> if the Fakeytard is being deliberately obtuse, or if he actually IS that >> stupid? > >OMG! Chimpy also denies the Laws of Thermodynamics. Now Chimpy can get >right on explaining how a photon of *lower* energy can excite a >molecule of *higher* energy. The fact is, heat gives itself to cold. no matter how you want to spin it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-28 14:09 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II |
| Message-ID | <navgkl$95j$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #557594 |
On 28/02/2016 12:54 PM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote: > IOW, a blackbody can absorb all radiation *above* *the* *energy* *of* > *the* *blackbody* *itself* simply because the lower-energy photons are > not of sufficient energy to cause the blackbody's orbital electrons to > enter a higher orbital. KoOk's now confusing electron orbit excitement (which produces narrow absorption and emission lines) with the free motion and vibration of molecules (which is where heat is, and where blackbody emissions originate and are absorbed). > Now LunkHead is going to have to explain how radiation from the snow > or ice can be reflected off the clouds, and *cause* *the* *snow* *or* > *ice* *to* *heat* *up*... Never claimed it heats it up. Rather, it doesn't cool as rapidly at night as it would if the sky were clear. It can heat it up across a span of multiple days, *if* the reduced cooling at night means that solar daytime heating exceeds nighttime radiative cooling due to the nighttime cloud cover (and lack of much cloud cover by day), where with little cloud cover at day *or* night the nighttime cooling would be greater than the daytime heating. Rest of 400-odd-line kOokblather snipped as it suffices to blast those two root misconceptions of yours to bring that whole edifice crashing down around your ko0ky ears. -- "To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks "I get fooled all the time by the constant hosiery parade in here." ~Checkmate
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-29 07:13 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II |
| Message-ID | <8057c291756e079f789887096980f9ad@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #557618 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> Ko0O0ki kensi the LunkHeaded LibTard, in <news:navgkl$95j$1@gioia.aioe.org> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > On 28/02/2016 12:54 PM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler > Emeritus wrote: >> IOW, a blackbody can absorb all radiation *above* *the* *energy* *of* >> *the* *blackbody* *itself* simply because the lower-energy photons are >> not of sufficient energy to cause the blackbody's orbital electrons to >> enter a higher orbital. > KoOk's now confusing electron orbit excitement (which produces narrow > absorption and emission lines) with the free motion and vibration of > molecules (which is where heat is, and where blackbody emissions > originate and are absorbed). WTF?! LunkHead k'lames blackbody radiation is due to "motion and vibration of molecules"! And he's doing it as he tries to defend his kooky contention that a photon of lower energy can heat up a molecule of higher energy! Bwahahahahaaaaaaa! Oh shit, LunkHead, there's no fucking way you're an astrophysicist, spewing Stupid Shit On Usenet like that. I will now utterly destroy both of your kooky contentions, providing the requisite proof that you're a drooling moron spewing moronic bullshit... In a hypothetical blackbody (a blackbody is a concept, a hypothetical material that does not exist... not even black holes are perfect blackbodies... radiation with a wavelength equal to or longer than the radius of the black hole may not be absorbed, and it is proposed that they give off blackbody radiation in the form of Hawking radiation), whenever a blackbody emits radiation, it corresponds to an electron jumping from a higher energy state to a lower energy state. If you observe a star, you'd see a continuous spectrum with no breaks. If you observe the gas making up that star, you'd see a continuous spectrum with breaks where specific wavelengths of energy have been absorbed by the gas cloud and then re-emitted. If you observe the gas itself (grab some from that star, so it's not fusing), you'll see emission spectra (peaks that correlate to the spectral emission of the atoms of that gas). There is a connection between emission lines from a gas and the continuous spectrum from a solid. As you crowd atoms together (as in a solid), the allowed energy levels in one atom start to become distorted due to the influence of the electric field of neighboring atoms. Distort an energy level difference a little bit and you get a slightly different frequency emission/absorption line. A distribution of distortions leads to a distribution of lines than eventually blend into a continuum. <http://astronomy.nmsu.edu/geas/lectures/lecture19/slide02.html> For solid objects, which emit a continuous spectrum, it's the same thing, thermal kinetic energy causes electrons to randomly change orbitals... remember, photons are an *electromagnetic* phenomenon... they are created solely by electrons dropping in orbit, and absorbed solely by electrons increasing in orbit, as quantum physics proved. Your kooky "motion and vibration of molecules" is *wrong*. <http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/252/black_body_radiation.html> <http://xray.rutgers.edu/~matilsky/documents/kirchoff.html> The second page also proves you *wrong* about your kooky contention that a photon of lower energy can excite a molecule of higher energy, to wit: "IMPORTANT POINT: since the different energy levels are discretely spaced, some photons will not have precisely the right amount of energy to cause the electron to jump to another level. Those photons are not absorbed by the atom." So your "black body radiation" in a gas isn't due to "motion and vibration of molecules" as the primary originator of photons, it's due to the random direction of re-emission of absorbed photons *from* *electrons* *dropping* *in* *their* *orbits*, thus blurring out the spectrum, filling out the spectral gaps and creating a continuous spectrum from spectral emission of the atoms making up that gas. And your "black body radiation" in a solid isn't due to "motion and vibration of molecules" as the primary originator of photons, it's due to the fact that the allowed energy levels of the atoms making up that solid are distorted, thus when the thermal kinetic energy causes those orbital electrons to randomly rise and *fall* *in* *their* *orbits*, *a* *continuous* *spectrum* *is* *created* of photon emission. Both of the cases (solids and gasses), though, are due to electrons dropping in orbit and emitting a photon, the *only* way a photon can be created. IOW, you don't even understand Kirchoff's Laws, which means there's no fucking way you're an astrophysicist. It also proves you don't understand a single thing about quantum physics. You're supposed to be an astrophysicist, remember? You should know this stuff... but you don't, because you're really just a lumpy dumpy frumpy slumpy shroomtard. SPNAK! >> Now LunkHead is going to have to explain how radiation from the snow >> or ice can be reflected off the clouds, and *cause* *the* *snow* *or* >> *ice* *to* *heat* *up*... > Never claimed it heats it up. Rather, it doesn't cool as rapidly at > night as it would if the sky were clear. Wrong. You've been proven wrong on this. The Radiation Paradox *proves* you wrong. > It can heat it up across a span of multiple days, *if* the reduced > cooling at night means that solar daytime heating exceeds nighttime > radiative cooling due to the nighttime cloud cover (and lack of much > cloud cover by day), Oh, so now you admit that increasing cloud cover over highly reflective surfaces such as snow or ice increases radiative emission to space, exactly as I said, exactly as those 7 cited peer-reviewed studies prove, exactly as the Radiation Paradox proves. SPNAK! > where with little cloud cover at day *or* night the > nighttime cooling would be greater than the daytime heating. And now you're right back to the same stupid shit you've been spewing... because you're far too retarded to understand physical processes. LOL <http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~broek112/home.php_files/Publications_MvdB/1996_Bintanja_IJC.pdf> ============================================================= Increasing the cloud optical depth causes a large increase in cloud albedo and only a small change in cloud emissivity so that the cooling effect starts to dominate." Thus, the phenomenon that net radiation increases with increasing cloud amount is, under favourable conditions (e.g. high albedo), attributable to the asymmetry in the dependency of the longwave and shortwave radiative cloud properties on cloud optical thickness. ============================================================= Thus, with high reflectivity surfaces such as snow or ice, radiation emission *increases* to space, day *or* night. Cloud cover only causes warmer nights over low reflectivity surfaces such as soil or concrete due to the different wavelengths emitted by those surfaces. Radiation reflected from the clouds is absorbed by the snow and re-radiated in the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window, going straight out to space, causing a net *cooling* as cloud cover (ie: optical depth) increases, which is the underlying basis for the Radiation Paradox, which none of you know-nothing nongs knew about. If you morons had any depth of understanding of the physical processes taking place, you'd realize the obvious, but you don't... because you're morons. Your anti-science nitwittery is why you morons believe in the fairy tale of CO2-induced AGW, despite the fact that it violates the Laws of Thermodynamics. SPNAK! > Rest of 400-odd-line kOokblather snipped as it suffices to blast those > two root misconceptions of yours to bring that whole edifice crashing > down around your ko0ky ears. If you keep spewing kooky shit like this while cowardly snipping out everything that proves you *wrong*, people are gonna start thinking you're a moron, Moron. LOL Message-ID: <a76a23be8f4a22ea6c31dde5b3e2dd8c@dizum.com> ======================================================== ======================================================== <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.usenet.kooks/yhNtCQr1rpE/GlDtnrGgMxsJ> <http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=145664837800> From: Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> Newsgroups: alt.usenet.kooks Subject: Re: A REVIEW: How much does Keith "Murphy" McElroy suck at this Usenet thing? Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 00:58:29 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <km1mfl$t4j$7@dont-email.me> Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="67.70.58.178"; Summary: Murphy is a kook with hundreds, if not thousands, of sock puppets Keywords: Murphy X-Mailer: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118 ======================================================== ======================================================== Nadegda got outed as that lumpy dumpy frumpy slumpy shroomtard Paul Derbyshire by Ray Banana. When LunkHead learned of this, he immediately started backpedaling and k'laming that "Nadegda" was actually just "vacationing" in Pembroke. LOL! Message-ID: <65d0f5e1ad03d42086b4a492e0eba763@dizum.com> ======================================================== ======================================================== > <http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=134389570800> Kensi was "vacationing"... in Pembroke, Ontario, Canada... quite by coincidence, you understand... LunkHead was there with Nadegda, apparently. And Nadegda and Kensi most definitely were *not* there to double-team on Paul Derbyshire's mushroom-slathered meatpole. Paul Derbyshire is a life-long virgin, you see. He'll never touch anything more feminine than his hand with a Barbie-doll wig glued to it, paste-on eyes, and his mother's hooker-pink lipstick smeared between thumb and index finger knuckle. Ironically, he's named his f(e)isty lover "kensi". She's really hot in the sack... an expert in getting anal. Sometimes, she takes it so deeply it pokes out of her mouth! Oh, here's Kensi: <http://goo.gl/hdpXFC> She's Paul Derbyshire's regular Saturday night thang. Ain't she purdy? I'm sure a lot of guys have hit that. Chimpy's hit that... twice. Strangely and quite coincidentally, Paul Derbyshire calls his right thumb "Nadegda". I found a picture of Nadegda, too. <https://goo.gl/sbdRcq> You don't wanna know what she's into. *Really* kinky stuff. Suffice to say sometimes she invites along her four sisters for what she calls "sexy spelunking". You know what they say... fugly chicks gotta go kinky. LOL > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdyBYSuqQBQ> > P.S. How's the astrophysics coming along? Have you visited > any good telescopes lately? Ask kensi which observatories nearby have time standard control capability. That's something every astronomer should know, right? <snicker> ======================================================== ======================================================== I note you've studiously avoided answering which observatories have time standard control capability, LunkHead... only those who actually work at an observatory would even know about such a thing, let alone which observatories have that capability... but then, everyone knows lumpy dumpy frumpy slumpy wannabes always out their womanly socks because they're too stoooopid to play the part of the identity they've assumed. Perhaps for your next sock, you should play the part of a mop jockey or a streetwalker... that'd be something you could handle, dude. <snicker> -- Kensi the moron wrote: ================================ The sphere's Gaussian curvature is 1/r^2, and its area is 4*pi*r^2, so the curvature is 4*pi ================================ Kensi the moron said the Gaussian curvature = 1 / r^2 *and* the Gaussian curvature = 4 * pi. Therefore, 1 / r^2 = 4 * pi Therefore, r = 0.28209479176 Kensi the moron says every sphere in the entire universe has a radius of 0.28209479176. Of course, being a moron, kensi didn't specify the units. The moron also said the Gaussian curvature of a sphere is dependent upon that sphere's radius. Wholly incorrect. Kensi the moron was corrected: ================================ Did... did you just say "the Gaussian curvature = 1/r^2" *and* "the Gaussian curvature = 4*pi" therefore "1/r^2 = 4*pi"? Now you backpedal, LunkHead. You mean the Gaussian curvature = 1/r^2 * (4*pi*r^2) therefore = (4*pi), and therefore the Gaussian curvature of a sphere is independent of r due to its symmetry, thereby proving your original "The sphere's Gaussian curvature is 1/r^2" blather *wrong*? ================================ But Kensi the moron persists in insisting that what he wrote isn't fucked up, and that the Gaussian curvature of a sphere *does* depend upon its radius, because he doesn't understand the equations he's trying to use, he doesn't know the difference between 'constant curvature' and 'Gaussian curvature', he doesn't know what an integral is, and he's a halfwit who can't figure out even basic geometry problems. Now remember, this is the same moron who k'lames he's an astrophysicist... yet he's stated that the Riemann curvature tensor concept being the central mathematical tool in the theory of general relativity and the modern theory of gravity, and the curvature of space-time being described by the geodesic deviation equation, is "science fiction" and "a howler". In addition, the moron k'lamed that 4-D Minkowski space-time was mostly positive Gaussian curvature, with only small areas of negative Gaussian curvature, which proves the moron has no idea of the effects of mass or magnetism upon the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold. He has k'lamed that the Gaussian curvature of the universe is predominantly positive, which means Lunkhead believes that massive objects such as planets, stars and black holes ride *above* the tangential plane of the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, thereby making the planes of principal curvature positive Gaussian curvature, and thus causing gravity to *repel*. Lunkhead the moron has k'lamed that magnetism has "*no* effect" upon the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, then backpedaled and said there was a "small amount of positive curvature due to the energy density in the field", thereby proving he doesn't know how magnetism affects the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, and denies the existence of magnetic attraction. Thus, Kensi the moron has described a universe in which planets could not maintain their orbits, a universe in which magnets could not work, and therefore a universe which could not exist. Kensi is the same moron who k'lames that snow at a colder temperature than the surrounding atmosphere is somehow violating the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics and giving off "blackbody radiation". Kensi is the same moron who k'lames that snow gives off "blackbody radiation" at wavelengths that would put the temperature of the snow at 489 F. Kensi is the same moron who first denied the existence of the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window, then backpedaled and k'lamed that snow emitted outside that ~11-micron window, and was proven wrong. Then the spankard moron tried to use the backpedal of "blackbody radiation" being at a different wavelength than spectral emission, yet again demonstrating that the moron has no clue how spectral absorption and emission works. Kensi is the same moron who denies the NASA SABER study proving that CO2 is a global *cooling* gas _because_ of the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window. The reality exposed by the NASA SABER study also proves the Klimate Katastrophe Kook Anthropogenic Global Warming k'lame of CO2 being a global warming gas is a fairy tale that violates the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics, thus destroying CO2-induced AGW, yet this same moron continues to cling to his delusions. Kensi is the same moron who continues to cling to his delusion that global warming causes more intense hurricanes, despite three peer-reviewed studies proving the exact opposite. Kensi is not an astrophysicist, he's far too stupid to be. He's just a slumpy dumpy frumpy lumpy loser trying to pretend that he's intelligent... and failing badly. That would be because Kensi is a moron with an underpowered brain that struggles (and fails) to understand reality.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-29 01:36 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II |
| Message-ID | <nb0ou0$1v8o$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #557776 |
