Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #562149 > unrolled thread
| Started by | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-03-13 13:42 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-04-12 09:42 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 161 — 15 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-13 13:42 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-13 16:58 -0500
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-03-13 23:14 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-13 20:59 -0500
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-03-15 11:06 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-15 11:29 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-16 17:37 -0500
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-14 04:34 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-13 21:24 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-14 05:43 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-13 22:12 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-14 07:07 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 00:37 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-14 16:24 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 09:32 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-14 12:55 -0500
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-14 19:17 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-03-14 21:15 +0000
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-15 05:27 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-15 00:52 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-15 16:52 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-15 17:43 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-16 05:34 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-16 11:37 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-16 17:09 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-16 15:12 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-17 05:50 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-17 16:19 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-17 13:06 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-18 05:32 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-18 06:19 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-18 14:16 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-18 17:24 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-19 02:08 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 05:52 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-19 17:14 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 18:24 +0100
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 02:44 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-20 11:50 -0700
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 03:05 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-20 13:53 -0700
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-20 20:40 +0000
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-20 13:51 -0700
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-20 20:31 +0100
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-20 20:46 +0000
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 04:52 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-21 05:52 +0100
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 15:56 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-21 16:46 +0100
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-21 11:21 -0600
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 02:12 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 05:31 +0100
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 16:19 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 15:45 +0100
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-22 09:36 -0600
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-22 17:50 +0000
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 16:34 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-21 09:26 +0000
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-21 16:09 +0100
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-21 09:35 -0600
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-21 13:02 -0400
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 02:17 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 06:01 +0100
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 16:09 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 16:46 +0100
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-21 15:38 +0000
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-21 12:57 -0400
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-21 13:22 -0400
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-21 13:29 -0400
oinky declareth noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-03-21 11:39 -0700
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-20 14:41 -0600
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 05:16 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-03-21 21:24 +0000
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-21 17:29 -0400
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 16:20 +0800
Re: Fakey proclaims he's a proudly ignorant mathematical maroon Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 15:56 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-28 18:48 +0200
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-28 13:23 -0600
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-28 15:57 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-18 14:11 -0600
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-18 16:14 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-18 06:04 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-19 06:38 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-18 22:48 +0000
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 05:36 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-19 17:18 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 18:09 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-31 06:27 +0200
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-30 21:46 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-31 07:07 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-04-01 00:39 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-31 12:51 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-04-01 01:03 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-31 13:05 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-31 11:22 -0600
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-31 10:55 -0600
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O "\"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> - 2016-03-31 13:02 -0400
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-04-01 08:17 +0200
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-04-01 01:04 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-31 18:16 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-31 11:16 -0600
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O pandora <pandora@peak.org> - 2016-03-31 12:35 -0500
HOH noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-03-16 14:02 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-03-18 12:36 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 05:41 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-19 10:40 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 19:23 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-19 12:25 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 21:20 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-19 15:04 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-20 07:14 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-19 23:34 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-20 19:27 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-20 14:47 -0600
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-20 13:56 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-20 21:14 +0000
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-21 05:37 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 15:23 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-21 16:36 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-21 11:25 -0600
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 05:36 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 17:39 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 02:20 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 05:46 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 17:34 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 16:52 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 17:11 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-04-06 07:09 +0200
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 01:12 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-04-06 17:16 +0200
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 13:24 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-04-07 09:02 +0200
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-16 15:05 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-16 17:19 -0500
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-17 04:46 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-16 21:18 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-16 23:26 -0500
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-17 06:43 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-16 23:00 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-17 16:09 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-17 09:35 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-18 06:24 +0100
HOH vs OCO noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-03-18 10:52 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-03-20 22:57 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-21 16:41 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 02:24 +0800
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-21 11:25 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 06:17 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-21 22:51 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 15:56 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-25 10:00 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-26 06:58 +0100
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-27 14:09 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-28 08:19 +0200
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-28 01:22 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-28 17:39 +0200
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-28 10:11 -0700
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-29 07:36 +0200
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-28 13:22 -0600
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-29 06:54 +0200
Re: PSI: Reassessing H2O James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 09:42 -0700
Page 1 of 9 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next page →
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-13 13:42 -0700 |
| Subject | PSI: Reassessing H2O |
| Message-ID | <be0fc7e6-7f12-40f5-a4ff-0d94f61bd42a@googlegroups.com> |
http://principia-scientific.org/reassessing-climate-role-carbon-dioxide/#comments JM: Up to this point everything you say is both true and irrelevant to my point. MH: So, water exist in gaseous form at all temperatures above and below its 1 atmosphere boiling point of 100 C. JM: This is false. At the ambient temperatures/pressures of the atmosphere, and in accordance with the same chart you mentioned, H2O cannot be gaseous. Thus it can only be liquid H2O suspended in air. As with their application to CO2 in climatology, the application of the Laws of Thermodynamics to H2O in meteorology are not optional. Consequently meteorology's notion that storms are caused by the convective upwelling of gaseous H2O and subsequent release of "latent heat" is refuted. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/sci.physics/james$20mcginn$20gaseous$20latent%7Csort:date http://scottishsceptic.co.uk/2011/08/26/how-to-get-off-the-ground-with-nothing-but-water-almost/#comment-39222 https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2015/06/11/atmospheric-convection-what-does-it-mean/comment-page-8/#comment-114103
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-13 16:58 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nc4nqm$ni0$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #562149 |
