Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #687059 > unrolled thread
| Started by | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-05-25 10:16 -0700 |
| Last post | 2018-06-04 15:45 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 67 — 9 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Particle Physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-05-25 10:16 -0700
Re: Particle Physics Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-05-25 15:54 -0400
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 19:52 -0700
Re: Particle Physics poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-05-28 01:11 -0700
Re: Particle Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-05-28 18:15 +0000
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-05-28 12:58 -0700
Re: Particle Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-05-28 21:42 +0000
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-05-28 14:54 -0700
Re: Particle Physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-28 23:45 +0000
Re: Particle Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-05-28 23:59 +0000
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 05:44 -0700
Re: Particle Physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-29 12:55 +0000
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 06:07 -0700
Re: Particle Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 13:15 +0000
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 06:51 -0700
Re: Particle Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 15:07 +0000
Re: Particle Physics poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-05-29 08:26 -0700
Re: Particle Physics poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-05-29 08:32 -0700
Re: Particle Physics poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-05-29 08:38 -0700
Re: Particle Physics poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-05-29 08:41 -0700
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 08:34 -0700
Re: Particle Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 16:05 +0000
Re: Particle Physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-29 16:48 +0000
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 10:52 -0700
Re: Particle Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 18:09 +0000
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 11:14 -0700
Re: Particle Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 18:33 +0000
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 11:54 -0700
Re: Particle Physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-29 19:07 +0000
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 12:34 -0700
Re: Particle Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 19:53 +0000
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 13:33 -0700
Re: Particle Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 21:11 +0000
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 15:42 -0700
Re: Particle Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 23:03 +0000
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 16:28 -0700
Re: Particle Physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-30 04:48 +0000
Re: Particle Physics poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-05-29 22:39 -0700
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-05-30 06:39 -0700
Re: Particle Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-05-30 14:42 +0000
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-05-30 07:57 -0700
Re: Particle Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-05-30 15:39 +0000
Re: Particle Physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-31 17:13 +0000
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 03:15 -0700
Re: Particle Physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-06-01 11:43 +0000
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 05:47 -0700
Re: Particle Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 13:00 +0000
Re: Particle Physics poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-06-01 23:54 -0700
Re: Particle Physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-30 04:37 +0000
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-05-30 06:58 -0700
Re: Particle Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 19:47 +0000
Re: Particle Physics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 13:28 -0700
Re: Particle Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 21:11 +0000
Re: Particle Physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-30 04:30 +0000
Re: Particle Physics poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-05-29 16:34 -0700
Re: Particle Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 18:32 +0000
Re: Particle Physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-29 18:57 +0000
For most, SciFi is preferable. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-05-29 15:17 -0700
Re: Particle Physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-29 18:12 +0000
Re: Particle Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 13:15 +0000
Re: Particle Physics poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-05-28 21:13 -0700
Re: Particle Physics mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-05-28 15:11 -0700
Re: Particle Physics Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2018-05-28 14:55 -0700
Re: Particle Physics poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-05-28 21:18 -0700
Re: Particle Physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-05-31 10:03 -0700
Re: Particle Physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-06-04 14:50 -0700
Re: Particle Physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-06-04 15:45 -0700
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-25 10:16 -0700 |
| Subject | Particle Physics |
| Message-ID | <3a6d2771-25ee-47b2-acc6-c6e98adbc027@googlegroups.com> |