On 29/02/2016 1:13 AM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote: >> KoOk's now confusing electron orbit excitement (which produces narrow >> absorption and emission lines) with the free motion and vibration of >> molecules (which is where heat is, and where blackbody emissions >> originate and are absorbed). > > WTF?! LunkHead k'lames blackbody radiation is due to "motion and > vibration of molecules"! And he's She's > doing it as he she > tries to defend his her > kooky contention that a photon of lower energy can heat up a molecule > of higher energy! Bwahahahahahaha! KoOk now thinks you can heat up *a* molecule! > whenever a blackbody emits radiation, it corresponds to an electron > jumping from a higher energy state to a lower energy state. No, that's fluorescence, a completely different source of radiation. In a hot object molecules are vibrating or (in a fluid) bouncing off one another. When they change direction, there are accelerating charges. When there are accelerating charges, EM radiation is produced. The more energetic the motion, the higher the average frequency, so the peak of the emission curve shifts to shorter wavelengths. Absorption happens similarly, EM radiation interacting with the charges inside the molecules and stirring up the molecules, adding some energy to the mix. It is, by the way, possible for a fast-moving molecule to get sped up a bit, or knocked onto a somewhat different trajectory, by absorbing a lowish-energy photon. > If you observe a star, you'd see a continuous spectrum with no breaks. > > If you observe the gas making up that star, you'd see a continuous > spectrum with breaks where specific wavelengths of energy have been > absorbed by the gas cloud and then re-emitted. > > If you observe the gas itself (grab some from that star, so it's not > fusing), you'll see emission spectra (peaks that correlate to the > spectral emission of the atoms of that gas). > > There is a connection between emission lines from a gas and the > continuous spectrum from a solid. As you crowd atoms together (as in a > solid), the allowed energy levels in one atom start to become > distorted due to the influence of the electric field of neighboring > atoms. Distort an energy level difference a little bit and you get a > slightly different frequency emission/absorption line. A distribution > of distortions leads to a distribution of lines than eventually blend > into a continuum. Part of the truth, but you're completely ignoring vibrational modes, rotational modes, and the all-important-in-any-fluid translational modes. And you're also mixing up your gases with your plasmas... >> Never claimed it heats it up. Rather, it doesn't cool as rapidly at >> night as it would if the sky were clear. > > Wrong. You are indeed wrong, as you would know if you had any experience with cold, clear winter nights. > Thus, with high reflectivity surfaces such as snow or ice, radiation > emission *increases* to space, No. Radiation emission from the ground increases, because 2nd, 4th, 6th etc. reflections between cloud and ground get added to the original emission from the ground. Emission *to space* drops. -- "To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks "I get fooled all the time by the constant hosiery parade in here." ~Checkmate
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-29 18:19 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II |
| Message-ID | <572517e97e47e36efbb5e7b33e5e4f6f@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #557781 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> Ko0O0oki kensi the LunkHeaded LibTard, in <news:nb0ou0$1v8o$1@gioia.aioe.org> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > On 29/02/2016 1:13 AM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler > Emeritus wrote: >>> KoOk's now confusing electron orbit excitement (which produces narrow >>> absorption and emission lines) with the free motion and vibration of >>> molecules (which is where heat is, and where blackbody emissions >>> originate and are absorbed). >> WTF?! LunkHead k'lames blackbody radiation is due to "motion and >> vibration of molecules"! And he's > She's he's >> doing it as he > she he >> tries to defend his > her his >> kooky contention that a photon of lower energy can heat up a molecule >> of higher energy! > Bwahahahahahaha! KoOk now thinks you can heat up *a* molecule! That's _exactly_ *your* kooky contention, LunkHead, when you k'lamed that a photon of lower energy can cause "motion and vibration of molecules" of a higher energy... in reality, lower energy photons than the energy of the molecule are not absorbed, the material is either transparent to that photon, or it reflects it. Only photons of sufficient energy are absorbed, one of the cornerstones of quantum physics. But then, we expect an anti-science nitwit like you to deny the reality of quantum physics and quantum mechanics. You're a moron. LOL SPNAK! >> whenever a blackbody emits radiation, it corresponds to an electron >> jumping from a higher energy state to a lower energy state. > No, that's fluorescence, a completely different source of radiation. Holy fuck, you're retarded. <http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mod5.html> ====================================================== Taking the electron transitions associated with visible and ultraviolet interactions with matter as an example, absorption of a photon will occur only when the quantum energy of the photon precisely matches the energy gap between the initial and final states. In the interaction of radiation with matter, if there is no pair of energy states such that the photon energy can elevate the system from the lower to the upper state, then the matter will be transparent to that radiation. <http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/imgmod/qpro1.gif> Absorption can occur only when DeltaE = hv = E2 - E1 A downward transition involves emission of a photon of energy: Ephoton = hv = E2 - E1 Energy levels associated with molecules, atoms and nuclei are in general discrete, quantized energy levels and transitions between those levels typically involve the absorption or emission of photons. Electron energy levels have been used as the example here, but quantized energy levels for molecular vibration and rotation also exist. Transitions between vibrational quantum states typically occur in the infrared and transitions between rotational quantum states are typically in the microwave region of the electromagnetic spectrum. It is possible for excited electrons in atoms and molecules to have some other kind of interaction which lowers their energy before they can make a downward transition. In that case they would emit a photon of lower energy and longer wavelength. This process is called fluorescence if it happens essentially instantaneously. It is also possible that material can hold onto the energy of excitation for a long time, gradually making downward transitions with emission. This delayed emission is called phosphorescence. Since by the Einstein A and B coefficients we know that the probabilities for absorption and emission are the same, the existence of phosphorescence would imply that some interaction took place quickly after the initial absorption that placed the electrons in a much more stable and long-lived state so that they could not immediately drop back down. ====================================================== Note that blurb: "Electron energy levels have been used as the example here, but quantized energy levels for molecular vibration and rotation also exist."... that proves you *wrong* when you k'lamed that a photon of lower energy can excite a molecule of higher energy. Note also that electron transition is *not* fluorescence, as you k'lame. SPNAK! > In a hot object molecules are vibrating or (in a fluid) bouncing off one > another. When they change direction, there are accelerating charges. > When there are accelerating charges, EM radiation is produced. The more > energetic the motion, the higher the average frequency, so the peak of > the emission curve shifts to shorter wavelengths. And it does so by *electrons* dropping in orbit, you moronic halfwit. Photons are only created by atomic transition, nuclear decay, particles smashing together or an electric and/or magnetic perturbation of the QED vacuum of sufficient strength. In the case we're talking about, they *only* come from atomic transition. Photons do *not* come from "vibrating molecules"... especially those locked in the lattice of a solid material. It is an electron transition brought about by that random thermal motion of the electrons (*not* the molecules) knocking some of them up in their orbits, then they give off a photon when that orbit decays. <https://www.quora.com/Where-do-all-the-photons-come-from-when-I-switch-on-the-lights> <http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/questions/question/3072/> <https://van.physics.illinois.edu/qa/listing.php?id=26512> <http://physics.bu.edu/~duffy/py106/PhotoelectricEffect.html> SPNAK! > Absorption happens similarly, EM radiation interacting with the charges > inside the molecules and stirring up the molecules, "stirring up the molecules" LOL! Stirring up the molecules of a solid material, you halfwit? SPNAK! > adding some energy > to the mix. It is, by the way, possible for a fast-moving molecule to > get sped up a bit, or knocked onto a somewhat different trajectory, by > absorbing a lowish-energy photon. "somewhat different trajectory" LOL! Somewhat different trajectory in a solid material, you halfwit? SPNAK! >> If you observe a star, you'd see a continuous spectrum with no breaks. >> >> If you observe the gas making up that star, you'd see a continuous >> spectrum with breaks where specific wavelengths of energy have been >> absorbed by the gas cloud and then re-emitted. >> >> If you observe the gas itself (grab some from that star, so it's not >> fusing), you'll see emission spectra (peaks that correlate to the >> spectral emission of the atoms of that gas). >> >> There is a connection between emission lines from a gas and the >> continuous spectrum from a solid. As you crowd atoms together (as in a >> solid), the allowed energy levels in one atom start to become >> distorted due to the influence of the electric field of neighboring >> atoms. Distort an energy level difference a little bit and you get a >> slightly different frequency emission/absorption line. A distribution >> of distortions leads to a distribution of lines than eventually blend >> into a continuum. > Part of the truth, but you're completely ignoring vibrational modes, > rotational modes, and the all-important-in-any-fluid translational > modes. And you're also mixing up your gases with your plasmas... No, I'm not. You're the moron mixing up "stirred up molecules" with lattice vibrations in solids causing local oscillations in electron density, thus causing Van der Waals forces to force some electrons randomly into higher orbit, thus emitting a photon when that orbit decays. Moron. How does a molecule get "stirred up" and have a "different trajectory" in a solid, you halfwit? SPNAK! >>> Never claimed it heats it up. Rather, it doesn't cool as rapidly at >>> night as it would if the sky were clear. >> Wrong. > You are indeed wrong, as you would know if you had any experience with > cold, clear winter nights. Moron. 7 peer-reviewed studies prove you wrong, the Radiation Paradox proves you wrong. You're wrong. Accept that fact, and maybe you can learn a bit, so you don't look like such a fucking moron. LOL The following is from my prior post, which you ran away from: ============================================================= <http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/hwrp/chy/chy14/documents/ms/remote_sensing_snow_cover_methods_mapping_snow.pdf> "The emissivity of snow approaches that of a black body at the 10.5—12.5 micron atmospheric window." And *only* at the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window. Ever heard of the "radiation paradox"? It's where the net radiation emission *increases* with increasing cloud cover. LOL Check out Holmgren, 1971; Jacobs et al., 1972; Ambach, 1974; Ohmura, 1981; Yamanouchi et al., 1982; Wendler, 1986; and R. Bintanja and M. R. Van Den Broeke, 1996. Then realize you're *wrong* and you've been SPNAK!'d yet again because you're too stoooopid to grasp reality. ============================================================= <http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~broek112/home.php_files/Publications_MvdB/1996_Bintanja_IJC.pdf> ============================================================= Increasing the cloud optical depth causes a large increase in cloud albedo and only a small change in cloud emissivity so that the cooling effect starts to dominate." Thus, the phenomenon that net radiation increases with increasing cloud amount is, under favourable conditions (e.g. high albedo), attributable to the asymmetry in the dependency of the longwave and shortwave radiative cloud properties on cloud optical thickness. ============================================================= Which is why those high, thin clouds have a weak net warming effect, whereas the low, thick clouds cause net cooling over snow or ice. The lower and the thicker the clouds are, the greater the effect. Moron. Thus, with high reflectivity surfaces such as snow or ice, radiation emission *increases* to space with increasing cloud cover. Cloud cover only causes warmer nights over low reflectivity surfaces such as soil or concrete. Radiation reflected from the clouds is absorbed by the snow and re-radiated in the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window, going straight out to space, causing a net *cooling* as cloud cover (ie: optical depth) increases, which is the underlying basis for the Radiation Paradox, which none of you know-nothing nongs knew about. If you morons had any depth of understanding of the physical processes taking place, you'd realize the obvious, but you don't... because you're morons. Your anti-science nitwittery is why you morons believe in the fairy tale of CO2-induced AGW, despite the fact that it violates the Laws of Thermodynamics. SPNAK! >> Thus, with high reflectivity surfaces such as snow or ice, radiation >> emission *increases* to space, > No. Radiation emission from the ground increases, because 2nd, 4th, 6th > etc. reflections between cloud and ground get added to the original > emission from the ground. Emission *to space* drops. Wrong. 180 degrees out from reality. <http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~broek112/home.php_files/Publications_MvdB/1996_Bintanja_IJC.pdf> "The surface emits longwave radiation (Lf) at the surface radiation temperature." Gee, that's exactly what I said... the surface emits at the temperature of the surface, in accordance with the Wien Displacement Law, *not* the Planck Curve. "Thus, the phenomenon that net radiation increases with increasing cloud amount is, under favourable conditions (e.g. high albedo), attributable to the asymmetry in the dependency of the longwave and shortwave radiative cloud properties on cloud optical thickness." Note it says *net* radiation... ie: net radiation transmissivity to space. "Obviously, an increase in net radiation with increasing cloud amount occurs throughout the winter when incident shortwave radiative fluxes are small or absent (e.g. Curry and Ebert, 1992; Schweiger and Key, 1994)" Gee, that's exactly what I said, the radiation reflected from the clouds is absorbed by the snow and re-emitted in the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window (the *only* band of wavelengths which the snow or ice can emit at, as the Bintaja study proves above), and is emitted straight out to space, which *increases* *net* *radiative* *transfer* *out* *to* *space* with increasing optical depth of clouds, even during winter, when, if you'll remember, it's fucking _dark_ all the time. SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! Moron. <snicker> Message-ID: <a76a23be8f4a22ea6c31dde5b3e2dd8c@dizum.com> ======================================================== ======================================================== <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.usenet.kooks/yhNtCQr1rpE/GlDtnrGgMxsJ> <http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=145664837800> From: Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> Newsgroups: alt.usenet.kooks Subject: Re: A REVIEW: How much does Keith "Murphy" McElroy suck at this Usenet thing? Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 00:58:29 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <km1mfl$t4j$7@dont-email.me> Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="67.70.58.178"; Summary: Murphy is a kook with hundreds, if not thousands, of sock puppets Keywords: Murphy X-Mailer: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118 ======================================================== ======================================================== Nadegda got outed as that lumpy dumpy frumpy slumpy shroomtard Paul Derbyshire by Ray Banana. When LunkHead learned of this, he immediately started backpedaling and k'laming that "Nadegda" was actually just "vacationing" in Pembroke. LOL! Message-ID: <65d0f5e1ad03d42086b4a492e0eba763@dizum.com> ======================================================== ======================================================== > <http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=134389570800> Kensi was "vacationing"... in Pembroke, Ontario, Canada... quite by coincidence, you understand... LunkHead was there with Nadegda, apparently. And Nadegda and Kensi most definitely were *not* there to double-team on Paul Derbyshire's mushroom-slathered meatpole. Paul Derbyshire is a life-long virgin, you see. He'll never touch anything more feminine than his hand with a Barbie-doll wig glued to it, paste-on eyes, and his mother's hooker-pink lipstick smeared between thumb and index finger knuckle. Ironically, he's named his f(e)isty lover "kensi". She's really hot in the sack... an expert in getting anal. Sometimes, she takes it so deeply it pokes out of her mouth! Oh, here's Kensi: <http://goo.gl/hdpXFC> She's Paul Derbyshire's regular Saturday night thang. Ain't she purdy? I'm sure a lot of guys have hit that. Chimpy's hit that... twice. Strangely and quite coincidentally, Paul Derbyshire calls his right thumb "Nadegda". I found a picture of Nadegda, too. <https://goo.gl/sbdRcq> You don't wanna know what she's into. *Really* kinky stuff. Suffice to say sometimes she invites along her four sisters for what she calls "sexy spelunking". You know what they say... fugly chicks gotta go kinky. LOL > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdyBYSuqQBQ> > P.S. How's the astrophysics coming along? Have you visited > any good telescopes lately? Ask kensi which observatories nearby have time standard control capability. That's something every astronomer should know, right? <snicker> ======================================================== ======================================================== I note you've studiously avoided answering which observatories have time standard control capability, LunkHead... only those who actually work at an observatory would even know about such a thing, let alone which observatories have that capability... but then, everyone knows lumpy dumpy frumpy slumpy wannabes always out their womanly socks because they're too stoooopid to play the part of the identity they've assumed. Perhaps for your next sock, you should play the part of a mop jockey or a streetwalker... that'd be something you could handle, dude. <snicker> -- Kensi the moron wrote: ================================ The sphere's Gaussian curvature is 1/r^2, and its area is 4*pi*r^2, so the curvature is 4*pi ================================ Kensi the moron said the Gaussian curvature = 1 / r^2 *and* the Gaussian curvature = 4 * pi. Therefore, 1 / r^2 = 4 * pi Therefore, r = 0.28209479176 Kensi the moron says every sphere in the entire universe has a radius of 0.28209479176. Of course, being a moron, kensi didn't specify the units. The moron also said the Gaussian curvature of a sphere is dependent upon that sphere's radius. Wholly incorrect. Kensi the moron was corrected: ================================ Did... did you just say "the Gaussian curvature = 1/r^2" *and* "the Gaussian curvature = 4*pi" therefore "1/r^2 = 4*pi"? Now you backpedal, LunkHead. You mean the Gaussian curvature = 1/r^2 * (4*pi*r^2) therefore = (4*pi), and therefore the Gaussian curvature of a sphere is independent of r due to its symmetry, thereby proving your original "The sphere's Gaussian curvature is 1/r^2" blather *wrong*? ================================ But Kensi the moron persists in insisting that what he wrote isn't fucked up, and that the Gaussian curvature of a sphere *does* depend upon its radius, because he doesn't understand the equations he's trying to use, he doesn't know the difference between 'constant curvature' and 'Gaussian curvature', he doesn't know what an integral is, and he's a halfwit who can't figure out even basic geometry problems. Now remember, this is the same moron who k'lames he's an astrophysicist... yet he's stated that the Riemann curvature tensor concept being the central mathematical tool in the theory of general relativity and the modern theory of gravity, and the curvature of space-time being described by the geodesic deviation equation, is "science fiction" and "a howler". In addition, the moron k'lamed that 4-D Minkowski space-time was mostly positive Gaussian curvature, with only small areas of negative Gaussian curvature, which proves the moron has no idea of the effects of mass or magnetism upon the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold. He has k'lamed that the Gaussian curvature of the universe is predominantly positive, which means Lunkhead believes that massive objects such as planets, stars and black holes ride *above* the tangential plane of the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, thereby making the planes of principal curvature positive Gaussian curvature, and thus causing gravity to *repel*. Lunkhead the moron has k'lamed that magnetism has "*no* effect" upon the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, then backpedaled and said there was a "small amount of positive curvature due to the energy density in the field", thereby proving he doesn't know how magnetism affects the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, and denies the existence of magnetic attraction. Thus, Kensi the moron has described a universe in which planets could not maintain their orbits, a universe in which magnets could not work, and therefore a universe which could not exist. Kensi is the same moron who k'lames that snow at a colder temperature than the surrounding atmosphere is somehow violating the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics and giving off "blackbody radiation". Kensi is the same moron who k'lames that snow gives off "blackbody radiation" at wavelengths that would put the temperature of the snow at 489 F. Kensi is the same moron who first denied the existence of the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window, then backpedaled and k'lamed that snow emitted outside that ~11-micron window, and was proven wrong. Then the spankard moron tried to use the backpedal of "blackbody radiation" being at a different wavelength than spectral emission, yet again demonstrating that the moron has no clue how spectral absorption and emission works. Kensi is the same moron who denies the NASA SABER study proving that CO2 is a global *cooling* gas _because_ of the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window. The reality exposed by the NASA SABER study also proves the Klimate Katastrophe Kook Anthropogenic Global Warming k'lame of CO2 being a global warming gas is a fairy tale that violates the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics, thus destroying CO2-induced AGW, yet this same moron continues to cling to his delusions. Kensi is the same moron who continues to cling to his delusion that global warming causes more intense hurricanes, despite three peer-reviewed studies proving the exact opposite. Kensi is not an astrophysicist, he's far too stupid to be. He's just a slumpy dumpy frumpy lumpy loser trying to pretend that he's intelligent... and failing badly. That would be because Kensi is a moron with an underpowered brain that struggles (and fails) to understand reality.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kensi <kkensington01@gmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-29 12:35 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II |
| Message-ID | <nb1vg9$767$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #557898 |
On 29/02/2016 12:19 PM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote: > NAK! NAK! > NAK! NAK! NAK! > NAK! NAK! NAK! NAK! NAK! > NAK! > NAK! NAK! NAK! NAK! NAK! NAK! NAK! NAK! NAK! > > M ars Attacks!! You *really* aren't from around here, are you? KoOk. *snicker* -- "To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks "I get fooled all the time by the constant hosiery parade in here." ~Checkmate
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-01 06:24 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II |
| Message-ID | <b40a6a8a06619004d34d2c5ec159a6e6@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #557901 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> Ko0O0oki kensi the LunkHeaded LibTard, in <news:nb1vg9$767$1@gioia.aioe.org> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > On 29/02/2016 12:19 PM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler > Emeritus wrote: Awww, look. I've reduced the spankard to cowardly out-of-context snipping and post-editing. LOL >> NAK! NAK! >> NAK! NAK! NAK! >> NAK! NAK! NAK! NAK! NAK! >> NAK! >> NAK! NAK! NAK! NAK! NAK! NAK! NAK! NAK! NAK! >> >> Moron. LOL > ars Attacks!! > > You *really* aren't from around here, are you? > > KoOk. > > *snicker* Translation: "Gawdamnit! If FNVWe keeps kicking my stoooopid ass so hard, I won't have any bit of reality from which I can hide with my kooky theories! Can't he see that I'm a libtard, so I'm allergic to reality?! I have to snip all that out and run away from it, that's *too* much reality for me to stand!" SPNAK! Message-ID: <a76a23be8f4a22ea6c31dde5b3e2dd8c@dizum.com> ======================================================== ======================================================== <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.usenet.kooks/yhNtCQr1rpE/GlDtnrGgMxsJ> <http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=145664837800> From: Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> Newsgroups: alt.usenet.kooks Subject: Re: A REVIEW: How much does Keith "Murphy" McElroy suck at this Usenet thing? Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 00:58:29 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <km1mfl$t4j$7@dont-email.me> Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="67.70.58.178"; Summary: Murphy is a kook with hundreds, if not thousands, of sock puppets Keywords: Murphy X-Mailer: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118 ======================================================== ======================================================== Nadegda got outed as that lumpy dumpy frumpy slumpy shroomtard Paul Derbyshire by Ray Banana. When LunkHead learned of this, he immediately started backpedaling and k'laming that "Nadegda" was actually just "vacationing" in Pembroke. LOL! Message-ID: <65d0f5e1ad03d42086b4a492e0eba763@dizum.com> ======================================================== ======================================================== > <http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=134389570800> Kensi was "vacationing"... in Pembroke, Ontario, Canada... quite by coincidence, you understand... LunkHead was there with Nadegda, apparently. And Nadegda and Kensi most definitely were *not* there to double-team on Paul Derbyshire's mushroom-slathered meatpole. Paul Derbyshire is a life-long virgin, you see. He'll never touch anything more feminine than his hand with a Barbie-doll wig glued to it, paste-on eyes, and his mother's hooker-pink lipstick smeared between thumb and index finger knuckle. Ironically, he's named his f(e)isty lover "kensi". She's really hot in the sack... an expert in getting anal. Sometimes, she takes it so deeply it pokes out of her mouth! Oh, here's Kensi: <http://goo.gl/hdpXFC> She's Paul Derbyshire's regular Saturday night thang. Ain't she purdy? I'm sure a lot of guys have hit that. Chimpy's hit that... twice. Strangely and quite coincidentally, Paul Derbyshire calls his right thumb "Nadegda". I found a picture of Nadegda, too. <https://goo.gl/sbdRcq> You don't wanna know what she's into. *Really* kinky stuff. Suffice to say sometimes she invites along her four sisters for what she calls "sexy spelunking". You know what they say... fugly chicks gotta go kinky. LOL > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdyBYSuqQBQ> > P.S. How's the astrophysics coming along? Have you visited > any good telescopes lately? Ask kensi which observatories nearby have time standard control capability. That's something every astronomer should know, right? <snicker> ======================================================== ======================================================== I note you've studiously avoided answering which observatories have time standard control capability, LunkHead... only those who actually work at an observatory would even know about such a thing, let alone which observatories have that capability... but then, everyone knows lumpy dumpy frumpy slumpy wannabes always out their womanly socks because they're too stoooopid to play the part of the identity they've assumed. Perhaps for your next sock, you should play the part of a mop jockey or a streetwalker... that'd be something you could handle, dude. <snicker> -- Kensi the moron wrote: ================================ The sphere's Gaussian curvature is 1/r^2, and its area is 4*pi*r^2, so the curvature is 4*pi ================================ Kensi the moron said the Gaussian curvature = 1 / r^2 *and* the Gaussian curvature = 4 * pi. Therefore, 1 / r^2 = 4 * pi Therefore, r = 0.28209479176 Kensi the moron says every sphere in the entire universe has a radius of 0.28209479176. Of course, being a moron, kensi didn't specify the units. The moron also said the Gaussian curvature of a sphere is dependent upon that sphere's radius. Wholly incorrect. Kensi the moron was corrected: ================================ Did... did you just say "the Gaussian curvature = 1/r^2" *and* "the Gaussian curvature = 4*pi" therefore "1/r^2 = 4*pi"? Now you backpedal, LunkHead. You mean the Gaussian curvature = 1/r^2 * (4*pi*r^2) therefore = (4*pi), and therefore the Gaussian curvature of a sphere is independent of r due to its symmetry, thereby proving your original "The sphere's Gaussian curvature is 1/r^2" blather *wrong*? ================================ But Kensi the moron persists in insisting that what he wrote isn't fucked up, and that the Gaussian curvature of a sphere *does* depend upon its radius, because he doesn't understand the equations he's trying to use, he doesn't know the difference between 'constant curvature' and 'Gaussian curvature', he doesn't know what an integral is, and he's a halfwit who can't figure out even basic geometry problems. Now remember, this is the same moron who k'lames he's an astrophysicist... yet he's stated that the Riemann curvature tensor concept being the central mathematical tool in the theory of general relativity and the modern theory of gravity, and the curvature of space-time being described by the geodesic deviation equation, is "science fiction" and "a howler". In addition, the moron k'lamed that 4-D Minkowski space-time was mostly positive Gaussian curvature, with only small areas of negative Gaussian curvature, which proves the moron has no idea of the effects of mass or magnetism upon the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold. He has k'lamed that the Gaussian curvature of the universe is predominantly positive, which means Lunkhead believes that massive objects such as planets, stars and black holes ride *above* the tangential plane of the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, thereby making the planes of principal curvature positive Gaussian curvature, and thus causing gravity to *repel*. Lunkhead the moron has k'lamed that magnetism has "*no* effect" upon the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, then backpedaled and said there was a "small amount of positive curvature due to the energy density in the field", thereby proving he doesn't know how magnetism affects the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, and denies the existence of magnetic attraction. Thus, Kensi the moron has described a universe in which planets could not maintain their orbits, a universe in which magnets could not work, and therefore a universe which could not exist. Kensi is the same moron who k'lames that snow at a colder temperature than the surrounding atmosphere is somehow violating the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics and giving off "blackbody radiation". Kensi is the same moron who k'lames that snow gives off "blackbody radiation" at wavelengths that would put the temperature of the snow at 489 F. Kensi is the same moron who first denied the existence of the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window, then backpedaled and k'lamed that snow emitted outside that ~11-micron window, and was proven wrong. Then the spankard moron tried to use the backpedal of "blackbody radiation" being at a different wavelength than spectral emission, yet again demonstrating that the moron has no clue how spectral absorption and emission works. Kensi is the same moron who denies the NASA SABER study proving that CO2 is a global *cooling* gas _because_ of the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window. The reality exposed by the NASA SABER study also proves the Klimate Katastrophe Kook Anthropogenic Global Warming k'lame of CO2 being a global warming gas is a fairy tale that violates the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics, thus destroying CO2-induced AGW, yet this same moron continues to cling to his delusions. Kensi is the same moron who continues to cling to his delusion that global warming causes more intense hurricanes, despite three peer-reviewed studies proving the exact opposite. Kensi is not an astrophysicist, he's far too stupid to be. He's just a slumpy dumpy frumpy lumpy loser trying to pretend that he's intelligent... and failing badly. That would be because Kensi is a moron with an underpowered brain that struggles (and fails) to understand reality.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-01 07:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II |
| Message-ID | <b536b50f4f293954d73101dc465b0f4e@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #557898 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
Bite My Shiny Metal Ass (aka Shiny Tinfoil Brain), in
<news:7n79dbllhkpcruqfgrg7gc6jbad34d7vkl@4ax.com> did thusly jump head
first into the wood chipper again:
Froups desnecked, Coward.
> FNVWe stomped a retard's brain flat. Again:
>> That's _exactly_ *your* kooky contention, LunkHead, when you k'lamed
>> that a photon of lower energy can cause "motion and vibration of
>> molecules" of a higher energy... in reality, lower energy photons than
>> the energy of the molecule are not absorbed, the material is either
>> transparent to that photon, or it reflects it. Only photons of
>> sufficient energy are absorbed, one of the cornerstones of quantum
>> physics.
> So His Nibs claims again that 3°K microwave oven radiation
> can't warm up a 300° bag of popcorn.
*Still* conflating the anomalous torsional and rotational heating of
dipolar molecules, with blackbody radiation which is due to electron
orbital change, Moron? You're more than a little confused, aren't you?
LOL
Aren't you the *moron* who k'lames that "Water is tetrahedral."?
Yeah... yeah you are. Moron.
Aren't you the *moron* who k'lames that "It actually has 4 poles, 2
positive and 2 negative."? Yeah... yeah you are. Moron.
Yeah, you're as confused as a cross-eyed drunk in a hall of mirrors.
LOL
Hey, here's an idea... maybe you could come up with a "mneuuuuuumonic"
so you can remember why life continually kicks your retarded ass.
SPNAK!
tuesi
utesc
pzd k
ie i
ds n
g
Think that'll work? Or does that confuse your hamster-wheel brain even
more?
<snicker>
> Orville Redenbacher will be disappointed. But, you know,
> wannabe-slumlords are experts on quantum transformers.
Moron still can't grasp that the molecules of water aren't absorbing
that microwave electromagnetic radiation, but instead a microwave oven
exploits the anomalous dipolar dielectric nature of water to rapidly
rotate and torsion the water molecules, which translates into kinetic
energy, which is heat.
Which has nothing to do with electron orbital changes due to photon
absorption, nor with blackbody radiation.
It'd be like if I rapid-fire bitchslapped your stupid slack-jawed face
at a rate of 2.45 GHz... the rapid rotation and torsion would
translate into kinetic energy, thus heating up your brain and melting
that tiny little ice cube into a puddle of brainsnot.
"Water is tetrahedral. It actually has 4 poles, 2 positive and 2
negative." (Shiny Tinfoil Brain's words) Wrong on *all* counts.
Because Shiny Tinfoil Brain is a moron.
<snicker>
> --
> "...a sinewave is a Fourier transformation of a circle."
> --Fakey
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phasor>
<https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/89/Unfasor.gif>
Message-ID: <80d61a6928a9e7df316c519affcf3838@dizum.com>
=========================================================
<http://betterexplained.com/articles/an-interactive-guide-to-the-fourier-transform/>
See the animations about 1/4th down the page? Yeah, those are Fourier
transforms transforming circles to sine waves in real time... and in
the process smearing egg on your stoooopid face. LOL
<http://muller.research.engineering.cornell.edu/sites/WEELS/summer06/Fourier%20Transforms-2D.pdf>
2D Fourier transform of a circularly symmetric function translates to
Bessinc shape in 2-D, translates in 1-D to a sinewave.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourier_transform>
"Still further generalization is possible to functions on groups,
which, besides the original Fourier transform on R or R" (viewed as
groups under addition), notably includes the discrete-time Fourier
transform (DTFT, group = Z), the discrete Fourier transform (DFT,
group = Z mod N) and the Fourier series or *circular* *Fourier*
*transform* (group = S^1, the unit circle ~ closed finite interval
with endpoints identified). The latter is routinely employed to handle
periodic functions."