<snip crap> get a new shtik jammie-boy, you're all wet this one vanished too, like your "Magical Plasma - not Plasma" disaster
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-13 23:14 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <nc4oin$kov$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #562160 |
Dne 13/03/2016 v 22:58 Sergio napsal(a): > > > <snip crap> > > > get a new shtik jammie-boy, you're all wet > > this one vanished too, like your "Magical Plasma - not Plasma" disaster > You are ugly on that James guy. :-D Making up own physics has so many advantages to existing one.... You need not to learn anything... You need not to understand anything... You need not to count anything... You need not to verify anything... It stimulates imagination... It stimulates rhetoric... It makes you feeling smart... It makes you feeling interesting ... It makes you feeling important... You can play word games with other people... It is fun.... Dont you like fun ? :-D -- Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer ) Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-13 20:59 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nc55vb$18bd$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #562163 |
On 3/13/2016 5:14 PM, Poutnik wrote: > Dne 13/03/2016 v 22:58 Sergio napsal(a): >> >> >> <snip crap> >> >> >> get a new shtik jammie-boy, you're all wet >> >> this one vanished too, like your "Magical Plasma - not Plasma" disaster >> > > You are ugly on that James guy. :-D > Making up own physics has so many advantages to existing one.... > > You need not to learn anything... > You need not to understand anything... > You need not to count anything... > You need not to verify anything... > It stimulates imagination... > It stimulates rhetoric... > It makes you feeling smart... > It makes you feeling interesting ... > It makes you feeling important... > You can play word games with other people... > > It is fun.... Dont you like fun ? :-D > on the darker side of pretend/fictional stuff, google Bronies these are guys 20 to 40 that play with My Little Ponys (girls toy for 8 year old girls). a software guy got hired over here very smart person, but could not socialize well, he ran a Brony website, so we let him go, too immature, he was 30, weighed 340 # as he stayed at home on his computer. some boys growing up played video games in all their spair time, did not aquire social or adult skills like they should have, and are now very lame at 25 to 30 years old, with dim future. there are a lot of them out there. (big market opertunity out there to cure these dudes) the making up ones own physics is what the New Age people did in the 1970's and 1980's mostly on the west coast, (makes them feel god like, and there were many cults pushing it) and many are detached from how things really work, and tend to not be connected strongly in reality, I think that is where McFly fell into. I don't care too much, Im practicing my Engrlish skills mostly. McFly is a nasty troll. But in my spair time I make radiation detectors using PMTs and scintillators for fun. Also it is fun looking up stuff that surfaces in the newsgroup, to see how it really works.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-15 11:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5ac360b6-2883-4af3-909c-0138d0e095c1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #562195 |
Sergio says on the darker side of pretend/fictional stuff, google Bronies these are guys 20 to 40 that play with My Little Ponys (girls toy for 8 year old girls). a software guy got hired over here very smart person, but could not socialize well, he ran a Brony website, so we let him go, too immature, he was 30, weighed 340 # as he stayed at home on his computer. ----------- My favorite Pony is Fluttershy. Who's yours? PS- Bro hoof!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-15 11:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0825ccd1-c68d-49b6-98f6-32c5866dabd8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #562632 |
On Tuesday, March 15, 2016 at 11:07:01 AM UTC-7, HVAC wrote: > Sergio says > on the darker side of pretend/fictional stuff, > > google Bronies > > these are guys 20 to 40 that play with My Little Ponys (girls toy for 8 > year old girls). > > a software guy got hired over here very smart person, but could not > socialize well, he ran a Brony website, so we let him go, too immature, > he was 30, weighed 340 # as he stayed at home on his computer. > ----------- > > My favorite Pony is Fluttershy. Who's yours? > > > PS- Bro hoof! It's great to see that you and Sergio finally have somebody to talk to.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-16 17:37 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nccn8o$m1u$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #562646 |
On 3/15/2016 1:29 PM, James McGinn wrote: > On Tuesday, March 15, 2016 at 11:07:01 AM UTC-7, HVAC wrote: >> Sergio says >> on the darker side of pretend/fictional stuff, >> google Bronies >> >> these are guys 20 to 40 that play with My Little Ponys (girls toy for 8 >> year old girls). >> a software guy got hired over here very smart person, but could not >> socialize well, he ran a Brony website, so we let him go, too immature, >> he was 30, weighed 340 # as he stayed at home on his computer. >> ----------- >> >> My favorite Pony is Fluttershy. Who's yours? >> >> PS- Bro hoof! > > It's great to see that you and Sergio finally have somebody to talk to. > perhaps you, Insane James, will find somebody to talk to too, beside the voices in your head. If you were a Brony, which is your favorite ?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-14 04:34 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <bc5458d7ca3b9489680f5a31622d8b76@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #562149 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> James McGinn, in <news:be0fc7e6-7f12-40f5-a4ff-0d94f61bd42a@googlegroups.com> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > http://principia-scientific.org/reassessing-climate-role-carbon-dioxide/#comments > > JM: Up to this point everything you say is both true and irrelevant > to my point. > > MH: So, water exist in gaseous form at all temperatures above and > below its 1 atmosphere boiling point of 100 C. > > JM: This is false. At the ambient temperatures/pressures of the > atmosphere, and in accordance with the same chart you mentioned, > H2O cannot be gaseous. Thus it can only be liquid H2O suspended > in air. As with their application to CO2 in climatology, the > application of the Laws of Thermodynamics to H2O in meteorology > are not optional. Consequently meteorology's notion that storms > are caused by the convective upwelling of gaseous H2O and subsequent > release of "latent heat" is refuted. No, it's not "refuted", Jim. Your saying so doesn't make it so. You've presented nothing but a demonstrably false fairy tale, the machinations of a badly bent mind which cannot grasp reality, and has thus scampered off into the brush, creating a kooky conspiracy theory that has been proven via more than a half-dozen different avenues to be utter hogwash. Meanwhile, there are several satellites operated by several agencies watching latent heat of condensation release from clouds, Jim. Why do you continue to deny reality? > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/sci.physics/james$20mcginn$20gaseous$20latent%7Csort:date > http://scottishsceptic.co.uk/2011/08/26/how-to-get-off-the-ground-with-nothing-but-water-almost/#comment-39222 > https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2015/06/11/atmospheric-convection-what-does-it-mean/comment-page-8/#comment-114103 Still demonstrating your inability to grasp how water can be gaseous phase below its boiling point, James? It's already been fully explained to you, and in the process, your kooky conspiracy theory has been utterly demolished. You postulate the following: 1) There is a "plasma not-a-plasma" that exists in the troposphere, which you have admitted is merely a hypothetical construct so you can continue to blather on about your kooky discredited conspiracy theory. 2) This magical "plasma not-a-plasma" is plasmized by an energy source that is somehow magically plasmizing water in the troposphere without dissociating it, given that the dissociation energy and nuclear binding energy of water are identical at 940.8 kJ/mol, and thus water will dissociate rather than plasmize, unless hit with an extremely energetic laser. 3) That your kooky energy source is somehow plasmizing only atmospheric water while not plasmizing or dissociating Earth-bound water, and is not killing off all life on the planet. Given that the *minimum* energy necessary to even *begin* to plasmize water would be equivalent to photons at a *maximum* wavelength of 103.32 nm, just 3.32 nm away from the x-ray range, I'm sure even you can see the problem inherent in your contention, James. 4) That this magical energy source exists in the troposphere. Except it cannot exist in the troposphere. Photons of shorter wavelength than ~121 nm are absorbed far above the troposphere due to their ability to ionize air, thus they are not present in the troposphere, where the overwhelming majority of all water is. 5) That warm air is heavier than cooler air... tell me, Jim... which direction does air flow from a flame? Oh, that's right, upward. Why? Because warm air is lighter and less dense than cooler air and thus convects upward. 6) That air with gaseous phase water in it is heavier than dry air, except you forget that science has long known about molar mass and molar volume... \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Air temperature is a much greater determiner of air density than humidity. The molar mass of water is 18.02 g/mol, as calculated from the sum of the atomic masses of its constituent atoms. The average molar mass of air (approximately 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, 1% other gases) is 28.57 g/mol at STP. Thus using Avogadro's Law and the Ideal Gas Law, water in its gaseous phase and air have a molar volume of 22.414 L/mol at STP. IOW, a molar mass of air and a molar mass of water in its gaseous phase occupy the same volume of 22.414 liters at STP. The density of water in its gaseous phase at STP is 0.804 g/L, whereas the density of dry air is 1.27 g/L at STP. Therefore that 22.414 liters molar volume would weigh: 18.02 grams for water in its gaseous phase 28.57 g for dry air Therefore, water in its gaseous phase is lighter than air. Therefore air containing water in its gaseous phase is lighter than dry air. Therefore, drier air *must* sink through air laden with water in its gaseous phase, because it is less buoyant. Except that's not all, Jim. Because air becomes denser as the altitude decreases. At any given altitude, air of the same temperature and gaseous water partial pressure will have the same density. At any given altitude, air of lower temperature but similar gaseous water partial pressure will have higher density. At any given altitude, air of the same temperature but greater gaseous water partial pressure will have lower density. For air of the same temperature and gaseous water partial pressure, air at a higher altitude will have lower density. (1) For instance, at sea level, 20 C temperature, and 0% relative humidity, the air density is 1.204 kg/m^3. Keeping all other factors in (1) the same but increasing relative humidity to 100%, or elevation to 74 meters, or temperature to 22.4 C, the air density is 1.194 kg/m^3. Thus in order for the air at sea level to rise 74 meters due to increased buoyancy, it must have 100% more relative humidity than the air 74 meters above (IOW, the air at sea level must be at 100% RH, the air 74 meters above must be at 0% RH), given the same temperature; or the temperature of that sea level air must be at least 2.4 C greater than the air at 74 meters, given the same relative humidity. Given that temperature can change much more than 2.4 C, whereas relative humidity can only max out at 100%, one can see that temperature-induced convection is the predominant driver of weather systems, destroying yet another of your kooky contentions. IOW, in order for air to rise, it must overcome gravity, which requires