The masses of the subatomic particles are measured using the curve paths of the liquid hydrogen bubble tracks within the bubble chamber that established particle physics. Initially, an accelerated proton beam is incident to an external metallic target that collision produces subatomic particles that propagate through the steel enclosure of the bubble chamber and interact with the hydrogen atoms forming the hydrogen bubble tracks but the subatomic particles that have a mass cannot propagate through the steel enclosure of the bubble chamber without producing a hole in the bubble chamber and causing an explosion of the liquid hydrogen. Rutherford's gold foil experiment is used to justify subatomic particles propagating through the bubble chamber but Rutherford's alpha particles cannot propagate through a quarter inch thick steel plate. Muons produced by the atmospheric decay of cosmic rays are also used to justify subatomic particles propagating through the steel enclosure of the bubble chamber but a muon is 200 times more massive than an electron. A 2000 W arc welder's electron beam can cut and weld steel. A high density of high energy muons propagating through the steel enclosure of the bubble chamber would result in the formation of a hole in the bubble chamber and a hydrogen explosion. The Soudan muon detector that is located at the bottom of a 1,800 meters deep mine shaft (Ayre, p. 2) is used to justify subatomic particles propagating through the steel enclosure of the bubble chamber but a muon that has a mass larger than an electron cannot propagate through more than 1,400 meters of bedrock. It is more likely that the Soudan muon detector is detecting radioactive isotopes that exist at the bottom of the former Soudan iron mine. The CERN large hadron collider LHC (2017) describes a hadron (proton) beam that is accelerated using a beam pipe and superconducting magnets but a magnetic field does not accelerate protons. Using an analogy, a solenoid's wire coil that accelerates an iron armature cannot be used to justify the acceleration of protons since a magnetic field of a solenoid produces an affect on metal objects such as a carpenter nail, paper clip or iron filings; a solenoid's magnetic field does not accelerate wood chips, charged dust particles or protons. The cyclotron is used to justify the acceleration of the hadron beam but the cyclotron accelerates ions not protons and the accelerated cyclotron ions are accelerated using an electric field produced by two gaps between the two halves of the cyclotron not by a magnetic field. A cathode tube's electron path are altered by an electric field of a capacitor not by a magnet. The LHC experiment is based on hadron beams consisting of disassociated hydrogen gas molecules but the disassociation of hydrogen would result in an extremely unstable protons. Proton beam therapy is used to justify the existence of a proton beam but protons that have a mass 1,000 times greater than an electron would destroy human skin, bone and tissue in the path of the proton beam. It is more likely that gamma rays are producing the effects of proton beam therapy. The LHC 27 km circumference beam pipe and magnets do not accelerate the proton beam since a magnetic field effects metal objects such as a carpenter nail, paper clip or iron filings yet a magnet's field does not accelerate wood chips, charged dust particles or protons. The RF cavity is used to accelerate the protons but the electric field of the RF cavity would result in the protons to collided with the negative surface. It is questionable what is the exact purposed of the 27 km circumference beam pipe and superconducting magnets since the RF cavity is ostensibly accelerating the protons not the CERN LHC 27 km circumference beam pipe and magnets.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Volney <volney@volney.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-25 15:54 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pe9plq$ia9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #687059 |
On 5/25/2018 1:16 PM, numbernumber1964@gmail.com wrote: > > subatomic particles that propagate through the steel enclosure of the bubble chamber and interact with the hydrogen atoms forming the hydrogen bubble tracks but the subatomic particles that have a mass cannot propagate through the steel enclosure of the bubble chamber without producing a hole in the bubble chamber and causing an explosion of the liquid hydrogen. Your mistake (subatomic particles needing to blast through steel bubble chamber walls causing explosions) has already been pointed out to you as wrong, yet you came back with the exact same wrong claim. Why? Another fine example of GIGO. <snip rest as just as wrong>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-27 19:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a9afc6ab-ad40-4b4f-8ca3-b644338a034a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #687079 |
Many or most of the things in bubble chambers are never present outside of high-energy collision events. In or out of atoms.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | poraty149@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-28 01:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5607685f-be57-4ffe-9e19-404400ddfce4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #687439 |
On Monday, May 28, 2018 at 5:53:03 AM UTC+3, john wrote: > Many or most of the things in bubble chambers are never present outside of high-energy collision events. In or out of atoms. ========================== right !! but what we know and able to '''erve is far from being ''the last word '' see for instance things that we can observe with the power of sharp consistent creative cleaver '' thinking I call it the power of the human mind (ie not just what we can 'see' with our common tools it needs something beyond of it ie the 'super!!! of human ingenuity ability == Google http://sites.google.com/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract many decades of hard work TIA Y.P ===========================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-28 18:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pehh08$1v6a$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #687439 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > Many or most of the things in bubble chambers are never present outside > of high-energy collision events. In or out of atoms. > Cosmic rays. Happens all the time. Everywhere on earth. All that stuff is there. -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-28 12:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a7249357-afde-4699-bf1e-9049a51ea1de@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #687518 |