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periodic_function>
You know, periodic functions... like sinewaves.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sine_and_cosine_transforms>
"In mathematics, the Fourier sine and cosine transforms are forms of
the Fourier integral transform that do not use complex numbers."
Gee.. that *Fourier* *sine* *transform* sure looks familiar, doesn't
it?
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sine_and_cosine_transforms>
"Relation with complex exponentials:
The form of the Fourier transform used more often today is... Euler's
Formula"
Why, that's the exact equation I used to properly graph 170 volt peak
3-phase, which translates to 120.208 volt RMS L-N and 208.207 volt RMS
L-L. I guess that's why they're called the Euler-Fourier Formulas.
<http://i.imgur.com/NrZzxlb.png>
SPNAK!
=========================================================
Aren't you the *moron* who k'lamed that Fourier transforms had nothing
to do with the Euler sinewave summation equation? Yeah... yeah you
are.
Spankard. Moron. LOL
--
Shiny Tinfoil Brain (aka Bite My Shiny Metal Ass) didn't know:
=====================================
The Euler equation is a subset of equations known as the Euler-Fourier
Formulas, thus that a sinewave is a transformation of a circle (which
should have been intuitive, given that generators *rotate* to create
*sinusoids*);
That cross correlation is used with Fourier transforms;
That superposition is the same as wave interference;
That wave interference works the same for standing or traveling waves;
That RMS and peak-to-peak voltage are two different things;
That RMS isn't a DC voltage;
That 170 volt peak, 120.208 volt RMS L-N 3-phase service gives 208.207
volts RMS L-L;
That 4444525800 != 4400000000 != 1;
The difference between frequency and period of a sinewave;
That there's no difference between 'i' and 'j' in electrical
engineering, physics and control systems engineering;
What a positive or negative vector is;
That the vector sum of 3-phase AC constitutes a closed loop per
Kirchhoff's Voltage Law, thus that the three phases sum to zero;
That "mnemonic" is not spelled "mneumonic";
That his claim: "Water is tetrahedral. It actually has 4 poles, 2
positive and 2 negative." is nonsense from a blathering moron.
And the moron continues to demonstrate his inability to read a graph.
=====================================
SPNAK!
<snicker>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-01 20:28 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II |
| Message-ID | <87025a96a3516931a8c93784c3dd0196@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #558224 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> Bite My Shiny Metal Ass (aka Shiny Tinfoil Brain), in <news:imtadb5jne1ufis40k0h8o397cge2mgfd8@4ax.com> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: Froups desnecked, Cowardly Moron. > FNVWe stomped a retard's brain flat. Again: >> Bite My Shiny Metal Ass (aka Shiny Tinfoil Brain), in >>> FNVWe stomped a retard's brain flat. Again: > Heheh. > > Amplification factor = 178/19 = 9.7 dB. > 14.5 dB, if you count crossposting inefficiency. > > Wooohoo! Beat that this time. Woot! I've got the moron so perturbed he's not only counting lines of text, he's going to a dB conversion website to punch in the numbers to determine just how ass-kicked he should consider himself to be. Because we all know he's far too stoooopid to do that dB conversion math himself. SPNAK! >> Aren't you the *moron* who k'lames that "Water is tetrahedral."? > Aren't you the moron who claims water is not tetrahedral? Aren't you the moron who k'lames that "Water is tetrahedral. It actually has 4 poles, 2 positive and 2 negative." Now you'll get right on detailing how, exactly, a three-atom molecule can exhibit tetrahedrality... because you appear to be just as math, geometry and reality-challenged as LunkHead. SPNAK! > What shape, exactly, do you think the molecule is? Message-ID: <230fdc3806a6ca5c7f66fa356765d72a@dizum.com> ========================================================= To be technically correct, you'd have to say water dynamic heterogeneities are approximately trigonally, nearly planarly, arranged with bond angles at 109.47 degrees, having sp^2-hybridized electron pairs, which combine into icosahedral super-heterogeneities. This model not only fully explains hydrogen bonding, but the electrostatic potential distribution which accounts for the O--O dimer and further accurately models the radial distribution function as embodied in the observed diffraction pattern of liquid water. But the individual water molecule is dipolar, with one strongly electronegative (8+) oxygen and two weakly electronegative (1+) hydrogens, said dipolar nature arising due to the O-H bond angle. And that still doesn't explain your stupidly blathering: "Water is tetrahedral. It actually has 4 poles, 2 positive and 2 negative." Water has *no* "negative poles", and it most certainly doesn't have "4 poles", you witless turd. You'll be getting right on diagramming your fictional "4 pole" water, Moron. SPNAK! ========================================================= <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/cluster_evidence.html> <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/clusters_overview.html#icos> ========================================================== This structuring accommodates explanation of many of the anomalous properties of water including its temperature-density and pressure-viscosity behavior, the radial distribution pattern, the presence of both cyclic pentamers and hexamers, the change in properties on supercooling and the solvation and hydration properties of ions, hydrophobic molecules, carbohydrates and macromolecules. ========================================================== IOW, the icosahedral model of water comes closer to accurately modeling all the anomalous behaviors of water than any other of the dozens of water models, one of which you've chosen... a long discredited model. Oh, you didn't even know you'd chosen a water model to bleat about, did you? Because you had no idea what a water model even was. Because you're a moron. <snicker> SPNAK! > -- > "...a sinewave is a Fourier transformation of a circle." > --Fakey <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phasor> <https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/89/Unfasor.gif> Message-ID: <80d61a6928a9e7df316c519affcf3838@dizum.com> ========================================================= <http://betterexplained.com/articles/an-interactive-guide-to-the-fourier-transform/> See the animations about 1/4th down the page? Yeah, those are Fourier transforms transforming circles to sine waves in real time... and in the process smearing egg on your stoooopid face. LOL <http://muller.research.engineering.cornell.edu/sites/WEELS/summer06/Fourier%20Transforms-2D.pdf> 2D Fourier transform of a circularly symmetric function translates to Bessinc shape in 2-D, translates in 1-D to a sinewave. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourier_transform> "Still further generalization is possible to functions on groups, which, besides the original Fourier transform on R or R" (viewed as groups under addition), notably includes the discrete-time Fourier transform (DTFT, group = Z), the discrete Fourier transform (DFT, group = Z mod N) and the Fourier series or *circular* *Fourier* *transform* (group = S^1, the unit circle ~ closed finite interval with endpoints identified). The latter is routinely employed to handle periodic functions." <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periodic_function> You know, periodic functions... like sinewaves. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sine_and_cosine_transforms> "In mathematics, the Fourier sine and cosine transforms are forms of the Fourier integral transform that do not use complex numbers." Gee.. that *Fourier* *sine* *transform* sure looks familiar, doesn't it? <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sine_and_cosine_transforms> "Relation with complex exponentials: The form of the Fourier transform used more often today is... Euler's Formula" Why, that's the exact equation I used to properly graph 170 volt peak 3-phase, which translates to 120.208 volt RMS L-N and 208.207 volt RMS L-L. I guess that's why they're called the Euler-Fourier Formulas. <http://i.imgur.com/NrZzxlb.png> SPNAK! ========================================================= Aren't you the *moron* who k'lamed that Fourier transforms had nothing to do with the Euler sinewave summation equation? Yeah... yeah you are. Spankard. Moron. LOL -- Shiny Tinfoil Brain (aka Bite My Shiny Metal Ass) didn't know: ===================================== The Euler equation is a subset of equations known as the Euler-Fourier Formulas, thus that a sinewave is a transformation of a circle (which should have been intuitive, given that generators *rotate* to create *sinusoids*); That cross correlation is used with Fourier transforms; That superposition is the same as wave interference; That wave interference works the same for standing or traveling waves; That RMS and peak-to-peak voltage are two different things; That RMS isn't a DC voltage; That 170 volt peak, 120.208 volt RMS L-N 3-phase service gives 208.207 volts RMS L-L; That 4444525800 != 4400000000 != 1; The difference between frequency and period of a sinewave; That there's no difference between 'i' and 'j' in electrical engineering, physics and control systems engineering; What a positive or negative vector is; That the vector sum of 3-phase AC constitutes a closed loop per Kirchhoff's Voltage Law, thus that the three phases sum to zero; That "mnemonic" is not spelled "mneumonic"; That his claim: "Water is tetrahedral. It actually has 4 poles, 2 positive and 2 negative." is nonsense from a blathering moron. And the moron continues to demonstrate his inability to read a graph. ===================================== SPNAK! <snicker>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-01 13:39 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II |
| Message-ID | <5evbdbhv7sjhf9hh7nhdu5cub0sepe7rih@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #558388 |
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 20:28:43 +0100 (CET), Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote: >Aren't you the moron who k'lames that "Water is tetrahedral. It >actually has 4 poles, 2 positive and 2 negative." So all the sites out there are lying? The fact is... The most common arrangement of liquid water (H2O) molecules is tetrahedral with two hydrogen atoms covalently attached to oxygen and two attached by hydrogen bonds. Spin it however you want. You are wrong....AGAIN! LOL
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-02 07:15 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II |
| Message-ID | <6d73c7a2347b65ebc3728b4273fd1e1d@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #558405 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> Trailer Trash Tony the Law-Breaking Scam-Running Drug-Dealing Wife-Beating Child-Endangering Tax-Evading Unemployable Racist High-School-Dropout Needle-Tracked Drug-Addled Alcoholic Pissbum (aka Tony Ray Rawlings, aka Anton Ray Eaks of 600 Raintree Blvd #58, Lamplighter Trailer Park, Canon City, CO), socked up as Skeeter, in <news:5evbdbhv7sjhf9hh7nhdu5cub0sepe7rih@4ax.com> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 20:28:43 +0100 (CET), Friendly Neighborhood > Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote: >> Aren't you the moron who k'lames that "Water is tetrahedral. It >> actually has 4 poles, 2 positive and 2 negative." > So all the sites out there are lying? No, they're outdated and misinformed. And you're a moron. LOL > The fact is... > The most common arrangement of liquid water (H2O) molecules is > tetrahedral with two hydrogen atoms covalently attached to oxygen and > two attached by hydrogen bonds. In a water cluster, as your blather just proved, moron. Unless you're k'laming that a water molecule has 4 hydrogen atoms, moron. Tetrahedrality is upon an individual-molecule basis, not upon clustered-molecule basis, moron. If one works off a clustered-molecule basis, one can arrive at pretty much any geometry one wants, moron. SPNAK! > Spin it however you want. You are wrong....AGAIN! Spin it however you want, you're a copy-n-paste single-wide trailer-monkey pissbum.... STILL! SPNAK! > <http://imgur.com/xt9bcTq> > > I were a execyootive reegunal sailes man making deleverys. > Now I are a toofless unemployalbe pissbum. <snicker> > I just found out today. Maybe a year. I love you all. > My shits fucked up anyboby givs a damn? No. Lying Drug-Abusing Woman-Beating Pissbum Trailer Trash Tony Ray Eaks. <snicker> -- Proof that Lamey (aka Skeeter) is Anton Ray Eaks: Message-ID: <kus7dj$bh0$1@news.mixmin.net> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topicsearchin/alt.usenet.kooks/messageid$3Akus7dj$24bh0$241@news.mixmin.net/alt.usenet.kooks/MLAQo_O73UM> Pissbum hard at work to earn his drug-money: <http://i.imgur.com/hr4eMvS.jpg> <--- LOL! Just say no to drugs and alcohol, kids! <http://i.imgur.com/uoZbsGI.jpg> <--- LOL! It's Howdy Doody Time!: <http://i.imgur.com/1myBylb.jpg> <--- LOL! The Pissbum Clan: <http://i.imgur.com/cixImyq.jpg> <--- LOL! MID: <81670ab47076fa4432bc62e70914ee31@dizum.com> Thanks for admitting you live in single-wide trailer #58 at the Lamp Lighter Mobile Home Park on Raintree Boulevard in Canon City, Colorado, Pissbum. LOL <https://web.archive.org/web/20150301045717/http://coloradovoters.info/by_number/0005/59023_anton_ray_eaks.html> <https://web.archive.org/web/20150224004840/http://coloradovoters.info/by_address/81212.html> 600 Raintree Blvd. #58 Canon City, CO 81212 Another single-wide? Of course it is... the Lamp Lighter Mobile Home Park only has single-wide trailers. LOL And you get caught in your "I don't do FaceBook" lie again, not to mention your "I'm not Tony Eaks" lie: A drug-addled loserly pissbum wrote: Message-ID: <c30abe10716ad5092ff377450c199bae@dizum.com> "It's dump day today, woke up to fire trucks across the street, seems the house caught fire. What a view I have now...LOL" <https://www.facebook.com/CanonCityDailyRecord?hc_location=timeline> "Tony Eaks - Right across the street from me, Woke up to flames and lights." <https://web.archive.org/web/20150122055700/http://www.canoncitydailyrecord.com/ci_27053304/early-morning-fire-destroys-home-at-lamp-lighter> And before he was a Canon City, CO single-wide trailer-dwelling unemployable pissbum, he was a Fairplay, CO single-wide trailer-dwelling unemployable pissbum. LOL In Fairplay, CO he mooched his mother to an early death... now he's mooching his ultra-ugly transsexual Howdy Doody wife Beverly Jean Johnson-Eaks, who is forced to work two minimum-wage jobs (cashier at Alco, cashier at Dollar Tree) to support Trailer Trash Tony's drug habit. LOL Message-ID: <96a8a62d10d76cd522bcf86bbaef274d@dizum.com> Message-ID: <91a9d7e35f68d22eef5b72f79ef505c0@dizum.com> Unit 66. Trailer Trash Tony is a single-wide pissbum! Bwahahahaaa! ============================================================ Trailer Trash Tony wrote: > Can you prove this single wide trailer thing? Or is it > just another attempt to try and "act" better than me? LOL Yeah, I can now prove "this single wide trailer thing", Trailer Trash Tony. Which by your own admission makes me better than you. LOL So I was right about everything I wrote about you... which makes you a pissbum, Pissbum. LOL <https://web.archive.org/web/20140724093727/http://coloradovoters.info/0005/59023.html> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Anton Ray Eaks was born in 1953 and he registered to vote, giving his address as 21980 HWY 285 UNIT 66, FAIRPLAY, PARK COUNTY, COLORADO 80440. His telephone number is 1-719-477-3574. His voting status is: Active. He is unaffiliated. RESIDENTIAL_ADDRESS: 21980 HWY 285 UNIT 66 RESIDENTIAL_CITY: FAIRPLAY RESIDENTIAL_STATE: CO RESIDENTIAL_ZIP_CODE: 80440 REGISTRATION_DATE: 07/31/2012 BIRTH_YEAR: 1953 PHONE_NUM: 719-477-3574 MAILING_ADDRESS_1: PO BOX 473 MAILING_CITY: FAIRPLAY MAILING_STATE: CO MAILING_ZIP_CODE: 80440 MAILING_ZIP_PLUS: 0473 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ NOTE: That phone number is the Alcoholics Anonymous hot-line at South Park Christian Chapel: <https://web.archive.org/web/20150131161807/http://www.southparkevents.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=48:on-going-activities-for-the-month-&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=54> "Alcoholics Anonymouis meeting 7-8pm at So Pk Christian Chapel 719-477-3574" Trailer Trash Tony is *such* a drunkard that when he registered to vote, he put down the AA DrunkieLine as his phone number! LOL A map of the gravel quarry / junkyard / trailer park where Trailer Trash Tony rented his shitty single-wide trailer for only $675 / month (and still couldn't pay the rent, and got evicted! LOL): <https://www.google.com/maps/place/21980+Hwy+285+%2366,+Fairplay,+CO+80440/@39.2157874,-105.9922529,346m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x876ae8155a400885:0xfb9ff5490348163d> Unit 66: This is a 3 bd/2ba single-wide trailer. <https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.318572058245476.1073741834.131803693588981&type=1&_fb_noscript=1> SPANKY-SPANKY! (tm) <snicker> ============================================================ Lamey (aka Skeeter) the alcoholic wife-beating outer-filthing drug-addict: Message-ID: <lfjfe7$b3t$4@news.mixmin.net> Message-ID: <1b7ef90407a4295786c3f1338e80d553@dizum.com> Message-ID: <c39bc1cce43a9e6860b642e72943f3ce@dizum.com> Message-ID: <ae39676e2ac093e5259ccf8210ecbb25@dizum.com> Trailer Trash Tony makes a multi-pronged confession: MID: <k9m2ca5g26l46qb2t9h05ff87skcjiov1o@4ax.com> "Yup, I can take 4 or 5 percs and roof your house. It's called the paradoxical affect." Pissbum groveled. LOL Pissbum lost. LOL! Message-ID: <lchuas$q96$4@news.mixmin.net> Message-ID: <c92bbbbfefed840db0563eb29f2d6498@dizum.com> Cowardly Pissbum gets caught in lie after lie. LOL! Message-ID: <l0rfde$hv8$2@news.mixmin.net> Message-ID: <l0smsq$fcq$2@news.mixmin.net> Lamey (aka Skeeter) the forger, busted and scrambling for cover like a coward: <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.usenet.kooks/2oWKmfnSPEA/RE_35HZp8qAJ> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.usenet.kooks/2oWKmfnSPEA/-RZxQp6TAe4J> Message-ID: <db92667a7bac368fab1b8ff5085f8b2e@dizum.com> Pissbum gets kicked so hard he's *still* bouncing around Usenet like a SuperBall: ============================================ Message-ID: <kv42gb$vd8$1@news.mixmin.net> <https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=alt.usenet.kooks/ZyzzhJiku3c/Q0c2J9_Jc5YJ> Message-ID: <kuatrj$b2g$1@news.mixmin.net> <https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=alt.usenet.kooks/N91lSABoN2s/JYDwKwwIZn4J> ============================================ Trailer Trash Tony the Single-Wide Trailer-Dwelling Pissbum is driven so insane by my truthiness that he's forced by his psychiatric professional to take Seroquel, a strong anti-psychotic that its maker (Astra Zeneca) only indicates for use in treating schizophrenia and bipolar disorder: ================================================== Lamey (aka Skeeter) admits he now takes Seroquel "to sleep"... it's a prescription medication for the treatment of mania and depression associated with bipolar disease and schizophrenia. I've driven him mad. LOL Pissbum tries to k'lame his doctor-recommended dosage is only half of the smallest tablet Astra Zeneca produces for Seroquel: MID: <3elg2aduthcn6j92jlledhg6sa4ibnbro1@4ax.com>: "Just like seriquil, I take it for sleep at night, 12.5 mg" I shred Pissbum Tony's lies and prove he's gone batty: MID: <0c4a46b95e1b8983104047001ec4e05f@dizum.com> MID: <11715d7d5e802fb4248513f981621812@dizum.com> MID: <3bb2754531e630d89eb7330623ee6281@dizum.com> MID: <8bc988e4842e4338432ad962f84a89d4@dizum.com> ==================================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-01 16:16 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II |
| Message-ID | <op.ydnz05n3tm21m2@benson.localhost> |
| In reply to | #558388 |
On Tue, 01 Mar 2016 14:28:43 -0500, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler
Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
> Bite My Shiny Metal Ass (aka Shiny Tinfoil Brain), in
> <news:imtadb5jne1ufis40k0h8o397cge2mgfd8@4ax.com> did thusly jump head
> first into the wood chipper again:
>
> Froups desnecked, Cowardly Moron.