energy (said energy in the form of temperature of the air itself decreasing air density or the latent heat of vaporization of monomer water in its gaseous phase replacing a certain percentage of higher molar weight air molecules and thus decreasing air density). It's not because of your blather that the air at a lower altitude is "heavier" due to "water droplets", Ko0okTard. //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ And before you begin blathering on again about the Ideal Gas Law not applying to the atmosphere, let me remind you that I've done the calculations for the van der Waals equation, as well. It is in agreement with the Ideal Gas Law to a great degree of accuracy even with the molar volume I used. As air volume increases for the same relative humidity, air with gaseous phase water in it acts more and more like an ideal gas, Jim. Compare the Ideal Gas Law to the van der Waals Equation with all parameters the same except for volume, and increase the volume through several iterations, then plot the difference between the results of the Ideal Gas Law and the van der Waals equation... notice the converging trend? Do you think for an Earth-atmosphere-sized container, the air with gaseous phase water in it would be within a very small margin of error to an ideal gas, Jim? Sure it is. But that's something else you don't understand because you're a low-information uneducated oaf. 7) Your kooky contention that water polarity changes upon H bonding... which would also cause random changes in water's solvent properties, and we know water's solvent properties do not change randomly, Jim. You didn't know about the two spin isomers of water, which means there are two hybrids of water with different H bonding strengths: <https://youtu.be/7hGqlEpvODw?t=2156> They used x-ray spectroscopy to determine photon energy from electron orbital shell descent. You'll note the gaseous phase water molecule's photon spectra peaks at a much lower photon energy than ice. This is due to differences in hydrogen bonding strength between the two phases. <https://youtu.be/7hGqlEpvODw?t=2304> You'll note the double peak of liquid water. Professor Anders Nilsson, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory: ==================================================== Two peaks, what does that mean? Could it be two different types of water molecules then, in the liquid? And if you look at it, one of the peaks is very close to the gas phase and the other peak is closer to the ice. So it looks like water contains two types of molecules. ==================================================== You betcha... para and ortho-form water. <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/ortho_para_water.html> ==================================================== Each hydrogen atom in water has a magnetic moment, which is associated with the proton's spin of 1/2. As is found in molecular hydrogen (H2), the protons (within the hydrogen atoms) in water (H2O) may possess parallel or antiparallel nuclear spin (see right). When the spins are parallel, there is a paramagnetic state called ortho-H2O with a magnetic moment = 1. This is the high spin (triplet) state with three symmetric spin states +1 , 0 , -1 (^^, ^v+^v, vv) where the three states have equal energy in a zero magnetic field. This spin state always possesses positive energy with a minimum energy level of 284.7 J mol-1 (23.794352 cm-1) H216O, [607c], 284.4 J mol-1 (23.773510 cm-1) H217O [607a] or 284.2 J mol-1 (23.754902 cm-1) H218O [607a]. When the spins are opposed there exists the nonmagnetic state called para-H2O with magnetic moment = 0 with just one antisymmetric spin state (^v-^v) and magnetic moment = 0. Some of the water molecules in this low spin (singlet) state will not be rotating even at room temperature. Para-H2O does not interact with an external magnetic field, but ortho-H2O does. Conversion between these isomers is symmetry forbidden for isolated water molecules and they act as different molecular species. They can change spin state on interaction with another particle, including other water molecules. The equilibrium ratio of these nuclear spin states in H2O is all para- at zero Kelvin, where the molecules have no rotational spin in their ground state, shifting to the most stable ratio [1694] of 3:1 ortho:para, in the relative amounts of the number of magnetic states, at less cold temperatures (>50 K, see left [2478]); the equilibrium taking months to establish itself in ice (or gas) and nearly an hour in ambient water [410]. It is now thought that the ratio lies far from equilibrium and much closer to 1:1 in liquid water due to hydrogen bond formation [2076]. This means that liquid H2O effectively consists of a mixture of non-identical molecules and the properties of pure liquid ortho-H2O or para-H2O are unknown. The differences in the properties of these two forms of water are expected to be greater in an electric field [1186], which may be imposed externally, from surfaces or from water clustering itself. Many materials preferentially adsorb para-H2O due to its non-rotation ground state [410, 835]. The apparent difference in energy between the two states is a significant 1-2 kJ mol-1, far greater than expected from spin-spin interactions (< μJ mol-1) [835]. It has been suggested that structural rearrangements may be induced by ortho-H2O : para-H2O conversion [1430], as it is possible that hydrogen bonds between para-H2O, possessing no ground state spin, are stronger and last longer than hydrogen bonds between ortho-H2O [1150]. It is thus possible that ortho-H2O and para-H2O form separate hydrogen bonded clusters [1150] with para-H2O being preferred in the low density tetrahedrally coordinated clusters and ortho-H2O being preferred in the high density clusters [2070], where their rotation is more easily accommodated. Picoliter samples of pure ortho-H2O and para-H2O may be separated in a strong dc electric field [2156]. ==================================================== The two spin isomers of water cause a different H bond strength when water molecules of like spin isomers engage in H bonding to form water clusters, Jim. Thus the weaker ortho-H2O hydrogen bond is more easily broken, so most of the gaseous phase water being evaporated should be ortho-H2O. You'll note above that ortho-H2O even in its liquid form is very close to the same properties as gaseous phase water under x-ray spectroscopy, the difference accountable by taking into consideration temperature and phase. Remember when I said the surface layer of water was more viscous than the bulk water? Yeah, that's because the ortho-H2O being evaporated removes heat from the water, which makes the para-H2O in the ~1.7 nm thick surface layer act nearly the same as ice. <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/interfacial_water.html> ===================================================== Analysis of simple thermodynamics c shows the surface has considerable structuring, having identical density to that of bulk water at just under 4 °C. In addition, the surface water structuring varies less with temperature than the bulk. Refractive index study of the water-air surface reveals it to be about 1.7 nm thick at 22 °C and more dense than the bulk liquid (that is, it behaves like water at a lower temperature). ===================================================== As for condensation? Well, it's been found that under circumstances in which relative humidity is less than ~25%, a four-molecule thick layer of ice forms on the condensation surface... so apparently what is happening is that the ortho-H2O being evaporated is colliding with other molecules in the air, changing their spin isomer and thus giving off energy, becoming para-H2O, and those are the ones preferentially condensing, forming that four-molecule thick layer of ice. You'll note above that para-H2O even in its liquid form is very close to the same properties as solid phase water (ice) under x-ray spectroscopy, the difference accountable by taking into consideration temperature and phase. For conditions of greater than ~25% relative humidity and thus greater water gaseous-phase partial pressure in the air, apparently the condensation process is fast enough to allow even ortho-H2O gaseous-phase water to condense, thus the four-molecule thick layer of ice is melted. So you see, James, it's not because of your kooky contention that the water molecule's polarity changes upon hydrogen bonding, it's because there are two spin-isomer hybrids of the water molecule with two different hydrogen bonding strengths. Yet again, your kooky conspiracy theory is ripped to shreds by scientific fact... made especially delicious because it was done utilizing a link *you* provided. LOL <http://phys.org/news/2014-09-para-ortho.html> ============================================== A hydrogen nucleus (proton) can adopt two different states, comparable to rotation clockwise and counterclockwise. In the case of water, the nuclear spins of the two — indistinguishable — protons can be combined in four different ways: one antisymmetric and three symmetric wavefunctions. Water adopting the antisymmetric wavefunction is called para water, whereas water adopting one of the symmetric ones is called ortho water. Because switching from one state to the other is "forbidden" due to quantum-mechanical symmetry rules, the two spin isomers cannot interconvert without external influences such as collisions. ============================================== Were you not aware that hydrogen has two spin isomers, ortho- and para-, and thus water, comprised of one oxygen atom and two hydrogen atoms, also has two spin isomers? <https://qph.is.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f24e171918d462fac89b809dccaa7c3e> <http://cdn.phys.org/newman/csz/news/800/2014/201434press.gif> In pure hydrogen, ortho-hydrogen is thermodynamically unstable even at low temperature and / or high pressure and it thus spontaneously converts to para-hydrogen upon molecular collision, which has implications for liquefied hydrogen storage, as energy is given off by this spin isomer conversion. In water, the oxygen atom slows the already slow conversion process to para-hydrogen by preserving spin state of the hydrogen atom via partially shielding the hydrogen atom from molecular collision which would cause spin isomer conversion. Now, let's you get to answering those questions you've been ducking, Jim... How are your kooky atmospheric "water droplets" forming if they're plasma, Jim? How is your kooky "plasma not-a-plasma" forming if the nuclear binding energy and dissociation energy of water are identical, and thus the water is dissociating into hydrogen and oxygen, Jim? Where is the energy (equivalent to photons of 103.32 nm wavelength, extremely strong ultraviolet, just 3.32 nm away from x-rays... except photons with shorter wavelength than 121 nm are absorbed high above the troposphere because they ionize air so well) coming from in the troposphere to form your kooky "plasma not-a-plasma", Jim? How is the energy to plasmize your kooky "plasma not-a-plasma" not dissociating all water on the planet and killing all life on the planet given that the energy *must* be in the troposphere where nearly all the water is, and where all life is, Jim? Now that it's been proven that water molecule polarity doesn't change upon H bonding, and in fact the two spin isomers of water molecules account for the different H bonding strengths which account for evaporation and condensation, do you still contend that your kooky conspiracy theory is workable, Jim? Why can't you answer those questions, Jim? Your kooky conspiracy theory has been utterly destroyed, Jim. It does not and cannot reflect reality. Deal with that reality as you will, Jim. Most Dunning-Kruger afflicted kooktards like you, when presented with the proof that they are delusional, tend to 'circle the wagons' to protect their delusions, driving themselves ever deeper into insanity. I note you are doing the same. I also note that, despite being driven *so* insane by their Usenet Lord and Master that some kooks forget their own name, they never forget mine... it haunts them for as long as they live. <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 the term "electronegativity" denotes a *positive* effective nuclear charge. What the definition of the word "equivalent" is. That digital voltmeters do indeed take discrete instantaneous samples. That the atmosphere (and the gaseous phase water within the atmosphere) does indeed follow the Ideal Gas Law to within 1.337842% margin of error *worst* *case* at 70 F. That the square of the instantaneous sample of peak-to-peak voltage of a peak-voltage sinewave is an offset sinewave, thus its average does *not* equal zero, as Shiny Tinfoil Brain k'lames. That the Ideal Gas Law does not require an ideal gas because it takes into account molar volume. That "within 10% error" does not equal "10% error". That water can be plasmized. That atomic number does not equal effective nuclear charge. And the moron continues to demonstrate his inability to read a graph. ===================================== SPNAK! <snicker>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-13 21:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fd179a2c-2704-4836-80f0-c1d53a0bedb7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #562207 |