Odd “ Cosmic rays. Happens all the time. Everywhere on earth. All that stuff is there. ” Yes, Cosmic rays are another instance where a high-energy event ripped atoms to shreds. Orbiting a BH at Lightspeed will do that to you. The point being that excited, rapidly decaying shreds of matter are a product of these high energy events. They are not a part of normal atoms just like tires spinning like tops are not part of a normal car that hasn’t just hit a wall at 200mph. You won’t understand this, Odd, but that’s okay. You’re blocked against it because it means you’ve been perpetuating bullshit. Sad but oh well shit happens dude. Have a nice day!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-28 21:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <peht4b$mgu$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #687535 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > Odd > “ > Cosmic rays. Happens all the time. Everywhere on earth. All that stuff is > there. > ” > Yes, Cosmic rays are another instance where a high-energy event ripped > atoms to shreds. Orbiting a BH at Lightspeed will do that to you. The > point being that excited, rapidly decaying shreds of matter are a product > of these high energy events. They are not a part of normal atoms just > like tires spinning like tops are not part of a normal car that hasn’t > just hit a wall at 200mph. Well as it turns out, the Yukawa meson that holds the protons in an atom together were discovered in cosmic rays. Check real history, John! > > You won’t understand this, Odd, but that’s okay. You’re blocked against > it because it means you’ve been perpetuating bullshit. Sad but oh well shit happens dude. > Have a nice day! > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-28 14:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <de2ae5ea-fe91-4ce5-a1c8-1d4789002c4b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #687545 |
Odd “Well as it turns out, the Yukawa meson that holds the protons in an atom together were discovered in cosmic rays. Check real history, John! ” Holds the protons together? With what? Yes, smashed atoms have weird stuff. Cosmic rays are smashed atoms. Smashed cars have weird stuff, too, like tires spinning like tops. W and Z ‘photons’ are like that- the result of high energy being applied. When that bus runs you over, you’ll find that some of your parts don’t fit or function like they used to.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-28 23:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pei4b2$r0a$4@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #687547 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >Odd >"Well as it turns out, the Yukawa meson that holds the protons in an atom >together were discovered in cosmic rays. Check real history, John! " >Holds the protons together? With what? Crazy Glue. You could always read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yukawa_potential https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yukawa_interaction but you won't understand either. And then you'll complain that they're wrong because physics has to be understandable by a bar maid in order to be valid.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-28 23:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pei55r$121k$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #687547 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > Odd > “Well as it turns out, the Yukawa meson that holds the protons in an atom > together were discovered in cosmic rays. Check real history, John! ” > Holds the protons together? With what? > Yes, smashed atoms have weird stuff. I was talking about Yukawa mesons in whole atoms. Try reading instead of guessing and floundering. > Cosmic rays are smashed atoms. > Smashed cars have weird stuff, too, like tires spinning like tops. W and > Z ‘photons’ are like that- the result of high energy being applied. > When that bus runs you over, you’ll find that some of your parts don’t > fit or function like they used to. > -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-29 05:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8593cd08-f072-46b2-8e3e-646c3de635c6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #687570 |
Odd “ I was talking about Yukawa mesons in whole atoms. Try reading instead of guessing and floundering. ” Draw me a picture and label the parts and reference me to the microscope they saw it with.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-29 12:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pejikn$mmi$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #687632 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >Odd >" >I was talking about Yukawa mesons in whole atoms. >Try reading instead of guessing and floundering. " >Draw me a picture and label the parts and reference me to the microscope >they saw it with. Why would you even think a microscope is even necessary? These things happen on a scale MUCH smaller than a wavelength of light! If you need a picture to color, try searching for "Feynman diagram nucleon-nucleon interaction" or something.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-29 06:07 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5e8418c1-8f16-465b-9312-78a1875aac0c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #687635 |
MM “These things happen on a scale MUCH smaller than a wavelength of light! ” So how have you constructed a picture? (Just a figure of speech- I know you don’t have a physical model). You have these pieces, like mesons (more electrons that have unusual spin), and you say you can piece them into a picture/model/somekindoffuckingunderstanding of the atom, but you can never show it? SHOW me where the mesons are in the atom- describe it/ whatever.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-29 13:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pejjpt$1crm$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #687636 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > MM > “These things > happen on a scale MUCH smaller than a wavelength of light! ” > So how have you constructed a picture? (Just a figure of speech- I know > you don’t have a physical model). John you promised you would not repeat this lie. You know — have been corrected repeatedly — that a physical model is not a picture. > You have these pieces, like mesons (more electrons that have unusual > spin), and you say you can piece them into a > picture/model/somekindoffuckingunderstanding of the atom, but you can never show it? > SHOW me where the mesons are in the atom- describe it/ whatever. > They are in the nucleus mostly. No picture available or needed. Mind your promise. -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-29 06:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6c0ea1db-0ea8-4798-8580-837b18b61ba8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #687638 |