>
>> FNVWe stomped a retard's brain flat. Again:
>
>>> Bite My Shiny Metal Ass (aka Shiny Tinfoil Brain), in
>
>>>> FNVWe stomped a retard's brain flat. Again:
>
>> Heheh.
>>
>> Amplification factor = 178/19 = 9.7 dB.
>> 14.5 dB, if you count crossposting inefficiency.
>>
>> Wooohoo! Beat that this time.
>
> Woot! I've got the moron so perturbed he's not only counting lines of
> text, he's going to a dB conversion website to punch in the numbers to
> determine just how ass-kicked he should consider himself to be.
> Because we all know he's far too stoooopid to do that dB conversion
> math himself.
why... why that's akin to some blowhard klaming to use an equation that
they clearly don't understand and are at a loss to provide any evidence of
having actually used it.
when does your sinewave stew boil over to y=2550.25, y0olur summayshun
k0ok?
Message-ID: <c8523e6d9c31e3282bbe581fa525a2a8@dizum.com>
"Oh, yeah... it's 2550.25 volts... so why does your graph not even
reach 2500 volts, given that eventually all the sinewaves will
constructively interfere (ie: *add* to each other) to *sum* to 2550.25
volts?"
Fakey, it doesn't reach 2500 volts because the summation of your sinewaves
never reaches that. They never reach their max values at the same time.
That's how stupid you are.
Message-ID: <731d08dcc702b9a8a13077ffc201e91f@dizum.com>
"I most certainly *did* prove otherwise. It can't even arrive at the
correct sinewave summation voltage of 2550.25 volts"
Fakey, you only *proved* that you are too inept to graph the equations and
notice a few things about the interactions of their frequencies when
summed.
>
> SPNAK!
that word... you keep saying it, but i fear that you do not know what it
means.
>
>>> Aren't you the *moron* who k'lames that "Water is tetrahedral."?
>
>> Aren't you the moron who claims water is not tetrahedral?
>
> Aren't you the moron who k'lames that "Water is tetrahedral. It
> actually has 4 poles, 2 positive and 2 negative."
>
> Now you'll get right on detailing how, exactly, a three-atom molecule
> can exhibit tetrahedrality... because you appear to be just as math,
> geometry and reality-challenged as LunkHead.
because it is.
https://plus.maths.org/content/sites/plus.maths.org/files/latestnews/may-aug10/ice/lone.jpg
>
> SPNAK!
>
>> What shape, exactly, do you think the molecule is?
>
> Message-ID: <230fdc3806a6ca5c7f66fa356765d72a@dizum.com>
> =========================================================
> To be technically correct, you'd have to say water dynamic
> heterogeneities are approximately trigonally, nearly planarly,
> arranged with bond angles at 109.47 degrees, having sp^2-hybridized
> electron pairs, which combine into icosahedral super-heterogeneities.
> This model not only fully explains hydrogen bonding, but the
> electrostatic potential distribution which accounts for the O--O dimer
> and further accurately models the radial distribution function as
> embodied in the observed diffraction pattern of liquid water.
>
> But the individual water molecule is dipolar, with one strongly
> electronegative (8+) oxygen and two weakly electronegative (1+)
> hydrogens, said dipolar nature arising due to the O-H bond angle.
>
> And that still doesn't explain your stupidly blathering: "Water is
> tetrahedral. It actually has 4 poles, 2 positive and 2 negative."
>
> Water has *no* "negative poles", and it most certainly doesn't have "4
> poles", you witless turd.
>
> You'll be getting right on diagramming your fictional "4 pole" water,
> Moron.
https://plus.maths.org/content/sites/plus.maths.org/files/latestnews/may-aug10/ice/lone.jpg
http://wps.prenhall.com/wps/media/objects/439/449969/Media_Portfolio/Chapter_08/FG08_13.JPG
>
> SPNAK!
> =========================================================
>
> <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/cluster_evidence.html>
> <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/clusters_overview.html#icos>
> ==========================================================
> This structuring accommodates explanation of many of the anomalous
> properties of water including its temperature-density and
> pressure-viscosity behavior, the radial distribution pattern, the
> presence of both cyclic pentamers and hexamers, the change in
> properties on supercooling and the solvation and hydration properties
> of ions, hydrophobic molecules, carbohydrates and macromolecules.
> ==========================================================
>
> IOW, the icosahedral model of water comes closer to accurately
> modeling all the anomalous behaviors of water than any other of the
> dozens of water models, one of which you've chosen... a long
> discredited model. Oh, you didn't even know you'd chosen a water model
> to bleat about, did you? Because you had no idea what a water model
> even was. Because you're a moron.
>
> <snicker>
>
> SPNAK!
>
>> --
>> "...a sinewave is a Fourier transformation of a circle."
>> --Fakey
>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phasor>
> <https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/89/Unfasor.gif>
>
> Message-ID: <80d61a6928a9e7df316c519affcf3838@dizum.com>
> =========================================================
> <http://betterexplained.com/articles/an-interactive-guide-to-the-fourier-transform/>
> See the animations about 1/4th down the page? Yeah, those are Fourier
> transforms transforming circles to sine waves in real time... and in
> the process smearing egg on your stoooopid face. LOL
>
> <http://muller.research.engineering.cornell.edu/sites/WEELS/summer06/Fourier%20Transforms-2D.pdf>
> 2D Fourier transform of a circularly symmetric function translates to
> Bessinc shape in 2-D, translates in 1-D to a sinewave.
>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourier_transform>
> "Still further generalization is possible to functions on groups,
> which, besides the original Fourier transform on R or R" (viewed as
> groups under addition), notably includes the discrete-time Fourier
> transform (DTFT, group = Z), the discrete Fourier transform (DFT,
> group = Z mod N) and the Fourier series or *circular* *Fourier*
> *transform* (group = S^1, the unit circle ~ closed finite interval
> with endpoints identified). The latter is routinely employed to handle
> periodic functions."
>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periodic_function>
> You know, periodic functions... like sinewaves.
>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sine_and_cosine_transforms>
> "In mathematics, the Fourier sine and cosine transforms are forms of
> the Fourier integral transform that do not use complex numbers."
>
> Gee.. that *Fourier* *sine* *transform* sure looks familiar, doesn't
> it?
>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sine_and_cosine_transforms>
> "Relation with complex exponentials:
> The form of the Fourier transform used more often today is... Euler's
> Formula"
>
> Why, that's the exact equation I used to properly graph 170 volt peak
> 3-phase, which translates to 120.208 volt RMS L-N and 208.207 volt RMS
> L-L. I guess that's why they're called the Euler-Fourier Formulas.
>
> <http://i.imgur.com/NrZzxlb.png>
>
> SPNAK!
> =========================================================
>
> Aren't you the *moron* who k'lamed that Fourier transforms had nothing
> to do with the Euler sinewave summation equation? Yeah... yeah you
> are.
>
> Spankard. Moron. LOL
>
fakey, fourier transforms are used to filter signals, not for adding two
arbitrary sine functions together. please do some research and get back
to us.
--
"sines, sines, everywhere there's sines
blocking up the snickerTurds, breaking his mind"
http://imgur.com/a/yMFsu
-
FNVWe attempts to rewrite physics texts in Message-ID:
<3dcad3dd0a0d39727506717506883c26@dizum.com>
">>let's not forget that mine also had the correct applied mathematics
>> equations unlike fakey the supposed know-it-all:
>> phase A: 120*sin(2*pi*60*x)
>> phase B: 120*sin(2*pi*60*x+pi)
>> voltage difference between phase A and phase B at any point x in time:
>> 120*sin(2*pi*60*x) - 120*sin(2*pi*60*x+pi) = 240*sin(2*pi*60*x)
Wrong, as has already been proven. What does it say below, you fecking
*moron*?
"The _sum_ E(θ) ≡ E(a) + E(b) can be written thusly:""
it says that you don't even know how to correctly apply mathematics to
real-world AC electricity, snickerTurds.
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/alternating-current/chpt-10/single-phase-power-systems/
http://sub.allaboutcircuits.com/images/02170.png
"To mathematically calculate voltage between “hot” wires, we must subtract
voltages, because their polarity marks show them to be opposed to each
other:"
http://sub.allaboutcircuits.com/images/12112.png
http://www.samlexamerica.com/support/documents/WhitePaper-120240VACSingleSplitPhaseandMultiWireBranchCircuits.pdf
on page 2:
** NOTE: The phase of Hot Leg 2 (Phase B) is in the
opposite direction - i.e., 180° apart from the phase
of Hot Leg L1 (Phase A)
*COUGH*
SPNAK!!
-
i know a guy on the internet who will draw a triangular sine wave in ASCII
art if you ask nicely.
see: Message-ID: <4ba4a50aaaebc7fb8a348293c5cf9f13@dizum.com>
-
snickerTurds can't seem to refute the following:
- begin snickerSinewaveStew.cpp --
/*
HOW TO RUN: download arbitrary precision libraries from:
http://www.hvks.com/Numerical/arbitrary_precision.html
place those files in a directory and save this file as
snickerSinewaveStew.cpp inside that same directory.
compiles with:
gcc -Wall -I. precisioncore.cpp snickerSinewaveStew.cpp -lstdc++
run with:
./a.out
enjoy the LULZ ;)
*/
#include <fprecision.h>
#include <iostream.h>
using namespace std;
int main(){
//float_precision MIN=float_precision(0);
//float_precision MAX=float_precision(0);
float_precision STEP=float_precision(.0001);
float_precision t=float_precision(0); // time variable
float_precision sum=float_precision(0); // sum of SnickerTurd's
ridiculous sinewave mess
float_precision snickerPrediction=float_precision(2550.25); //
snickerTurd's erroneous k0oK-k'lame Sum
float_precision PI;
PI =_float_table(_PI,25);
// this while loop will run forever, but snickers doesn't understand why
while(sum < snickerPrediction){
// fakey's Sinewave Stew(TM) see: MID:
<db672705e57e4932eba3632562e0a941@dizum.com>
sum = (float_precision(150) * float_precision(
sin(float_precision(120)*float_precision(2)*PI*t))) +
(float_precision(20.25) * float_precision(
sin(float_precision(33)*float_precision(2)*PI*t))) +
(float_precision(1400)* float_precision(
sin(float_precision(150)*float_precision(2)*PI*t))) +(float_precision(20)*
float_precision(sin(float_precision(5013)*float_precision(2)*PI*t))) +
(float_precision(600)*float_precision(sin(float_precision(13)*float_precision(2)*PI*t)))
+
(float_precision(360)*float_precision(sin(float_precision(1209)*float_precision(2)*PI*t)));
// perhaps show a few values larger than +2300 to educate teh
snickerTurds
if(sum>float_precision(2300)){
cout << "t=" << t << " sum=" << sum << std::endl;
}
t = t+STEP;
}
/*
Message-ID: <c8523e6d9c31e3282bbe581fa525a2a8@dizum.com>
"Oh, yeah... it's 2550.25 volts... so why does your graph not even
reach 2500 volts, given that eventually all the sinewaves will
constructively interfere (ie: *add* to each other) to *sum* to 2550.25
volts?"
Fakey, it doesn't reach 2500 volts because the summation of your sinewaves
never reaches that. They never reach their max values at the same time.
That's how stupid you are.
Message-ID: <731d08dcc702b9a8a13077ffc201e91f@dizum.com>
"I most certainly *did* prove otherwise. It can't even arrive at the
correct sinewave summation voltage of 2550.25 volts"
Fakey, you only *proved* that you are too inept to graph the equations and
notice a few things about the interactions of their frequencies when
summed.
the next line of code is never executed, but snickers DEFINITELY can't
figure out why it isn't and instead has a bunch of lame excuses while
still having not produced a value for t where the sum=2550.25, as he has
k0okily proklamed in many usenet messages.