On Sunday, March 13, 2016 at 8:45:06 PM UTC-7, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote: > Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> > > James McGinn, in > <news:be0fc7e6-7f12-40f5-a4ff-0d94f61bd42a@googlegroups.com> did > thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > > > http://principia-scientific.org/reassessing-climate-role-carbon-dioxide/#comments > > > > JM: Up to this point everything you say is both true and irrelevant > > to my point. > > > > MH: So, water exist in gaseous form at all temperatures above and > > below its 1 atmosphere boiling point of 100 C. > > > > JM: This is false. At the ambient temperatures/pressures of the > > atmosphere, and in accordance with the same chart you mentioned, > > H2O cannot be gaseous. Thus it can only be liquid H2O suspended > > in air. As with their application to CO2 in climatology, the > > application of the Laws of Thermodynamics to H2O in meteorology > > are not optional. Consequently meteorology's notion that storms > > are caused by the convective upwelling of gaseous H2O and subsequent > > release of "latent heat" is refuted. > > No, it's not "refuted", Jim. Your saying so doesn't make it so. I will gladly make a retraction if anybody can definitively demonstrate that water remains gaseous at ambient temps and/or if moist air (all other things being equal) is lighter than dry air. Fair enough?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-14 05:43 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <5ed901c761ca842e2693082258f9fd8d@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #562219 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> James McGinn, in <news:fd179a2c-2704-4836-80f0-c1d53a0bedb7@googlegroups.com> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > On Sunday, March 13, 2016 at 8:45:06 PM UTC-7, > Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote: >> James McGinn, in >> <news:be0fc7e6-7f12-40f5-a4ff-0d94f61bd42a@googlegroups.com> did >> thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: >>> http://principia-scientific.org/reassessing-climate-role-carbon-dioxide/#comments >>> >>> JM: Up to this point everything you say is both true and irrelevant >>> to my point. >>> >>> MH: So, water exist in gaseous form at all temperatures above and >>> below its 1 atmosphere boiling point of 100 C. >>> >>> JM: This is false. At the ambient temperatures/pressures of the >>> atmosphere, and in accordance with the same chart you mentioned, >>> H2O cannot be gaseous. Thus it can only be liquid H2O suspended >>> in air. As with their application to CO2 in climatology, the >>> application of the Laws of Thermodynamics to H2O in meteorology >>> are not optional. Consequently meteorology's notion that storms >>> are caused by the convective upwelling of gaseous H2O and subsequent >>> release of "latent heat" is refuted. >> No, it's not "refuted", Jim. Your saying so doesn't make it so. You've >> presented nothing but a demonstrably false fairy tale, the >> machinations of a badly bent mind which cannot grasp reality, and has >> thus scampered off into the brush, creating a kooky conspiracy theory >> that has been proven via more than a half-dozen different avenues to >> be utter hogwash. >> >> Meanwhile, there are several satellites operated by several agencies >> watching latent heat of condensation release from clouds, Jim. Why do >> you continue to deny reality? > I If you think you can just "wait it out" until I lose interest, you don't know me very well, James. I never give up. You'll pay me the $100,000 you owe me for meeting not just one but every single one of the terms of your publicly-made and often-reiterated challenge, and on top of that, providing the scientific proof that your kooky little conspiracy theory does not and cannot reflect reality, or you'll spend the remainder of your days backpedaling and proving yourself to be an uneducated moron. Do you think, both of us being in California, I can't put a lien on your house, Jim? > will gladly make a retraction if anybody can definitively > demonstrate that water remains gaseous at ambient temps and/or > if moist air (all other things being equal) is lighter than dry air. Already done, Jim, so you're lying. > Fair enough? You're a kooktard, Jim. You're far too stupid and insane, and far, far too emotionally invested in your being far too stupid and insane, to ever acknowledge reality, despite my rubbing your stupid face in it these past 8 days. Yeah, Jim... in 8 short days I've utterly destroyed your kooky little theory, proven it cannot and does not reflect reality, and proven you're a brain-damaged moron. And I did it with scientific fact you find yourself utterly unable to refute. Meanwhile, all you've done is lie, conflate, backpedal, divert, duck, dodge and non sequitur. Get right on answering those tough questions, Jim... you've made an extraordinary claim, and you've presented absolutely zero corroborable proof to back that claim up. So you throw out 150+ years of substantive and in-depth research as means of attempting to salvage your kooky discredited conspiracy theory in order to maintain your delusion that you know something no one else, all of them smarter and saner than you, knows, Jim? Do you really think the entire world has been wrong for a century and a half, and *you*, the kooktard who cannot answer my tough questions, are right, Jim? Or do you think the Occam's Razor explanation is that you're a delusional Dunning-Kruger afflicted paranoid-schizophrenic kook who's concocted a kooky conspiracy theory that is laughably wrong? Why can't you get your kooky conspiracy theory through the peer-review process, Jim? Why are there *no* corroborating peer-reviewed papers that back up your kooky contentions, Jim? The ones you've provided I've used to prove you and your kooky conspiracy theory *wrong*. How are your kooky atmospheric "water droplets" forming if they're plasma, Jim? How is your kooky "plasma not-a-plasma" forming if the nuclear binding energy and dissociation energy of water are identical, and thus the water is dissociating into hydrogen and oxygen, Jim? Where is the energy (equivalent to photons of 103.32 nm, extremely strong ultraviolet, just 3.32 nm away from x-rays... except photons with shorter wavelength than 121 nm are absorbed far above the troposphere because they ionize air so well) coming from in the troposphere to form your kooky "plasma not-a-plasma", Jim? How is the energy to plasmize your kooky "plasma not-a-plasma" not dissociating all water on the planet and killing all life on the planet given that the energy *must* be in the troposphere where nearly all the water is, and where all life is, Jim? Now that it's been proven that water molecule polarity doesn't change upon H bonding, and in fact the two spin isomers of water molecules account for the different H bonding strengths which account for evaporation and condensation, do you still contend that your kooky conspiracy theory is workable, Jim? Why can't you answer those questions, Jim? Your kooky conspiracy theory has been utterly destroyed, Jim. It does not and cannot reflect reality. Deal with that reality as you will, Jim. Most Dunning-Kruger afflicted kooktards like you, when presented with the proof that they are delusional, tend to 'circle the wagons' to protect their delusions, driving themselves ever deeper into insanity. I note you are doing the same. I also note that, despite being driven *so* insane by their Usenet Lord and Master that some kooks forget their own name, they never forget mine... it haunts them for as long as they live. <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*. It also means LunkHead believes the universe to be finite, and therefore it cannot be expanding. 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 attempted to back up his kooky k'lame above by further k'laming that snow emits at wavelengths which correspond to a variety of temperatures, presumably from 489 F to -422 F, because the moron doesn't understand that the Planck curve breaks down under certain circumstances, meaning snow emits in accordance with the Wien Displacement Law in a ~2.1251 micron window centered on the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window, not Planck's curve. 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 k'lamed heat flows from cooler to warmer; that in a solid, molecules are "flying-and-bouncing-around-the-place", that heat is "stirring up the molecules" and putting the molecules on a "somewhat different trajectory", thereby demonstrating that LunkHead cannot even grasp such basic topics as what heat is. 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 lumpy dumpy frumpy slumpy shroomtard 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 | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-13 22:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <208333ab-57b4-42fd-a81f-a24d3b81a11f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #562233 |
On Sunday, March 13, 2016 at 9:53:16 PM UTC-7, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote: > If you think you can just "wait it out" until I lose interest, I don't want you to lose interest. > you > don't know me very well, James. I never give up. You'll pay me the > $100,000 you owe me If I thought somebody owed me money I would be looking for a lawyer. I honestly hope you do the same.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-14 07:07 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <6ee8ec64a49327c39896e28cc2adbe6c@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #562239 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> James McGinn, in <news:208333ab-57b4-42fd-a81f-a24d3b81a11f@googlegroups.com> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > On Sunday, March 13, 2016 at 9:53:16 PM UTC-7, > Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote: >> If you think you can just "wait it out" until I lose interest, you >> don't know me very well, James. I never give up. You'll pay me the >> $100,000 you owe me for meeting not just one but every single one of >> the terms of your publicly-made and often-reiterated challenge, and on >> top of that, providing the scientific proof that your kooky little >> conspiracy theory does not and cannot reflect reality, or you'll spend >> the remainder of your days backpedaling and proving yourself to be an >> uneducated moron. >> >> Do you think, both of us being in California, I can't put a lien on >> your house, Jim? > I don't want you to lose interest. Oh, I'm sure if I put a lien on your house, I'd gain appreciable equity interest, James. But you'll willingly pay me, James... and be glad that you're doing so, just to be rid of me. <snicker> > If I thought somebody owed me money I would be looking for a > lawyer. I honestly hope you do the same. That's not how I work, Jim. I find it's more fun to drop-kick retards until they pay up. In fact, by the time I'm done with you, you'll think paying me what you owe me is just about the best idea you ever had. <snicker> Get right on answering those tough questions, Jim... you've made an extraordinary claim, and you've presented absolutely zero corroborable proof to back that claim up. So you throw out 150+ years of substantive and in-depth research as means of attempting to salvage your kooky discredited conspiracy theory in order to maintain your delusion that you know something no one else, all of them smarter and saner than you, knows, Jim? Do you really think the entire world has been wrong for a century and a half, and *you*, the kooktard who cannot answer my tough questions, are right, Jim? Or do you think the Occam's Razor explanation is that you're a delusional Dunning-Kruger afflicted paranoid-schizophrenic kook who's concocted a kooky conspiracy theory that is laughably wrong? Why can't you get your kooky conspiracy theory through the peer-review process, Jim? Why are there *no* corroborating peer-reviewed papers that back up your kooky contentions, Jim? The ones you've provided I've used to prove you and your kooky conspiracy theory *wrong*. How are your kooky atmospheric "water droplets" forming if they're plasma, Jim? How is your kooky "plasma not-a-plasma" forming if the nuclear binding energy and dissociation energy of water are identical, and thus the water is dissociating into hydrogen and oxygen, Jim? Where is the energy (equivalent to photons of 103.32 nm, extremely strong ultraviolet, just 3.32 nm away from x-rays... except photons with shorter wavelength than 121 nm are absorbed far above the troposphere because they ionize air so well) coming from in the troposphere to form your kooky "plasma not-a-plasma", Jim? How is the energy to plasmize your kooky "plasma not-a-plasma" not dissociating all water on the planet and killing all life on the planet given that the energy *must* be in the troposphere where nearly all the water is, and where all life is, Jim? Now that it's been proven that water molecule polarity doesn't change upon H bonding, and in fact the two spin isomers of water molecules account for the different H bonding strengths which account for evaporation and condensation, do you still contend that your kooky conspiracy theory is workable, Jim? Why can't you answer those questions, Jim? Your kooky conspiracy theory has been utterly destroyed, Jim. It does not and cannot reflect reality. Deal with that reality as you will, Jim. Most Dunning-Kruger afflicted kooktards like you, when presented with the proof that they are delusional, tend to 'circle the wagons' to protect their delusions, driving themselves ever deeper into insanity. I note you are doing the same. I also note that, despite being driven *so* insane by their Usenet Lord and Master that some kooks forget their own name, they never forget mine... it haunts them for as long as they live. <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*. It also means LunkHead believes the universe to be finite, and therefore it cannot be expanding. 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 attempted to back up his kooky k'lame above by further k'laming that snow emits at wavelengths which correspond to a variety of temperatures, presumably from 489 F to -422 F, because the moron doesn't understand that the Planck curve breaks down under certain circumstances, meaning snow emits in accordance with the Wien Displacement Law in a ~2.1251 micron window centered on the ~11-micron infrared atmospheric window, not Planck's curve. 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 k'lamed heat flows from cooler to warmer; that in a solid, molecules are "flying-and-bouncing-around-the-place", that heat is "stirring up the molecules" and putting the molecules on a "somewhat different trajectory", thereby demonstrating that LunkHead cannot even grasp such basic topics as what heat is. 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 lumpy dumpy frumpy slumpy shroomtard 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 | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-14 00:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <99ef391e-feff-45c1-89b1-5ecf223b37ba@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #562253 |
On Sunday, March 13, 2016 at 11:18:05 PM UTC-7, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote: > > I don't want you to lose interest. > > Oh, I'm sure if I put a lien on your house, I'd gain appreciable > equity interest, LOL. You would have to get a judgement first, dumbass. And that would mean you would have to come up with some genuine evidence and . . . well . . . suffice to say, that ain't going to happen. > James. But you'll willingly pay me, James... and be > glad that you're doing so, just to be rid of me. Why don't you see if you can find an expert, somebody willing to publicly vouch for you. Somebody willing to debate. Somebody willing to calmly present the evidence that gets you so flabbergasted. But here's the problem, anybody smart enough to win such a debate would also be smart enough to realize, upon preparation, that they have no chance of winning. > > <snicker> > > > If I thought somebody owed me money I would be looking for a > > lawyer. I honestly hope you do the same. > > That's not how I work, Jim. I find it's more fun to drop-kick retards > until they pay up. In fact, by the time I'm done with you, you'll > think paying me what you owe me is just about the best idea you ever > had. Do they let you out on your own? By yourself?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-14 16:24 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <d3fab06574213d6ad3cecc273baf804c@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #562271 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> James McGinn, in <news:99ef391e-feff-45c1-89b1-5ecf223b37ba@googlegroups.com> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again on Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 00:37:47 -0700 (PDT): Look at the moronic kooktard bleating in the wee hours. LOL > On Sunday, March 13, 2016 at 11:18:05 PM UTC-7, > Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote: >>> I don't want you to lose interest. >> Oh, I'm sure if I put a lien on your house, I'd gain appreciable >> equity interest, > LOL. You would have to get a judgement first, dumbass. > And that would mean you would have to come up with some > genuine evidence and . . . well . . . suffice to say, > that ain't going to happen. Oh, but James, scientific evidence is admissible, as are Usenet posts. Do you not realize that, James? Why, we just had one moron recently go to jail based in part on evidence consisting of Usenet posts... that was my doing, I entrapped him. I'm devious like that. <snicker> >> James. But you'll willingly pay me, James... and be >> glad that you're doing so, just to be rid of me. > Why don't you see if you can find an expert, somebody willing > to publicly vouch for you. There's no need for that, James. The scientific data stands on its own, as it has done for two centuries, because comprehensive mathematics back them up, as does empirical evidence. Conversely, your kooky contentions have absolutely no evidence. Did you not think of that before you made your public challenge, Jim? > Somebody willing to debate. Somebody willing to calmly present > the evidence that gets you so flabbergasted. Says the moron bleating out backpedaling denials and attempts at diversion away from the topic of his being utterly unable to defend his kooky conspiracy theory, in the wee hours. LOL > But here's the problem, anybody smart enough to win such a > debate would also be smart enough to realize, upon preparation, > that they have no chance of winning. And why would that be, Jim? Do you realize just what a tight spot you've gotten yourself into with your insane blathering, Jim? I'm gonna own your house, Jim. >> <snicker> >>> If I thought somebody owed me money I would be looking for a >>> lawyer. I honestly hope you do the same. >> That's not how I work, Jim. I find it's more fun to drop-kick retards >> until they pay up. In fact, by the time I'm done with you, you'll >> think paying me what you owe me is just about the best idea you ever >> had. > Do they let you out on your own? By yourself? Your non sequiturs are not adequate substitute for a defense of your kooky conspiracy theory, James Bernard McGinn, Jr. of Antioch, CA. You will pay me what you owe me, Jim... by the time I'm done with you, you'll be glad to do so, just to be rid of me. <snicker> Now, here's your chance to prove your mettle, Jim... get to refuting that scientific reality... ========================================================== Still demonstrating your inability to grasp how water can be gaseous phase below its boiling point, James? It's already been fully explained to you, and in the process, your kooky conspiracy theory has been utterly demolished. You postulate the following: 1) There is a "plasma not-a-plasma" that exists in the troposphere, which you have admitted is merely a hypothetical construct so you can continue to blather on about your kooky discredited conspiracy theory. 2) This magical "plasma not-a-plasma" is plasmized by an energy source that is somehow magically plasmizing water in the troposphere without dissociating it, given that the dissociation energy and nuclear binding energy of water are identical at 940.8 kJ/mol, and thus water will dissociate rather than plasmize, unless hit with an extremely energetic laser. 3) That your kooky energy source is somehow plasmizing only atmospheric water while not plasmizing or dissociating Earth-bound water, and is not killing off all life on the planet. Given that the *minimum* energy necessary to even *begin* to plasmize water would be equivalent to photons at a *maximum* wavelength of 103.32 nm, just 3.32 nm away from the x-ray range, I'm sure even you can see the problem inherent in your contention, James. 4) That this magical energy source exists in the troposphere. Except it cannot exist in the troposphere. Photons of shorter wavelength than ~121 nm are absorbed far above the troposphere due to their ability to ionize air, thus they are not present in the troposphere, where the overwhelming majority of all water is. 5) That warm air is heavier than cooler air... tell me, Jim... which direction does air flow from a flame? Oh, that's right, upward. Why? Because warm air is lighter and less dense than cooler air and thus convects upward. 6) That air with gaseous phase water in it is heavier than dry air, except you forget that science has long known about molar mass and molar volume... \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Air temperature is a much greater determiner of air density than humidity. The molar mass of water is 18.02 g/mol, as calculated from the sum of the atomic masses of its constituent atoms. The average molar mass of air (approximately 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, 1% other gases) is 28.57 g/mol at STP. Thus using Avogadro's Law and the Ideal Gas Law, water in its gaseous phase and air have a molar volume of 22.414 L/mol at STP. IOW, a molar mass of air and a molar mass of water in its gaseous phase occupy the same volume of 22.414 liters at STP. The density of water in its gaseous phase at STP is 0.804 g/L, whereas the density of dry air is 1.27 g/L at STP. Therefore that 22.414 liters molar volume would weigh: 18.02 grams for water in its gaseous phase 28.57 g for dry air Therefore, water in its gaseous phase is lighter than air. Therefore air containing water in its gaseous phase is lighter than dry air. Therefore, drier air *must* sink through air laden with water in its gaseous phase, because it is less buoyant. Except that's not all, Jim. Because air becomes denser as the altitude decreases. At any given altitude, air of the same temperature and gaseous water partial pressure will have the same density. At any given altitude, air of lower temperature but similar gaseous water partial pressure will have higher density. At any given altitude, air of the same temperature but greater gaseous water partial pressure will have lower density. For air of the same temperature and gaseous water partial pressure, air at a higher altitude will have lower density. (1) For instance, at sea level, 20 C temperature, and 0% relative humidity, the air density is 1.204 kg/m^3. Keeping all other factors in (1) the same but increasing relative humidity to 100%, or elevation to 74 meters, or temperature to 22.4 C, the air density is 1.194 kg/m^3. Thus in order for the air at sea level to rise 74 meters due to increased buoyancy, it must have 100% more relative humidity than the air 74 meters above (IOW, the air at sea level must be at 100% RH, the