*/
cout << "snickerTurds was right! the sum is " << sum << " at time t=" <<
t <<endl;
}
- end snickerSinewaveStew.cpp --
-
Fakey irrationally demands a theme song to foam to:
"all I really want your pathetic pwned ass to do is write me a classic
rock song as tribute to your Usenet Lord and Master..."
<f4f9193fa7d28b760a9de681e61427e7@dizum.com>
-
Somewhere Abouts Round Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:25:03 -0500, Friendly
Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
<snicker>
Fag. LOL
Idiot. LOL
Moron. LOL
Tranny. LOL
Libtard. LOL
Crackhead. LOL
GableTard. LOL
DildoRider. LOL
Bad Musician. LOL
Stick Figure. LOL
Terrible Liar. LOL
Sinewave Spammer. LOL
Outerfilthing Stalker. LOL
Talentless FrothMonkey. LOL
Math Challenged Halfwit. LOL
Klimate Katastrophe Kook. LOL
Defeated Tearful Spankard. LOL
Waster Of Time To Save $10. LOL
Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In The History Of Usenet. LOL
on top of old snick-ers, all covered with Fag. LOL
is where my usenet lord and mas-ter
can go straight to hell*
*hell doesn't exist. hope everybody is having a productive evening.
-
http://i.imgur.com/2tH6zVB.jpg
http://cafepress.com/kooktown
http://i.imgur.com/pnWqhSG.jpg
-
If my poasts are offensive to you, you can always block all From: headers
containing "root@127.0.0.1", unless you are an idiot who would like to
yammer about "morphing" and maybe try to lodge some frivolous complaints
to my news provider, then please be sure to ignore this helpful
information and have fun making an ass of yourself in public. :)
if that route of silencing those horrid opinions of mine that you
downloaded to your computer under duress doesn't work you can always try:
http://i.imgur.com/jlsN9JX.png?2
-
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop
The Gish Gallop is often used as an indirect argument from authority — as
it appears to paint the galloper as an expert in a broad range of subjects
or with an extensive knowledge of an individual one. Simultaneously it
presents opponents (in spoken debates) or refuters (in written,
Internet-based ones) as incompetent bumblers who didn't do their homework
before the debate. Such emphasis on style over substance is the reason
many scientists disdain public debates as a forum for disseminating
opinions. - Page #1 from the Gospel of SnickerTurd
-
Coming soon! To a newsgroup near you!:
$ perl fakeyBot.pl
FakeyBot> I'm FakeyBot. What's your name so I can Google-stalk you,
look you up on Radaris, and hurl invective and probably-illegal harrassing
bile from behind an anonymous dizum account? <snicker>
You> Robert Michael Wolfe
FakeyBot> Oh look, you're back again to polish my size 16 steel-toed
boot with your colon and listen to me talk about bestiality and cocks,
Robert. <snicker>
Robert> you talk about cocks a lot.
FakeyBot> Oh, I talk about sex a lot?
Robert> gay sex, mostly...
FakeyBot> Fag!
(just as useful as the original!)
-
snickers the wonderturd describes how he alerted lots of his kiddie pr0n
friends to the ensuing FBI sting in message
<b5e7da79a455d0c9227b1b50e25e7ea1@dizum.com>:
"That's easy enough to do... how do you think my crew uncovered the
largest CP ring using Tor and I2P, which we promptly turned over to
the FBI? I discovered a way to uncover the IP addresses the I2P users were
using, and a way of tracking Eepsites back to their IP addresses, then we
figured out that we could DDOS a Tor IP address and modify Tor headers
while checking whether a Tor hidden service was still up, then using
process of elimination to pinpoint the IP address hosting that hidden
service. It's not rocket science.
_The I2P community got all up in arms when I discussed on their forum how
I was doing it, and that it'd be a good way of cleaning up I2P so it can
get on with being a platform to research anonymous communication... my
distinct impression was that the "anonymity
research platform" story was just a cover story to allow pervs to
trade CP._ (NOTE: admits to participating in what he "suspected" was a
kiddie pr0n network.)
That Silk Road 2.0 was taken offline in the ensuing FBI Operation
Onymous was just icing on the cake."
-
Golden Killfile, June 2005
KOTM, November 2006
Bob Allisat Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, November 2006
Special Ops Cody Memorial Purple Heart, November 2006
Special Ops Cody Memorial Purple Heart, September 2007
Tony Sidaway Memorial "Drama Queen" Award, November 2006
Busted Urinal Award, April 2007
Order of the Holey Sockpuppet, September 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle, September 2006
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle, April 2008
Tinfoil Sombrero, February 2007
AUK Mascot, September 2007
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-02 08:21 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II |
| Message-ID | <701b479f4e60104e4288dbef2163dccd@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #558418 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in <news:op.ydnz05n3tm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > why... why that's akin to some blowhard klaming to use an equation that > they clearly don't understand and are at a loss to provide any evidence of > having actually used it. Except I've demonstrated that I do understand it. You're the moron using a kooky sinewave subtraction equation that leads you to make kooky proclamations like measuring between two phases of 3-phase AC gives 0 volts and that shorting all three phases together *doubles* the voltage. As for "provide any evidence", the Euler sinewave summation equation has been in use since the 18th century... your being too stupid to find it and *far* too stupid to use it properly is no one's fault but your own, especially given the fact that I've given you the equation twice now. 150 IQ? LOL > whe<SMACKAKOOK!> Your using the wrong equation because you're a mathematical moron who can't for the life of him understand vector summation. That, too, is no one's fault but your own. 150 IQ? LOL >>> Aren't you the moron who claims water is not tetrahedral? >> Aren't you the moron who k'lames that "Water is tetrahedral. It >> actually has 4 poles, 2 positive and 2 negative." >> >> Now you'll get right on detailing how, exactly, a three-atom molecule >> can exhibit tetrahedrality... because you appear to be just as math, >> geometry and reality-challenged as LunkHead. > because it is. > > https://plus.maths.org/content/sites/plus.maths.org/files/latestnews/may-aug10/ice/lone.jpg Except there are no "lone pairs", you moron. You're using an outdated water model and you're thoroughly confused as to the molecular model, counting electrons as part of the _molecular_ geometry. <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/water_molecule.html> ===================================================== The water molecule is often described in school and undergraduate textbooks as having four, approximately tetrahedrally arranged, sp3-hybridized electron pairs, two of which are associated with hydrogen atoms leaving the two remaining lone pairs. In a perfect tetrahedral arrangement the bond-bond, bond-lone pair and lone pair-lone pair angles would all be 109.47° and such tetrahedral bonding patterns are found in condensed phases such as hexagonal ice. Ab initio calculations on isolated molecules, however, do not confirm the presence of significant directed electron density where lone pairs are expected. The negative charge is more evenly smeared out along the line between where these lone pairs would have been expected, and lies closer to the center of the O-atom than the centers of positive charge on the hydrogen atoms (as left). Water structure, showing the electrostatic potential is raised at those tetrahedral positions where lone pair electrons are commonly displayedEarly 5-point molecular models, with explicit negative charge where the lone pairs are purported to be, fared poorly in describing hydrogen bonding, but more recent models show some promise. Although there is no apparent consensus of opinion [116], such descriptions of substantial sp3-hybridized lone pairs in the isolated water molecule should perhaps be avoided... ===================================================== You see that, DildoRider? Such descriptions of substantial sp3-hybridized lone pairs in the isolated water molecule *should* *perhaps* *be* *avoided*. SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! SPNAK! >>> What shape, exactly, do you think the molecule is? >> Message-ID: <230fdc3806a6ca5c7f66fa356765d72a@dizum.com> >> ========================================================= >> To be technically correct, you'd have to say water dynamic >> heterogeneities are approximately trigonally, nearly planarly, >> arranged with bond angles at 109.47 degrees, having sp^2-hybridized >> electron pairs, which combine into icosahedral super-heterogeneities. >> This model not only fully explains hydrogen bonding, but the >> electrostatic potential distribution which accounts for the O--O dimer >> and further accurately models the radial distribution function as >> embodied in the observed diffraction pattern of liquid water. >> >> But the individual water molecule is dipolar, with one strongly >> electronegative (8+) oxygen and two weakly electronegative (1+) >> hydrogens, said dipolar nature arising due to the O-H bond angle. >> >> And that still doesn't explain your stupidly blathering: "Water is >> tetrahedral. It actually has 4 poles, 2 positive and 2 negative." >> >> Water has *no* "negative poles", and it most certainly doesn't have "4 >> poles", you witless turd. >> >> You'll be getting right on diagramming your fictional "4 pole" water, >> Moron. > https://plus.maths.org/content/sites/plus.maths.org/files/latestnews/may-aug10/ice/lone.jpg > http://wps.prenhall.com/wps/media/objects/439/449969/Media_Portfolio/Chapter_08/FG08_13.JPG Bwahahahaaa! Not only are you using an outdated water model, you apparently believe that your nonexistent lone pairs constitute the third and fourth legs in a *molecular* geometric model... meaning you don't know the difference between electrons and atoms. Besides which, the VSEPR theory shows water isn't tetrahedral under the AXE method, it's bent: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VSEPR_theory#AXE_method> Do you not understand that the VSEPR theory predicts a shape that doesn't match bond angles when orbitals involved in bonding are a combination of s and p orbitals, thus hybridization is required, thus the VSEPR theory is flawed? SPNAK! >> SPNAK! >> ========================================================= >> >> <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/cluster_evidence.html> >> <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/clusters_overview.html#icos> >> ========================================================== >> This structuring accommodates explanation of many of the anomalous >> properties of water including its temperature-density and >> pressure-viscosity behavior, the radial distribution pattern, the >> presence of both cyclic pentamers and hexamers, the change in >> properties on supercooling and the solvation and hydration properties >> of ions, hydrophobic molecules, carbohydrates and macromolecules. >> ========================================================== >> >> IOW, the icosahedral model of water comes closer to accurately >> modeling all the anomalous behaviors of water than any other of the >> dozens of water models, one of which you've chosen... a long >> discredited model. Oh, you didn't even know you'd chosen a water model >> to bleat about, did you? Because you had no idea what a water model >> even was. Because you're a moron. >> >> <snicker> >> >> SPNAK! >>> -- >>> "...a sinewave is a Fourier transformation of a circle." >>> --Fakey >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phasor> >> <https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/89/Unfasor.gif> >> >> Message-ID: <80d61a6928a9e7df316c519affcf3838@dizum.com> >> ========================================================= >> <http://betterexplained.com/articles/an-interactive-guide-to-the-fourier-transform/> >> See the animations about 1/4th down the page? Yeah, those are Fourier >> transforms transforming circles to sine waves in real time... and in >> the process smearing egg on your stoooopid face. LOL >> >> <http://muller.research.engineering.cornell.edu/sites/WEELS/summer06/Fourier%20Transforms-2D.pdf> >> 2D Fourier transform of a circularly symmetric function translates to >> Bessinc shape in 2-D, translates in 1-D to a sinewave. >> >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourier_transform> >> "Still further generalization is possible to functions on groups, >> which, besides the original Fourier transform on R or R" (viewed as >> groups under addition), notably includes the discrete-time Fourier >> transform (DTFT, group = Z), the discrete Fourier transform (DFT, >> group = Z mod N) and the Fourier series or *circular* *Fourier* >> *transform* (group = S^1, the unit circle ~ closed finite interval >> with endpoints identified). The latter is routinely employed to handle >> periodic functions." >> >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periodic_function> >> You know, periodic functions... like sinewaves. >> >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sine_and_cosine_transforms> >> "In mathematics, the Fourier sine and cosine transforms are forms of >> the Fourier integral transform that do not use complex numbers." >> >> Gee.. that *Fourier* *sine* *transform* sure looks familiar, doesn't >> it? >> >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sine_and_cosine_transforms> >> "Relation with complex exponentials: >> The form of the Fourier transform used more often today is... Euler's >> Formula" >> >> Why, that's the exact equation I used to properly graph 170 volt peak >> 3-phase, which translates to 120.208 volt RMS L-N and 208.207 volt RMS >> L-L. I guess that's why they're called the Euler-Fourier Formulas. >> >> <http://i.imgur.com/NrZzxlb.png> >> >> SPNAK! >> ========================================================= >> >> Aren't you the *moron* who k'lamed that Fourier transforms had nothing >> to do with the Euler sinewave summation equation? Yeah... yeah you >> are. >> >> Spankard. Moron. LOL > fakey, fourier transforms are used to filter signals, not for adding two > arbitrary sine functions together. please do some research and get back > to us. Gee... I guess that's why they're known as the Euler-Fourier Formulas, you halfwitted brain-damaged stick-figure emo-goth crackhead. SPNAK! Fag. LOL Idiot. LOL Moron. LOL Tranny. LOL Libtard. LOL Crackhead. LOL GableTard. LOL DildoRider. LOL Bad Musician. LOL Stick Figure. LOL Terrible Liar. LOL Obsessed Retard. LOL Sinewave Spammer. LOL Outerfilthing Stalker. LOL Talentless FrothMonkey. LOL Math Challenged Halfwit. LOL Klimate Katastrophe Kook. LOL Defeated Tearful Spankard. LOL Waster Of Time To Save $10. LOL Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In The History Of Usenet. LOL -- Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka DildoRider, aka Teh Mop Jockey) 5907 Stanton Ave. Pittsburgh, PA (412) 853-6395 (412) 799-0532 (412) 665-8289 (412) 404-8757 DildoRider admits he's stoooopid: MID: <c65504c436778934b3e8a0fb022b7618@dizum.com> ================================================= >> it appears I've kicked your ass so hard it's >> damaged your brain, DildoRider. > then it appears that you like shooting fish in > barrels, intellectually lazy fuckhead that you are. Well, you've just admitted that intellectually kicking your ass is akin to shooting fish in a barrel... IOW, you've admitted that you're stoooopid. No un-ringing that bell. <snicker> ================================================= DildoRider admits he's "really stupid" (his words). LOL MID: <8a9faed11123abfaa1257fb33fb0c082@dizum.com> ================================================= > so what you're saying is that your targets for attack > have to be really stupid or else you can't manage? ================================================= DildoRider admits much more about himself: MID: <36c6802852caf4f712515dedb738e450@dizum.com> ================================================= "absolutely and completely retarded, insane, gay, ugly, smelly, toothless, dirt-poor, incontinent and possibly homeless" ================================================= This is a libtard's method of "winning", for fuck sake. 150 IQ? LOL
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-03 07:40 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II |