air 74 meters above must be at 0% RH), given the same temperature; or the temperature of that sea level air must be at least 2.4 C greater than the air at 74 meters, given the same relative humidity. Given that temperature can change much more than 2.4 C, whereas relative humidity can only max out at 100%, one can see that temperature-induced convection is the predominant driver of weather systems, destroying yet another of your kooky contentions. IOW, in order for air to rise, it must overcome gravity, which requires energy (said energy in the form of temperature of the air itself decreasing air density or the latent heat of vaporization of monomer water in its gaseous phase replacing a certain percentage of higher molar weight air molecules and thus decreasing air density). It's not because of your blather that the air at a lower altitude is "heavier" due to "water droplets", Ko0okTard. //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ And before you begin blathering on again about the Ideal Gas Law not applying to the atmosphere, let me remind you that I've done the calculations for the van der Waals equation, as well. It is in agreement with the Ideal Gas Law to a great degree of accuracy even with the molar volume I used. As air volume increases for the same relative humidity, air with gaseous phase water in it acts more and more like an ideal gas, Jim. Compare the Ideal Gas Law to the van der Waals Equation with all parameters the same except for volume, and increase the volume through several iterations, then plot the difference between the results of the Ideal Gas Law and the van der Waals equation... notice the converging trend? Do you think for an Earth-atmosphere-sized container, the air with gaseous phase water in it would be within a very small margin of error to an ideal gas, Jim? Sure it is. But that's something else you don't understand because you're a low-information uneducated oaf. 7) Your kooky contention that water polarity changes upon H bonding... which would also cause random changes in water's solvent properties, and we know water's solvent properties do not change randomly, Jim. You didn't know about the two spin isomers of water, which means there are two hybrids of water with different H bonding strengths: <https://youtu.be/7hGqlEpvODw?t=2156> They used x-ray spectroscopy to determine photon energy from electron orbital shell descent. You'll note the gaseous phase water molecule's photon spectra peaks at a much lower photon energy than ice. This is due to differences in hydrogen bonding strength between the two phases. <https://youtu.be/7hGqlEpvODw?t=2304> You'll note the double peak of liquid water. Professor Anders Nilsson, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory: ==================================================== Two peaks, what does that mean? Could it be two different types of water molecules then, in the liquid? And if you look at it, one of the peaks is very close to the gas phase and the other peak is closer to the ice. So it looks like water contains two types of molecules. ==================================================== You betcha... para and ortho-form water. <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/ortho_para_water.html> ==================================================== Each hydrogen atom in water has a magnetic moment, which is associated with the proton's spin of 1/2. As is found in molecular hydrogen (H2), the protons (within the hydrogen atoms) in water (H2O) may possess parallel or antiparallel nuclear spin (see right). When the spins are parallel, there is a paramagnetic state called ortho-H2O with a magnetic moment = 1. This is the high spin (triplet) state with three symmetric spin states +1 , 0 , -1 (^^, ^v+^v, vv) where the three states have equal energy in a zero magnetic field. This spin state always possesses positive energy with a minimum energy level of 284.7 J mol-1 (23.794352 cm-1) H216O, [607c], 284.4 J mol-1 (23.773510 cm-1) H217O [607a] or 284.2 J mol-1 (23.754902 cm-1) H218O [607a]. When the spins are opposed there exists the nonmagnetic state called para-H2O with magnetic moment = 0 with just one antisymmetric spin state (^v-^v) and magnetic moment = 0. Some of the water molecules in this low spin (singlet) state will not be rotating even at room temperature. Para-H2O does not interact with an external magnetic field, but ortho-H2O does. Conversion between these isomers is symmetry forbidden for isolated water molecules and they act as different molecular species. They can change spin state on interaction with another particle, including other water molecules. The equilibrium ratio of these nuclear spin states in H2O is all para- at zero Kelvin, where the molecules have no rotational spin in their ground state, shifting to the most stable ratio [1694] of 3:1 ortho:para, in the relative amounts of the number of magnetic states, at less cold temperatures (>50 K, see left [2478]); the equilibrium taking months to establish itself in ice (or gas) and nearly an hour in ambient water [410]. It is now thought that the ratio lies far from equilibrium and much closer to 1:1 in liquid water due to hydrogen bond formation [2076]. This means that liquid H2O effectively consists of a mixture of non-identical molecules and the properties of pure liquid ortho-H2O or para-H2O are unknown. The differences in the properties of these two forms of water are expected to be greater in an electric field [1186], which may be imposed externally, from surfaces or from water clustering itself. Many materials preferentially adsorb para-H2O due to its non-rotation ground state [410, 835]. The apparent difference in energy between the two states is a significant 1-2 kJ mol-1, far greater than expected from spin-spin interactions (< μJ mol-1) [835]. It has been suggested that structural rearrangements may be induced by ortho-H2O : para-H2O conversion [1430], as it is possible that hydrogen bonds between para-H2O, possessing no ground state spin, are stronger and last longer than hydrogen bonds between ortho-H2O [1150]. It is thus possible that ortho-H2O and para-H2O form separate hydrogen bonded clusters [1150] with para-H2O being preferred in the low density tetrahedrally coordinated clusters and ortho-H2O being preferred in the high density clusters [2070], where their rotation is more easily accommodated. Picoliter samples of pure ortho-H2O and para-H2O may be separated in a strong dc electric field [2156]. ==================================================== The two spin isomers of water cause a different H bond strength when water molecules of like spin isomers engage in H bonding to form water clusters, Jim. Thus the weaker ortho-H2O hydrogen bond is more easily broken, so most of the gaseous phase water being evaporated should be ortho-H2O. You'll note above that ortho-H2O even in its liquid form is very close to the same properties as gaseous phase water under x-ray spectroscopy, the difference accountable by taking into consideration temperature and phase. Remember when I said the surface layer of water was more viscous than the bulk water? Yeah, that's because the ortho-H2O being evaporated removes heat from the water, which makes the para-H2O in the ~1.7 nm thick surface layer act nearly the same as ice. <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/interfacial_water.html> ===================================================== Analysis of simple thermodynamics c shows the surface has considerable structuring, having identical density to that of bulk water at just under 4 °C. In addition, the surface water structuring varies less with temperature than the bulk. Refractive index study of the water-air surface reveals it to be about 1.7 nm thick at 22 °C and more dense than the bulk liquid (that is, it behaves like water at a lower temperature). ===================================================== As for condensation? Well, it's been found that under circumstances in which relative humidity is less than ~25%, a four-molecule thick layer of ice forms on the condensation surface... so apparently what is happening is that the ortho-H2O being evaporated is colliding with other molecules in the air, changing their spin isomer and thus giving off energy, becoming para-H2O, and those are the ones preferentially condensing, forming that four-molecule thick layer of ice. You'll note above that para-H2O even in its liquid form is very close to the same properties as solid phase water (ice) under x-ray spectroscopy, the difference accountable by taking into consideration temperature and phase. For conditions of greater than ~25% relative humidity and thus greater water gaseous-phase partial pressure in the air, apparently the condensation process is fast enough to allow even ortho-H2O gaseous-phase water to condense, thus the four-molecule thick layer of ice is melted. So you see, James, it's not because of your kooky contention that the water molecule's polarity changes upon hydrogen bonding, it's because there are two spin-isomer hybrids of the water molecule with two different hydrogen bonding strengths. Yet again, your kooky conspiracy theory is ripped to shreds by scientific fact... made especially delicious because it was done utilizing a link *you* provided. LOL <http://phys.org/news/2014-09-para-ortho.html> ============================================== A hydrogen nucleus (proton) can adopt two different states, comparable to rotation clockwise and counterclockwise. In the case of water, the nuclear spins of the two — indistinguishable — protons can be combined in four different ways: one antisymmetric and three symmetric wavefunctions. Water adopting the antisymmetric wavefunction is called para water, whereas water adopting one of the symmetric ones is called ortho water. Because switching from one state to the other is "forbidden" due to quantum-mechanical symmetry rules, the two spin isomers cannot interconvert without external influences such as collisions. ============================================== Were you not aware that hydrogen has two spin isomers, ortho- and para-, and thus water, comprised of one oxygen atom and two hydrogen atoms, also has two spin isomers? <https://qph.is.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f24e171918d462fac89b809dccaa7c3e> <http://cdn.phys.org/newman/csz/news/800/2014/201434press.gif> In pure hydrogen, ortho-hydrogen is thermodynamically unstable even at low temperature and / or high pressure and it thus spontaneously converts to para-hydrogen upon molecular collision, which has implications for liquefied hydrogen storage, as energy is given off by this spin isomer conversion. In water, the oxygen atom slows the already slow conversion process to para-hydrogen by preserving spin state of the hydrogen atom via partially shielding the hydrogen atom from molecular collision which would cause spin isomer conversion. Now, let's you get to answering those questions you've been ducking, Jim... How are your kooky atmospheric "water droplets" forming if they're plasma, Jim? How is your kooky "plasma not-a-plasma" forming if the nuclear binding energy and dissociation energy of water are identical, and thus the water is dissociating into hydrogen and oxygen, Jim? Where is the energy (equivalent to photons of 103.32 nm wavelength, extremely strong ultraviolet, just 3.32 nm away from x-rays... except photons with shorter wavelength than 121 nm are absorbed high above the troposphere because they ionize air so well) coming from in the troposphere to form your kooky "plasma not-a-plasma", Jim? How is the energy to plasmize your kooky "plasma not-a-plasma" not dissociating all water on the planet and killing all life on the planet given that the energy *must* be in the troposphere where nearly all the water is, and where all life is, Jim? Now that it's been proven that water molecule polarity doesn't change upon H bonding, and in fact the two spin isomers of water molecules account for the different H bonding strengths which account for evaporation and condensation, do you still contend that your kooky conspiracy theory is workable, Jim? Why can't you answer those questions, Jim? Your kooky conspiracy theory has been utterly destroyed, Jim. It does not and cannot reflect reality. Deal with that reality as you will, Jim. Most Dunning-Kruger afflicted kooktards like you, when presented with the proof that they are delusional, tend to 'circle the wagons' to protect their delusions, driving themselves ever deeper into insanity. I note you are doing the same. I also note that, despite being driven *so* insane by their Usenet Lord and Master that some kooks forget their own name, they never forget mine... it haunts them for as long as they live. <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 the term "electronegativity" denotes a *positive* effective nuclear charge. What the definition of the word "equivalent" is. That digital voltmeters do indeed take discrete instantaneous samples. That the atmosphere (and the gaseous phase water within the atmosphere) does indeed follow the Ideal Gas Law to within 1.337842% margin of error *worst* *case* at 70 F. That the square of the instantaneous sample of peak-to-peak voltage of a peak-voltage sinewave is an offset sinewave, thus its average does *not* equal zero, as Shiny Tinfoil Brain k'lames. That the Ideal Gas Law does not require an ideal gas because it takes into account molar volume. That "within 10% error" does not equal "10% error". That water can be plasmized. That atomic number does not equal effective nuclear charge. And the moron continues to demonstrate his inability to read a graph. ===================================== SPNAK! <snicker>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-14 09:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <06cf0283-ade4-4649-ac8e-dff75377b790@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #562314 |
On Monday, March 14, 2016 at 8:34:30 AM UTC-7, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote: > > LOL. You would have to get a judgement first, dumbass. > > And that would mean you would have to come up with some > > genuine evidence and . . . well . . . suffice to say, > > that ain't going to happen. > > Oh, but James, scientific evidence is admissible, as are Usenet posts. > Do you not realize that, You will be cross examined, not unlike what is happening over at scottish sceptic site, where you are fairing poorly. You will be expected to describe the experiments and actually understand them. You can't just blather on and evade questions like you do here. What will you do? You have zero chance of being successful.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-14 12:55 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nc6tuv$1u4h$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #562327 |
On 3/14/2016 11:32 AM, James McGinn wrote: > On Monday, March 14, 2016 at 8:34:30 AM UTC-7, Friendly Neighborhood > Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote: >> >> Oh, but James, scientific evidence is admissible, as are Usenet >> posts. Do you not realize that, > > You will be cross examined, not unlike what is happening over at > scottish septic site, everyone knows the Scotts do not have indoor plumbing, and wear kilts so the can squat when needed in the fields Scott Tissue was an attempt by the English to get the Scotties to wipe their bottoms. Didn't work, you can smell a Scott 1/2 mile away.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-14 19:17 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <c643767cfb31bc2d98807adcbbb5a6ff@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #562327 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> James McGinn, in <news:06cf0283-ade4-4649-ac8e-dff75377b790@googlegroups.com> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > On Monday, March 14, 2016 at 8:34:30 AM UTC-7, > Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote: >>> LOL. You would have to get a judgement first, dumbass. >>> And that would mean you would have to come up with some >>> genuine evidence and . . . well . . . suffice to say, >>> that ain't going to happen. >> Oh, but James, scientific evidence is admissible, as are Usenet posts. >> Do you not realize that, > You will be cross examined, not unlike what is happening over > at scottish sceptic site, where you are fairing poorly. "fairing poorly" LOL This from the kooktard who is running away from answering those tough questions, and thus far has called the webmaster of that site stupid and uneducated and failed to provide any data requested of you... here's another question, Jim... why is that no one, after reviewing the data, believes you're anything other than a moronic halfwit? You'll note I've provided references to the experiments, and a description of the exact experiment which will definitively confirm or null your kooky theory, Jim... why aren't you doing that experiment to prove yourself right, Jim? You've made an extraordinary claim, the onus is upon you to prove yourself right... until then, you're wrong. That's the way it works, Jim. Deal with it. > You will be expected to describe the experiments and actually > understand them. You can't just blather on and evade questions > like you do here. You're projecting, James. The only "blathering on and evading of questions" is being done by you. Conversely I've provided peer-reviewed empirically-observed scientific experiments from the past two and a half centuries which explained everything you're trying to explain while nulling your supposition. You have no refutation of that scientific reality, so the very best you can do is bleat, conflate, goalpost-move, evade, topic-change and use slimy debating tactics as means of protecting your delusions... but you'll note you cannot defend your kooky "theory not-a-theory" (because it doesn't rise to the level of theory, nor even hypothesis... you have *zero* corroborating data, *zero* experimental data... you only have a hunch, as you've admitted) which uses "plasma not-a-plasma" (which cannot exist in the troposphere), then when called on it, you demand proof of that which has been known for centuries, dismiss it when presented as "irrelevant", claim that your use of hypothetical constructs to make your kooky theory work is "semantics", and avoid providing any data or proof because you have none. In short, Jim, you've lost. Badly. > What will you do? > > You have zero chance of being successful. Awww, poor Jim. Projection doesn't become you. Now, Jim... get right on answering those tough questions, or run away again and prove that your kooky theory is nothing more than a fairy tale, no better than AGW, believed in by moronic kooktards who can't grasp the basics of science. <snicker> How are your kooky atmospheric "water droplets" forming if they're plasma, Jim? How is your kooky "plasma not-a-plasma" forming if the nuclear binding energy and dissociation energy of water are identical, and thus the water is dissociating into hydrogen and oxygen, Jim? Where is the energy (equivalent to photons of 103.32 nm wavelength, extremely strong ultraviolet, just 3.32 nm away from x-rays... except photons with shorter wavelength than 121 nm are absorbed high above the troposphere because they ionize air so well) coming from in the troposphere to form your kooky "plasma not-a-plasma", Jim? How is the energy to plasmize your kooky "plasma not-a-plasma" not dissociating all water on the planet and killing all life on the planet given that the energy *must* be in the troposphere where nearly all the water is, and where all life is, Jim? Now that it's been proven that water molecule polarity doesn't change upon H bonding, and in fact the two spin isomers of water molecules account for the different H bonding strengths which account for evaporation and condensation, do you still contend that your kooky conspiracy theory is workable, Jim? Why can't you answer those questions, Jim? -- 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 the term "electronegativity" denotes a *positive* effective nuclear charge. What the definition of the word "equivalent" is. That digital voltmeters do indeed take discrete instantaneous samples. That the atmosphere (and the gaseous phase water within the atmosphere) does indeed follow the Ideal Gas Law to within 1.337842% margin of error *worst* *case* at 70 F. That the square of the instantaneous sample of peak-to-peak voltage of a peak-voltage sinewave is an offset sinewave, thus its average does *not* equal zero, as Shiny Tinfoil Brain k'lames. That the Ideal Gas Law does not require an ideal gas because it takes into account molar volume. That "within 10% error" does not equal "10% error". That water can be plasmized. That atomic number does not equal effective nuclear charge. And the moron continues to demonstrate his inability to read a graph. ===================================== SPNAK! <snicker>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-14 21:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dkonvcFoj0qU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #562314 |
On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 16:24:15 +0100, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote: > Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> > > James McGinn, in > <news:99ef391e-feff-45c1-89b1-5ecf223b37ba@googlegroups.com> did thusly > jump head first into the wood chipper again on Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 > 00:37:47 -0700 (PDT): > > Look at the moronic kooktard bleating in the wee hours. LOL About half an hour after your last post last night, if memory serves. So? > >> On Sunday, March 13, 2016 at 11:18:05 PM UTC-7, >> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote: > >>>> I don't want you to lose interest. > >>> Oh, I'm sure if I put a lien on your house, I'd gain appreciable >>> equity interest, Yes, and if Pinocchio lies, his nose grows. >> LOL. You would have to get a judgement first, dumbass. >> And that would mean you would have to come up with some genuine >> evidence and . . . well . . . suffice to say, >> that ain't going to happen. > > Oh, but James, scientific evidence is admissible, as are Usenet posts. But you haven't actually _done_ anything, or even said you were going to _do_ anything -- just said "if I do X, then Y". But you and I and everybody on the planet knows you can't put a lien on James' home, so there is no "X". > Do you not realize that, James? Why, we just had one moron recently go > to jail based in part on evidence consisting of Usenet posts... that was > my doing, Mmmhmm. Just don't sit too close to the screen while your telling these whoppers, or you'll end up with monitor bits on your nose. ObPhysics: Perpetual motion machine: strap a piece of buttered toast to a cat, then drop her. Nyuk-nyuk, betcha never heard that one before... ;) -- -v
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-15 05:27 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <69d98a24f2a9c5826a5972a2cba036e4@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #562424 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> vallor, in <news:dkonvcFoj0qU1@mid.individual.net> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: > On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 16:24:15 +0100, Friendly Neighborhood > Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote: >> James McGinn, in >> <news:99ef391e-feff-45c1-89b1-5ecf223b37ba@googlegroups.com> did thusly >> jump head first into the wood chipper again on Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 >> 00:37:47 -0700 (PDT): >> >> Look at the moronic kooktard bleating in the wee hours. LOL > About half an hour after your last post last night, if memory serves. I was fast asleep by 11 PM. > So? So remailer latency. So James McGinn cannot defend the fairy tale he's concocted so he can tell himself he's smarter than every scientist in the past 250+ years, despite his scientific education being the sum total of a single Basic Meteorology elective class, so he spends more and more time bleating non sequiturs, backpedaling, stomping his feet and demanding proof of that which has been known, studied and measured for centuries, then dismissing it, and refusing to do any experiments which would null his kooky claims or provide any evidence for fear I'll rip it to shreds. Because I've left him no wiggle room to defend his kooky claims, so the only thing he's got left is to protect his delusions, so at the very least, he can continue to think he's anything other than an insane moronic kooktard who cannot grasp simple physical phenomena. <snicker> >>> On Sunday, March 13, 2016 at 11:18:05 PM UTC-7, >>> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote: >>>>> I don't want you to lose interest. >>>> Oh, I'm sure if I put a lien on your house, I'd gain appreciable >>>> equity interest, > Yes, and if Pinocchio lies, his nose grows. Did you know Pinocchio made a horrible motivational speaker? I, however, don't suffer that problem. I motivate my kooks to bleat non-stop. And now that you've started... <snicker> >>> LOL. You would have to get a judgement first, dumbass. >>> And that would mean you would have to come up with some genuine >>> evidence and . . . well . . . suffice to say, >>> that ain't going to happen. >> Oh, but James, scientific evidence is admissible, as are Usenet posts. > But you haven't actually _done_ anything, or even said you were going to > _do_ anything -- just said "if I do X, then Y". > > But you and I and everybody on the planet knows you can't put a lien on > James' home, so there is no "X". Defending the anti-science nitwit who thinks the jet stream and tornadoes are the same thing, and in fact thinks the jet stream burrows down through the atmosphere to form tornadoes? LOL The moronic kooktard who's fabricated an impossible "plasma not-a-plasma" that cannot exist because water won't plasmize unless hit with extremely energetic lasers because its nuclear binding energy and dissociation energy are identical at 940.8 kJ/mol, and thus water preferentially dissociates into hydrogen and oxygen? LOL The dimwitted nong who believes there exists in the troposphere an energy source so energetic it can plasmize all the water in the troposphere, yet it somehow magically doesn't dissociate or plasmize all water on the planet (and kill all life)? The braindead idiot who believes warmer air is heavier than cooler air? LOL The uneducated shortbus window licker who cannot grasp molar volume and molar mass, and thus believes water vapor is heavier than air, and thus that air with water vapor in it is heavier than dry air? LOL The crayon-eating kook who dismisses 250+ years of empirical experimental evidence proving he's delusional, yet won't do a simple experiment which will most definitely null his kooky claims? LOL The kooktard who can't get his fantastical fairy tale claims through the peer-review process, and in fact can't even get his kooky rambling writings on a pre-print server? LOL The moron who has to "publish" his "discoveries not-discoveries", which are nothing more than suppositions built upon suppositions pulled straight from his ass, on a website that specializes in topics such as: "The Expanding Earth" - Earth expands, plate tectonics doesn't exist "The Place of Reason in Botanical Life" - Genetic mutation doesn't account for evolutionary change, plants have consciousness! "Genetic Memory" - Evolution doesn't exist, reproductive systems have their own consciousness and can intelligently change the offspring. "An Alternative To Plate Tectonics" - Earth is hollow! Yeah, this is the level of "science" that James McGinn's kooky claims rise to. LOL >> Do you not realize that, James? Why, we just had one moron recently go >> to jail based in part on evidence consisting of Usenet posts... that was >> my doing, > Mmmhmm. > > Just don't sit too close to the screen while your telling these whoppers, > or you'll end up with monitor bits on your nose. Oh, you didn't know? Having been in acting in a prior life, I knew Renee, and knowing Emmett, I knew Renee would be irresistible bait to him... all she had to do was a bit of smoking and a mention of anal sex and Emmett went full-on stalker, as he always does. He exceeded even our best hopes, with his videos and photos, which stood as additional evidence against him. Thus, to rid society of a menace, the plan was hatched and carried out. It was hoped that a book could be gotten out of it and thereby revive Renee's acting career via publicity, but no one is interested in an ugly stalkerish little gargoyle such as Emmett... they just shrugged their shoulders and said, "Yeah, he's fucking crazy. What'd you expect? Crazy toothless wonky-eyed guy stalks hot chick. Been done before. Jodie Foster's story was better. Get that ugly little shit to take a shot at a politician or Bobbitt himself, and you've got a story. Next." Eh, it was fun, at least. And the good it did for both Emmett and society as a whole was immense. <snicker> > ObPhysics: > > Perpetual motion machine: strap a piece of buttered toast to a cat, then > drop her. > > Nyuk-nyuk, betcha never heard that one before... ;) That's a waste of a perfectly good piece of toast. And it's not a perpetual motion machine, it generates anti-gravity. <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 the term "electronegativity" denotes a *positive* effective nuclear charge. What the definition of the word "equivalent" is. That digital voltmeters do indeed take discrete instantaneous samples. That the atmosphere (and the gaseous phase water within the atmosphere) does indeed follow the Ideal Gas Law to within 1.337842% margin of error *worst* *case* at 70 F. That the square of the instantaneous sample of peak-to-peak voltage of a peak-voltage sinewave is an offset sinewave, thus its average does *not* equal zero, as Shiny Tinfoil Brain k'lames. That the Ideal Gas Law does not require an ideal gas because it takes into account molar volume. That "within 10% error" does not equal "10% error". That water can be plasmized. That atomic number does not equal effective nuclear charge. 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 | 2016-03-15 00:52 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <op.yecntec8tm21m2@benson.localhost> |
| In reply to | #562523 |
On Tue, 15 Mar 2016 00:27:24 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler
Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
> vallor, in <news:dkonvcFoj0qU1@mid.individual.net> did thusly jump
> head first into the wood chipper again:
>
>> On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 16:24:15 +0100, Friendly Neighborhood
>> Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:
>
>>> James McGinn, in
>>> <news:99ef391e-feff-45c1-89b1-5ecf223b37ba@googlegroups.com> did thusly
>>> jump head first into the wood chipper again on Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016
>>> 00:37:47 -0700 (PDT):
>>>
>>> Look at the moronic kooktard bleating in the wee hours. LOL
>
>> About half an hour after your last post last night, if memory serves.
>
> I was fast asleep by 11 PM.
i was fast asleep way before that.
YOU LOSE.
>
>> So?
>
> So remailer latency.
>
> So James McGinn cannot defend the fairy tale he's concocted so he can
> tell himself he's smarter than every scientist in the past 250+ years,
> despite his scientific education being the sum total of a single Basic
> Meteorology elective class, so he spends more and more time bleating
> non sequiturs, backpedaling, stomping his feet and demanding proof of
> that which has been known, studied and measured for centuries, then
> dismissing it, and refusing to do any experiments which would null his
> kooky claims or provide any evidence for fear I'll rip it to shreds.
> Because I've left him no wiggle room to defend his kooky claims, so
> the only thing he's got left is to protect his delusions, so at the
> very least, he can continue to think he's anything other than an
> insane moronic kooktard who cannot grasp simple physical phenomena.
>
> <snicker>
>
>>>> On Sunday, March 13, 2016 at 11:18:05 PM UTC-7,
>>>> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:
>
>>>>>> I don't want you to lose interest.
>
>>>>> Oh, I'm sure if I put a lien on your house, I'd gain appreciable
>>>>> equity interest,
>
>> Yes, and if Pinocchio lies, his nose grows.
>
> Did you know Pinocchio made a horrible motivational speaker?
>
> I, however, don't suffer that problem. I motivate my kooks to bleat
> non-stop. And now that you've started...
>
> <snicker>
>
>>>> LOL. You would have to get a judgement first, dumbass.
>>>> And that would mean you would have to come up with some genuine
>>>> evidence and . . . well . . . suffice to say,
>>>> that ain't going to happen.
>
>>> Oh, but James, scientific evidence is admissible, as are Usenet posts.
>
>> But you haven't actually _done_ anything, or even said you were going to
>> _do_ anything -- just said "if I do X, then Y".
>>
>> But you and I and everybody on the planet knows you can't put a lien on
>> James' home, so there is no "X".
>
> Defending the anti-science nitwit who thinks the jet stream and
> tornadoes are the same thing, and in fact thinks the jet stream
> burrows down through the atmosphere to form tornadoes? LOL
>
> The moronic kooktard who's fabricated an impossible "plasma
> not-a-plasma" that cannot exist because water won't plasmize unless
> hit with extremely energetic lasers because its nuclear binding energy
> and dissociation energy are identical at 940.8 kJ/mol, and thus water
> preferentially dissociates into hydrogen and oxygen? LOL
>
> The dimwitted nong who believes there exists in the troposphere an
> energy source so energetic it can plasmize all the water in the
> troposphere, yet it somehow magically doesn't dissociate or plasmize
> all water on the planet (and kill all life)?
>
> The braindead idiot who believes warmer air is heavier than cooler
> air? LOL
>
> The uneducated shortbus window licker who cannot grasp molar volume
> and molar mass, and thus believes water vapor is heavier than air, and
> thus that air with water vapor in it is heavier than dry air? LOL
>
> The crayon-eating kook who dismisses 250+ years of empirical
> experimental evidence proving he's delusional, yet won't do a simple
> experiment which will most definitely null his kooky claims? LOL
>
> The kooktard who can't get his fantastical fairy tale claims through
> the peer-review process, and in fact can't even get his kooky rambling
> writings on a pre-print server? LOL
>
> The moron who has to "publish" his "discoveries not-discoveries",
> which are nothing more than suppositions built upon suppositions
> pulled straight from his ass, on a website that specializes in topics
> such as:
>
> "The Expanding Earth" - Earth expands, plate tectonics doesn't exist
>
> "The Place of Reason in Botanical Life" - Genetic mutation doesn't
> account for evolutionary change, plants have consciousness!
>
> "Genetic Memory" - Evolution doesn't exist, reproductive systems have
> their own consciousness and can intelligently change the offspring.
>
> "An Alternative To Plate Tectonics" - Earth is hollow!
>
> Yeah, this is the level of "science" that James McGinn's kooky claims
> rise to. LOL
>
>>> Do you not realize that, James? Why, we just had one moron recently go
>>> to jail based in part on evidence consisting of Usenet posts... that
>>> was
>>> my doing,
>
>> Mmmhmm.
>>
>> Just don't sit too close to the screen while your telling these
>> whoppers,
>> or you'll end up with monitor bits on your nose.
>
> Oh, you didn't know? Having been in acting in a prior life, I knew
> Renee, and knowing Emmett, I knew Renee would be irresistible bait to
> him... all she had to do was a bit of smoking and a mention of anal
> sex and Emmett went full-on stalker, as he always does. He exceeded
> even our best hopes, with his videos and photos, which stood as
> additional evidence against him. Thus, to rid society of a menace, the
> plan was hatched and carried out.
>
> It was hoped that a book could be gotten out of it and thereby revive
> Renee's acting career via publicity, but no one is interested in an
> ugly stalkerish little gargoyle such as Emmett... they just shrugged
> their shoulders and said, "Yeah, he's fucking crazy. What'd you
> expect? Crazy toothless wonky-eyed guy stalks hot chick. Been done
> before. Jodie Foster's story was better. Get that ugly little shit to
> take a shot at a politician or Bobbitt himself, and you've got a
> story. Next."
>
> Eh, it was fun, at least. And the good it did for both Emmett and
> society as a whole was immense.
>
> <snicker>
>
>> ObPhysics:
>>
>> Perpetual motion machine: strap a piece of buttered toast to a cat,
>> then
>> drop her.
>>
>> Nyuk-nyuk, betcha never heard that one before... ;)
>
> That's a waste of a perfectly good piece of toast. And it's not a
> perpetual motion machine, it generates anti-gravity.
>
> <snicker>
>
--
"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]
Page 1 of 9 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web