| Message-ID | <c8eebd166e1f054546055caa931bff48@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #558388 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> Bite My Shiny Metal Ass (aka Shiny Tinfoil Brain), in <news:cl9edbdu21c4j208gr4hf1mo5c736m57ke@4ax.com> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: Froups desnecked, Cowardly Moron. > FNVWe stomped a retard's brain flat. Again: >> Bite My Shiny Metal Ass (aka Shiny Tinfoil Brain), in >>> Amplification factor = 178/19 = 9.7 dB. >>> 14.5 dB, if you count crossposting inefficiency. >>> >>> Wooohoo! Beat that this time. >> Woot! I've got the moron so perturbed he's not only counting lines of >> text, > Heh. People who have real newsreaders don't have to count > anything, chump. It's right there in the thread view. > But, please feel free to argue about it... it's a great way > to try to change the subject, innit? Translation: "Nuuuuhhhh-uuuhhhhhhh! I'm not a pwned line-counting dB-calculating kooktard! I'm k'laming the total number of lines in a post including quoted text as the lines I counted and calculated as dB because I'm just *that* fucking stupid that I'd tell such an easily disproved lie!" SPNAK! >> he's going to a dB conversion website to punch in the numbers to >> determine just how ass-kicked he should consider himself to be. >> Because we all know he's far too stoooopid to do that dB conversion >> math himself. > I realize using a log key on a calculator is beyond your > mental level, fakey. Doesn't mean you should be projecting > your incompetence upon everyone else. Bwahahahaa! I forced Shiny Tinfoil Brain to Google-rape until he came across a website that explained to him how to use the Log key on his calculator to calculate dB, which he'd never used before... then he yet again ran to Usenet to bleat, hoping against hope it'd do the impossible... make him look a little less stupid. <snicker> >> Now you'll get right on detailing how, exactly, a three-atom molecule >> can exhibit tetrahedrality... because you appear to be just as math, >> geometry and reality-challenged as LunkHead. > You'll get right on detailing how you think a water molecule > is shaped, fakey. You won't, of course, since you don't > have a clue. You will just run & bleat that you're winning. Of course I will. Molecularly, using the VSEPR theory AXE method, it's a bent geometry. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VSEPR_theory#AXE_method> "Bent (H2O)" You'll note the VSEPR theory does *not* classify water as tetrahedral. SPNAK! >>> What shape, exactly, do you think the molecule is? >> Message-ID: <230fdc3806a6ca5c7f66fa356765d72a@dizum.com> >> ========================================================= >> To be technically correct, you'd have to say water dynamic >> heterogeneities are approximately trigonally, nearly planarly, >> arranged with bond angles at 109.47 degrees, having sp^2-hybridized > Hey... 109.47°, you say?... Why,.. why, isn't that the very > same angle between each of the vertices in a tetrahedron? > Why, yes! Yes, i believe it is, fakey! > > Thanks again for proving that i'm right, and you're a moron. That doesn't make it a tetrahedron on a molecular level, you fecking moron. Because a water molecule is a bent geometry, as I prove above. That's why I said the dynamic heterogeneities are approximately *trigonally*, nearly planarly, arranged. IOW, the individual molecules are not at 109.47, only the inter-molecular bonds are. <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/water_molecule.html#lp> "Early 5-point molecular models, with explicit negative charge where the lone pairs are purported to be, fared poorly in describing hydrogen bonding, but more recent models show some promise. Although there is no apparent consensus of opinion [116], such descriptions of substantial sp3-hybridized lone pairs in the isolated water molecule should perhaps be avoided [117], as an sp2-hybridized structure (plus a pz orbital) is indicated. This rationalizes the formation of (almost planar) trigonal hydrogen bonding that can be found around some restricted sites in the hydration of proteins and where the numbers of hydrogen bond donors and acceptors are unequal." <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/water_molecule.html#lp> "The molecule is clearly not spherical, however, with about a ±5% variation in van der Waals diameter dependent on the axis chosen; approximately tetrahedrally placed slight indentations being apparent opposite the (putative) electron pairs." IOW, you read the word "tetrahedral", thought it'd make you sound like less of a moron, so you ran to Usenet to bleat that word, without realizing that's merely a description of the geometry of the electron distribution using the hydrogen atoms as landmarks. It is *not* the molecular geometry. Aren't you the moron who k'lamed: "Water is tetrahedral. It actually has 4 poles, 2 positive and 2 negative." Bwahahaha. So wrong you're not even wrong. There's not a correct word in those two sentences. SPNAK! > <snip copy n paste technobabble> Translation: "I'll yet again snip out all that information I don't understand. Because I'm a moron." <snicker> >> Water has *no* "negative poles", and it most certainly doesn't have "4 >> poles", you witless turd. > LOL! If water had no negative poles, it wouldn't have an > electric moment then, would it? And it wouldn't be > *DI*polar, would it? Holy shit on a shingle, you're a fucking moron. <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/water_molecule.html#lp> "Due to the relatively large positive charge on the oxygen atom nucleus (8+) and the closeness of its electrons, the oxygen atom attracts electrons much more strongly (i.e. is much more electronegative) than the hydrogen atoms (1+). This results in a charge transfer from the hydrogen atoms towards the oxygen atom and, hence, the polarity of the water molecule." BOTH the oxygen *and* the hydrogen are electronegative, but the vastly greater electronegativity of the oxygen atom gives the water molecule its dipolar nature. You'll get right on explaining how the electron distribution would have ~10% probability distribution on the hydrogen atoms if they were *negative* and thus repulsed electrons, you fucking halfwit. SPNAK! on the know-nothing *moron*. > Sheesh. Where do they get these nitwits from. No idea where you come from, Nitwit. But whichever rock it was, you should crawl back under it. <snicker> -- Shiny Tinfoil Brain (aka Bite My Shiny Metal Ass) didn't know: ===================================== The Euler equation is a subset of equations known as the Euler-Fourier Formulas, thus that a sinewave is a transformation of a circle (which should have been intuitive, given that generators *rotate* to create *sinusoids*); That cross correlation is used with Fourier transforms; That superposition is the same as wave interference; That wave interference works the same for standing or traveling waves; That RMS and peak-to-peak voltage are two different things; That RMS isn't a DC voltage; That 170 volt peak, 120.208 volt RMS L-N 3-phase service gives 208.207 volts RMS L-L; That 4444525800 != 4400000000 != 1; The difference between frequency and period of a sinewave; That there's no difference between 'i' and 'j' in electrical engineering, physics and control systems engineering; What a positive or negative vector is; That the vector sum of 3-phase AC constitutes a closed loop per Kirchhoff's Voltage Law, thus that the three phases sum to zero; That "mnemonic" is not spelled "mneumonic"; That his claim: "Water is tetrahedral. It actually has 4 poles, 2 positive and 2 negative." is nonsense from a blathering moron. That water does not have negative poles. The oxygen has an electronegativity of 8+, the hydrogens 1+. And the moron continues to demonstrate his inability to read a graph. ===================================== SPNAK! <snicker>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-28 13:56 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part II |
| Message-ID | <op.ydj38q04tm21m2@benson.localhost> |
| In reply to | #557521 |
On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 02:47:10 -0500, Checkmate, DoW #1
<Lunatic.Fringe@the.edge> wrote:
> In article <nau6p0$1rc$1@gioia.aioe.org>, kkensington01@gmail.invalid
> says...
>
>
>> > IOW, the idiotic anti-science nitwit just k'lamed that
>> > heat can flow from colder to hotter! LOL
>>
>> Who k'lamed that, again? The *net* transfer is in the other direction,
>> because the hot object emits more energy than it receives, and the cold
>> one receives more than it emits. But they do both radiate. Lunkhead.
>>
>
> Gee, I didn't have any problem understanding that explanation. I wonder
> if the Fakeytard is being deliberately obtuse, or if he actually IS that
> stupid?
>
he's still summing sine waves to get potential differences, so...
--
"sines, sines, everywhere there's sines
blocking up the snickerTurds, breaking his mind"
http://imgur.com/a/yMFsu
-
FNVWe attempts to rewrite physics texts in Message-ID:
<3dcad3dd0a0d39727506717506883c26@dizum.com>
">>let's not forget that mine also had the correct applied mathematics
>> equations unlike fakey the supposed know-it-all:
>> phase A: 120*sin(2*pi*60*x)
>> phase B: 120*sin(2*pi*60*x+pi)
>> voltage difference between phase A and phase B at any point x in time:
>> 120*sin(2*pi*60*x) - 120*sin(2*pi*60*x+pi) = 240*sin(2*pi*60*x)
Wrong, as has already been proven. What does it say below, you fecking
*moron*?
"The _sum_ E(θ) ≡ E(a) + E(b) can be written thusly:""
it says that you don't even know how to correctly apply mathematics to
real-world AC electricity, snickerTurds.
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/alternating-current/chpt-10/single-phase-power-systems/
http://sub.allaboutcircuits.com/images/02170.png
"To mathematically calculate voltage between “hot” wires, we must subtract
voltages, because their polarity marks show them to be opposed to each
other:"
http://sub.allaboutcircuits.com/images/12112.png
http://www.samlexamerica.com/support/documents/WhitePaper-120240VACSingleSplitPhaseandMultiWireBranchCircuits.pdf
on page 2:
** NOTE: The phase of Hot Leg 2 (Phase B) is in the
opposite direction - i.e., 180° apart from the phase
of Hot Leg L1 (Phase A)
*COUGH*
SPNAK!!
-
i know a guy on the internet who will draw a triangular sine wave in ASCII
art if you ask nicely.
see: Message-ID: <4ba4a50aaaebc7fb8a348293c5cf9f13@dizum.com>
-
snickerTurds can't seem to refute the following:
- begin snickerSinewaveStew.cpp --
/*
HOW TO RUN: download arbitrary precision libraries from:
http://www.hvks.com/Numerical/arbitrary_precision.html
place those files in a directory and save this file as
snickerSinewaveStew.cpp inside that same directory.
compiles with:
gcc -Wall -I. precisioncore.cpp snickerSinewaveStew.cpp -lstdc++
run with:
./a.out
enjoy the LULZ ;)
*/
#include <fprecision.h>
#include <iostream.h>
using namespace std;
int main(){
//float_precision MIN=float_precision(0);
//float_precision MAX=float_precision(0);
float_precision STEP=float_precision(.0001);
float_precision t=float_precision(0); // time variable
float_precision sum=float_precision(0); // sum of SnickerTurd's
ridiculous sinewave mess
float_precision snickerPrediction=float_precision(2550.25); //
snickerTurd's erroneous k0oK-k'lame Sum
float_precision PI;
PI =_float_table(_PI,25);
// this while loop will run forever, but snickers doesn't understand why
while(sum < snickerPrediction){
// fakey's Sinewave Stew(TM) see: MID:
<db672705e57e4932eba3632562e0a941@dizum.com>
sum = (float_precision(150) * float_precision(
sin(float_precision(120)*float_precision(2)*PI*t))) +
(float_precision(20.25) * float_precision(
sin(float_precision(33)*float_precision(2)*PI*t))) +
(float_precision(1400)* float_precision(
sin(float_precision(150)*float_precision(2)*PI*t))) +(float_precision(20)*
float_precision(sin(float_precision(5013)*float_precision(2)*PI*t))) +
(float_precision(600)*float_precision(sin(float_precision(13)*float_precision(2)*PI*t)))
+
(float_precision(360)*float_precision(sin(float_precision(1209)*float_precision(2)*PI*t)));
// perhaps show a few values larger than +2300 to educate teh
snickerTurds
if(sum>float_precision(2300)){
cout << "t=" << t << " sum=" << sum << std::endl;
}
t = t+STEP;
}
/*
Message-ID: <c8523e6d9c31e3282bbe581fa525a2a8@dizum.com>
"Oh, yeah... it's 2550.25 volts... so why does your graph not even
reach 2500 volts, given that eventually all the sinewaves will
constructively interfere (ie: *add* to each other) to *sum* to 2550.25
volts?"
Fakey, it doesn't reach 2500 volts because the summation of your sinewaves
never reaches that. They never reach their max values at the same time.
That's how stupid you are.
Message-ID: <731d08dcc702b9a8a13077ffc201e91f@dizum.com>
"I most certainly *did* prove otherwise. It can't even arrive at the
correct sinewave summation voltage of 2550.25 volts"
Fakey, you only *proved* that you are too inept to graph the equations and
notice a few things about the interactions of their frequencies when
summed.
the next line of code is never executed, but snickers DEFINITELY can't
figure out why it isn't and instead has a bunch of lame excuses while
still having not produced a value for t where the sum=2550.25, as he has
k0okily proklamed in many usenet messages.
*/
cout << "snickerTurds was right! the sum is " << sum << " at time t=" <<
t <<endl;
}
- end snickerSinewaveStew.cpp --
-
Fakey irrationally demands a theme song to foam to:
"all I really want your pathetic pwned ass to do is write me a classic
rock song as tribute to your Usenet Lord and Master..."
<f4f9193fa7d28b760a9de681e61427e7@dizum.com>
-
Somewhere Abouts Round Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:25:03 -0500, Friendly
Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
<snicker>
Fag. LOL
Idiot. LOL
Moron. LOL
Tranny. LOL
Libtard. LOL
Crackhead. LOL
GableTard. LOL
DildoRider. LOL
Bad Musician. LOL
Stick Figure. LOL
Terrible Liar. LOL
Sinewave Spammer. LOL
Outerfilthing Stalker. LOL
Talentless FrothMonkey. LOL
Math Challenged Halfwit. LOL
Klimate Katastrophe Kook. LOL
Defeated Tearful Spankard. LOL
Waster Of Time To Save $10. LOL
Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In The History Of Usenet. LOL
on top of old snick-ers, all covered with Fag. LOL
is where my usenet lord and mas-ter
can go straight to hell*
*hell doesn't exist. hope everybody is having a productive evening.
-
http://i.imgur.com/2tH6zVB.jpg
http://cafepress.com/kooktown
http://i.imgur.com/pnWqhSG.jpg
-
If my poasts are offensive to you, you can always block all From: headers
containing "root@127.0.0.1", unless you are an idiot who would like to
yammer about "morphing" and maybe try to lodge some frivolous complaints
to my news provider, then please be sure to ignore this helpful
information and have fun making an ass of yourself in public. :)
if that route of silencing those horrid opinions of mine that you
downloaded to your computer under duress doesn't work you can always try:
http://i.imgur.com/jlsN9JX.png?2
-
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop
The Gish Gallop is often used as an indirect argument from authority — as
it appears to paint the galloper as an expert in a broad range of subjects
or with an extensive knowledge of an individual one. Simultaneously it
presents opponents (in spoken debates) or refuters (in written,
Internet-based ones) as incompetent bumblers who didn't do their homework
before the debate. Such emphasis on style over substance is the reason
many scientists disdain public debates as a forum for disseminating
opinions. - Page #1 from the Gospel of SnickerTurd
-
Coming soon! To a newsgroup near you!:
$ perl fakeyBot.pl
FakeyBot> I'm FakeyBot. What's your name so I can Google-stalk you,
look you up on Radaris, and hurl invective and probably-illegal harrassing
bile from behind an anonymous dizum account? <snicker>
You> Robert Michael Wolfe
FakeyBot> Oh look, you're back again to polish my size 16 steel-toed
boot with your colon and listen to me talk about bestiality and cocks,
Robert. <snicker>
Robert> you talk about cocks a lot.
FakeyBot> Oh, I talk about sex a lot?
Robert> gay sex, mostly...
FakeyBot> Fag!
(just as useful as the original!)
-
snickers the wonderturd describes how he alerted lots of his kiddie pr0n
friends to the ensuing FBI sting in message
<b5e7da79a455d0c9227b1b50e25e7ea1@dizum.com>:
"That's easy enough to do... how do you think my crew uncovered the
largest CP ring using Tor and I2P, which we promptly turned over to
the FBI? I discovered a way to uncover the IP addresses the I2P users were
using, and a way of tracking Eepsites back to their IP addresses, then we
figured out that we could DDOS a Tor IP address and modify Tor headers
while checking whether a Tor hidden service was still up, then using
process of elimination to pinpoint the IP address hosting that hidden
service. It's not rocket science.
_The I2P community got all up in arms when I discussed on their forum how
I was doing it, and that it'd be a good way of cleaning up I2P so it can
get on with being a platform to research anonymous communication... my
distinct impression was that the "anonymity
research platform" story was just a cover story to allow pervs to
trade CP._ (NOTE: admits to participating in what he "suspected" was a
kiddie pr0n network.)
That Silk Road 2.0 was taken offline in the ensuing FBI Operation
Onymous was just icing on the cake."
-
Golden Killfile, June 2005
KOTM, November 2006
Bob Allisat Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, November 2006
Special Ops Cody Memorial Purple Heart, November 2006
Special Ops Cody Memorial Purple Heart, September 2007
Tony Sidaway Memorial "Drama Queen" Award, November 2006
Busted Urinal Award, April 2007
Order of the Holey Sockpuppet, September 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle, September 2006
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle, April 2008
Tinfoil Sombrero, February 2007
AUK Mascot, September 2007
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-28 19:10 +0100 |
| Subject | Fakey here's both complex sine wave equations graphed. Part IIb |
| Message-ID | <6087ea4aedd97219585c0aca18e314fa@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #557511 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
Ko0O0oki kensi the LunkHeaded LibTard, in
<news:nau6p0$1rc$1@gioia.aioe.org> did thusly jump head first into the
wood chipper again:
Bwahahahaaa! I've so SPNAK!'d the moronic anti-science halfwit that
he's back to cowardly snipping out all that data which proves him
*wrong*... then bleating out more moronic blather. LOL
SPNAK!
> On 27/02/2016 1:37 PM, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler
> Emeritus wrote:
>> clouds pass radiation to space at the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric
>> window,
> Nope.
I've cited 7 peer-reviewed studies proving you *wrong*, LunkHead.
============================================================
<http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/hwrp/chy/chy14/documents/ms/remote_sensing_snow_cover_methods_mapping_snow.pdf>
"The emissivity of snow approaches that of a black body at the
10.5—12.5 micron atmospheric window."
And *only* at the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window.
Ever heard of the "radiation paradox"? It's where the net radiation
emission *increases* with increasing cloud cover. LOL
Check out Holmgren, 1971; Jacobs et al., 1972; Ambach, 1974; Ohmura,
1981; Yamanouchi et al., 1982; Wendler, 1986; and R. Bintanja and M.
R. Van Den Broeke, 1996.
Then realize you're *wrong* and you've been SPNAK!'d yet again because
you're too stoooopid to grasp reality.
============================================================
>>> And according to mainstream science (not the kOoksites you
>>> frequent) it absorbs some *and* scatters some.
>> I cited 7 peer-reviewed studies proving you wrong, L<SMACKAK00K!>
> You cited studies so far over your head you don't understand them, but
> *think* you do.
>
> Seems to be a recurring theme with you, kOok.
Says the moronic kook trying to use one of the studies to blather out
stupidity in the desperate hopes that he can prove himself "not
wrong"... remember? You said increasing cloud thickness leads to more
warming over snow and ice... except you're 180 degrees out from
reality. Again.
<http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~broek112/home.php_files/Publications_MvdB/1996_Bintanja_IJC.pdf>
=============================================================
*Increasing* the cloud *optical* *depth* causes a large increase in
cloud albedo and only a small change in cloud emissivity so that the
cooling effect starts to dominate."
Thus, the phenomenon that net radiation increases with increasing
cloud amount is, under favourable conditions (e.g. high albedo),
attributable to the asymmetry in the dependency of the longwave and
shortwave radiative cloud properties on cloud optical thickness.
=============================================================
If you knew what a blackbody was, you'd understand how snow and ice
work in conjunction with heavy cloud cover to *increase* net radiation
emission to space, LunkHead.
Oh look, an astrophysics site... proving you *wrong*. LOL
<http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mod6.html>
======================================================
"Blackbody radiation" or "cavity radiation" refers to an object or
system which absorbs all radiation incident upon it and re-radiates
energy which is characteristic of this radiating system only, not
dependent upon the type of radiation which is incident upon it.
======================================================
That should actually say "absorbs all radiation incident upon it which
exceeds the energy of the blackbody itself", since photons of lower
energy cannot excite molecules of a higher energy. If such were the
case, photolysis would be a simple matter of shining a flashlight at
water, and we'd have all the hydrogen energy to power our world that
we wanted... of course, that'd also mean the sun would split all the
world's water into hydrogen and oxygen, leaving no water. So LunkHead
Land must be a desert world. LOL
So the clouds let through the wavelengths at the ~11-micron infrared
atmospheric window and those wavelengths go straight out to space
unimpeded (which is the definition of *window*, LunkHead). The longer
wavelengths get reflected back down to the snow or ice, which
*re*-*emits* them at the snow or ice's blackbody *temperature* in
accordance with Wien's Displacement Law, which is that tiny 2.1251
micron band centered on the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window,
and thus *that* radiation gets radiated straight out to space
unimpeded, so on and so forth.
Which is why the 7 peer reviewed studies I cited all say that
increasing low cloud cover over snow or ice *increases* net radiation
emission to space, thus causing a net *cooling* effect.
SPNAK! on the anti-science nitwit who yet again finds himself 180
degrees out from reality because his tiny little libtard brain can't
process fast enough to grasp reality.
<snicker>
>> Which is why those high, thin clouds have a weak net warming effect,
>> whereas the low, thick clouds cause net cooling.
> By day, when the sun's shining. At night both have warming effects.
Wrong. Do you suppose the only radiation being reflected off those
clouds, absorbed by the snow, and re-emitted at that snow's blackbody
radiation temperature in according with Wien's Displacement Law, to be
chucked out to space in the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window, is
coming from the sun, LunkHead? So LunkHead is now k'laming that all
infrared emission stops at night! LOL
SPNAK! on the moron who cannot be an astrophysicist, because he has
trouble even grasping basic terrestrial processes, interstellar
processes would leave the poor hapless moron with a melted brain...
likely k'laming that the Gaussian curvature of space is predominantly
positive, thus causing gravity to *repel*... oh... wait... Lunkhead
already k'lamed that... see my .sig.
SPNAK!
>> Thus clouds do *not* cause warmer temperatures over snow or ice.
> Except at night.
Wrong. LunkHead k'lames the process by which longer wavelengths are
converted to shorter wavelength by the blackbody characteristics of
snow and ice only happens when the sun is shining... therefore when
the sun is shining, snow and ice are blackbodies, whereas when it's
not, they're not. And when the sun goes down, infrared radiation
emission stops. LOL!
<http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mod6.html>
"Blackbody radiation" or "cavity radiation" refers to an object or
system which absorbs all radiation incident upon it and re-radiates
energy which is characteristic of this radiating system only, not
dependent upon the type of radiation which is incident upon it.
Again, that should say "absorbs all radiation incident upon it which
exceeds the energy of the blackbody itself", since photons of lower
energy cannot excite molecules of a higher energy.
Reposted from my prior post, which you ran away from:
============================================================
At low frequencies (long wavelengths), emission tends to the
Rayleigh-Jeans Law. Conversely, at high frequencies (short
wavelengths), emission tends to the Wien Displacement Law, Lunkhead.
As wavelength drops, the peak becomes more pointed. Planck's curve
breaks down. That's why I used Wien's Displacement Law.
Snow or ice cannot emit at a temperature it cannot attain, LunkHead.
The dropoff in emission is greater than exponential. I encourage you
to explore the anomalous nature of water in all its phases as regards
emission of radiation (the reason for the ~11-micron infrared
atmospheric window). If it emitted at shorter wavelengths, the
satellite measurements of snowpack temperature would be skewed too
warm. The Planck curve is an approximation, but it breaks down under
certain circumstances. Which is why, at shorter wavelengths, the
Planck function behaves in accordance with the Wien Displacement Law.
Read the book Atmospheric Radiation, specifically pages 28-31. Also
"Temperature Effect of Phase Transition Radiation of Water", Page 9.
Snow emits at wavelengths that don't correspond to the Planck curve,
LunkHead. It corresponds to the Wien Displacment Law, as I proved.
Oh, look:
<http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/hwrp/chy/chy14/documents/ms/remote_sensing_snow_cover_methods_mapping_snow.pdf>
"The emissivity of snow approaches that of a black body at the
10.5—12.5 micron atmospheric window."
And *only* at the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window.
Ever heard of the "radiation paradox"? It's where the net radiation
emission *increases* with increasing cloud cover. LOL
Check out Holmgren, 1971; Jacobs et al., 1972; Ambach, 1974; Ohmura,
1981; Yamanouchi et al., 1982; Wendler, 1986; and R. Bintanja and M.
R. Van Den Broeke, 1996.
Then realize you're *wrong* and you've been SPNAK!'d yet again because
you're too stoooopid to grasp reality.
============================================================
Reposted from my prior post, which you ran away from:
============================================================
Snow and ice *cannot* emit at a temperature it cannot attain, and it
*will* *not* emit above its melting point, leaving a tiny 2.1251
micron window that snow and ice emit at.
Wien's Displacement Law:
Displacement_max = b/T
Where:
T = absolute temperature in Kelvin
b = Wien's displacement constant, 2900 um K
Given that:
32 F = freezing point of water
32 F = 273.15 K
2900 um K / 273.15 K = 10.6168 micron at the freezing point of water
Once snow goes above that temperature, it melts and runs away,
exposing the land beneath that snow, therefore snow *cannot* emit
above 273.15 K, thus it *cannot* emit shorter wavelengths than 10.6168
micron.
Now, let's assume the great majority of the time that temperature will
not get below -50 F. That's polar wintertime cold, and likely won't be
reached very often anywhere else.
2900 um K / 227.5944 K = 12.7419 micron.
Thus, given that snow *cannot* emit at a wavelength that corresponds
to a temperature it cannot reach, and given that snow won't reach
below -50 F very often in anyplace but the poles in winter, we can
safely set the upper wavelength of emission at 12.7419 micron.
Thus, snow emits at 10.6168 to ~12.7419 micron, a narrow 2.1251 micron
window. This accounts for the great majority of temperatures seen.
Outside the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window, snow wouldn't even
"see" the ~3K of space due to atmospheric absorption at those
associated wavelengths, thus snow blackbody emission drops off outside
the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window, making your blather about
"most of it is outside the 11 micron atmospheric window" especially
stoooopid. LOL
============================================================
Remember, it was *you* who k'lamed snow emits "outside the 11 micron
atmospheric window", LunkHead. I proved you *wrong*. LOL
<http://www.uni-graz.at/~foelsche/VO/Physics_of_the_Atmosphere_II/Physics_of_the_Atmosphere_II_04_Radiation_Laws_2.ppt>
============================================================
Slide #9:
Oh look... just as the NASA SABER study proved, water vapor, NO and
CO2 (and methane!) are global *cooling* gasses due to not absorbing at
the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window... which means yet again
LunkHead finds himself 180 degrees out from reality.
============================================================
So we've got a process by which the long-wave radiation reflected by
clouds is absorbed by snow and ice and re-emits at the ~11-micron
infrared atmospheric window (the *only* wavelengths it can emit due to
snow and ice being a near-blackbody) (just as the water vapor and N2O
do in the NASA SABER study), which allows that radiation a free pass
straight out to space... and this iterative process continues until,
as the NASA SABER study proved, ~95% of all that radiation is
converted to wavelengths corresponding to the ~11-micron infrared
atmospheric window and is emitted out to space.
Educate yourself, you moron:
<http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2012/22mar_saber/>
=================================================================
"Carbon dioxide and nitric oxide are natural thermostats," explains
James Russell of Hampton University, SABER's principal investigator.
"When the upper atmosphere (or 'thermosphere') heats up, these
molecules try as hard as they can to shed that heat back into space."
For the three day period, March 8th through 10th, the thermosphere
absorbed 26 billion kWh of energy. Infrared radiation from CO2 and NO,
the two most efficient _coolants_ in the thermosphere, re-radiated 95%
of that total back into space.
{NOTE: They did this by absorbing then re-emitting that energy at the
wavelength of the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window.}
=================================================================
That water has anomalous emission of radiation is the reason behind
the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window, and thus the temperature
stability of our planet, LunkHead... your kooky AGW has been
destroyed, and you've been proven to be a know-nothing moron who is
yet again 180 degrees out from reality.
SPNAK!
--
Kensi the moron wrote:
================================
The sphere's Gaussian curvature is 1/r^2, and its area is 4*pi*r^2, so
the curvature is 4*pi
================================
Kensi the moron said the Gaussian curvature = 1 / r^2 *and* the
Gaussian curvature = 4 * pi.
Therefore, 1 / r^2 = 4 * pi
Therefore, r = 0.28209479176
Kensi the moron says every sphere in the entire universe has a radius
of 0.28209479176. Of course, being a moron, kensi didn't specify the
units.
The moron also said the Gaussian curvature of a sphere is dependent
upon that sphere's radius. Wholly incorrect.
Kensi the moron was corrected:
================================
Did... did you just say "the Gaussian curvature = 1/r^2" *and* "the
Gaussian curvature = 4*pi" therefore "1/r^2 = 4*pi"? Now you
backpedal, LunkHead.
You mean the Gaussian curvature = 1/r^2 * (4*pi*r^2) therefore =
(4*pi), and therefore the Gaussian curvature of a sphere is
independent of r due to its symmetry, thereby proving your original
"The sphere's Gaussian curvature is 1/r^2" blather *wrong*?
================================
But Kensi the moron persists in insisting that what he wrote isn't
fucked up, and that the Gaussian curvature of a sphere *does* depend
upon its radius, because he doesn't understand the equations he's
trying to use, he doesn't know the difference between 'constant
curvature' and 'Gaussian curvature', he doesn't know what an integral
is, and he's a halfwit who can't figure out even basic geometry
problems.
Now remember, this is the same moron who k'lames he's an
astrophysicist... yet he's stated that the Riemann curvature tensor
concept being the central mathematical tool in the theory of general
relativity and the modern theory of gravity, and the curvature of
space-time being described by the geodesic deviation equation, is
"science fiction" and "a howler".
In addition, the moron k'lamed that 4-D Minkowski space-time was
mostly positive Gaussian curvature, with only small areas of negative
Gaussian curvature, which proves the moron has no idea of the effects
of mass or magnetism upon the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold.
He has k'lamed that the Gaussian curvature of the universe is
predominantly positive, which means Lunkhead believes that massive
objects such as planets, stars and black holes ride *above* the
tangential plane of the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, thereby
making the planes of principal curvature positive Gaussian curvature,
and thus causing gravity to *repel*.
Lunkhead the moron has k'lamed that magnetism has "*no* effect" upon
the 4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, then backpedaled and said there
was a "small amount of positive curvature due to the energy density in
the field", thereby proving he doesn't know how magnetism affects the
4-D Minkowski space-time manifold, and denies the existence of
magnetic attraction.
Thus, Kensi the moron has described a universe in which planets could
not maintain their orbits, a universe in which magnets could not work,
and therefore a universe which could not exist.
Kensi is the same moron who k'lames that snow at a colder temperature
than the surrounding atmosphere is somehow violating the First and
Second Laws of Thermodynamics and giving off "blackbody radiation".
Kensi is the same moron who k'lames that snow gives off "blackbody
radiation" at wavelengths that would put the temperature of the snow
at 489 F.
Kensi is the same moron who first denied the existence of the
~11-micron infrared atmospheric window, then backpedaled and k'lamed
that snow emitted outside that ~11-micron window, and was proven
wrong. Then the spankard moron tried to use the backpedal of
"blackbody radiation" being at a different wavelength than spectral
emission, yet again demonstrating that the moron has no clue how
spectral absorption and emission works.
Kensi is the same moron who denies the NASA SABER study proving that
CO2 is a global *cooling* gas _because_ of the ~11-micron infrared
atmospheric window.
The reality exposed by the NASA SABER study also proves the Klimate
Katastrophe Kook Anthropogenic Global Warming k'lame of CO2 being a
global warming gas is a fairy tale that violates the First and Second
Laws of Thermodynamics, thus destroying CO2-induced AGW, yet this same
moron continues to cling to his delusions.
Kensi is the same moron who continues to cling to his delusion that
global warming causes more intense hurricanes, despite three
peer-reviewed studies proving the exact opposite.
Kensi is not an astrophysicist, he's far too stupid to be. He's just a
slumpy dumpy frumpy lumpy loser trying to pretend that he's
intelligent... and failing badly.
That would be because Kensi is a moron with an underpowered brain that
struggles (and fails) to understand reality.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 16 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web