Odd “They are in the nucleus mostly. No picture available or needed. Mind your promise. ” Did I promise not to bother you guys about WHERE ur particles are, or what pathways they follow because you have no answer for that? Sorry
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-29 15:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pejqbf$1ppe$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #687642 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > Odd > “They are in the nucleus mostly. No picture available or needed. Mind your > promise. ” > Did I promise not to bother you guys about WHERE ur particles are, or > what pathways they follow because you have no answer for that? Sorry > Well yes. Again you have rather simple minded fixations in what a physical model is. In your mind, a physical model MUST have specific locations, well defined pathways and a picture. None of these are what a physical model is. We’ve talked about the criteria for a physical model. I know you WANT physicists to present explanations to you in a way that makes sense to you, which is pretty limited because you don’t have the basic concepts, you don’t know the lingo, and you don’t do math, all three of which are needed to be able to follow a physics model. I have heard you whine that physicists SHOULD be able to make those descriptions accessible to laypeople without those skills. Frankly, I disagree and I’m pretty sure physicists disagree. They do not owe that to laypeople. Can you explain why you think they should? -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | poraty149@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-29 08:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <78e32074-5813-4b4b-9866-718af01c34b3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #687649 |
On Tuesday, May 29, 2018 at 6:07:33 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote: > john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > > Odd > > “They are in the nucleus mostly. No picture available or needed. Mind your > > promise. ” > > Did I promise not to bother you guys about WHERE ur particles are, or > > what pathways they follow because you have no answer for that? Sorry > > > > Well yes. Again you have rather simple minded fixations in what a physical > model is. In your mind, a physical model MUST have specific locations, well > defined pathways and a picture. None of these are what a physical model > is. We’ve talked about the criteria for a physical model. > > I know you WANT physicists to present explanations to you in a way that > makes sense to you, which is pretty limited because you don’t have the > basic concepts, you don’t know the lingo, and you don’t do math, all three > of which are needed to be able to follow a physics model. I have heard you > whine that physicists SHOULD be able to make those descriptions accessible > to laypeople without those skills. Frankly, I disagree and I’m pretty sure > physicists disagree. They do not owe that to laypeople. Can you explain why > you think they should? > > -- > Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables ======================== no pictures ??!!' ' imbecile moron crock no need for pictures do you idiot criminal think that the nucleus is a** porridge* of sub particles you are a criminal against mankind!! to nucleus is not a 'porridge of sub particles if you are a n ignorant about it at least admit it and don't pose as a teacher of it : ====== see http://sites/google.come/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract that is only an **abstract*!! of the model got it shameless crock ?? each sub particle has its exact **3D**location !! ======= Y. Porat ==============================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | poraty149@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-29 08:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <52e6a50a-3711-4647-9e80-8be021519bee@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #687652 |
On Tuesday, May 29, 2018 at 6:26:10 PM UTC+3, pora...@gmail.com wrote: > On Tuesday, May 29, 2018 at 6:07:33 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Odd > > > “They are in the nucleus mostly. No picture available or needed. Mind your > > > promise. ” > > > Did I promise not to bother you guys about WHERE ur particles are, or > > > what pathways they follow because you have no answer for that? Sorry > > > > > > > Well yes. Again you have rather simple minded fixations in what a physical > > model is. In your mind, a physical model MUST have specific locations, well > > defined pathways and a picture. None of these are what a physical model > > is. We’ve talked about the criteria for a physical model. > > > > I know you WANT physicists to present explanations to you in a way that > > makes sense to you, which is pretty limited because you don’t have the > > basic concepts, you don’t know the lingo, and you don’t do math, all three > > of which are needed to be able to follow a physics model. I have heard you > > whine that physicists SHOULD be able to make those descriptions accessible > > to laypeople without those skills. Frankly, I disagree and I’m pretty sure > > physicists disagree. They do not owe that to laypeople. Can you explain why > > you think they should? > > > > -- > > Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > ======================== > no pictures ??!!' > ' > imbecile moron crock > no need for pictures > do you idiot criminal think that the > nucleus is a** porridge* of sub particles > you are a criminal against mankind!! > to nucleus is not a 'porridge of sub particles > if you are a n ignorant about it > at least admit it > and don't pose as a teacher of it : > ====== > see > http://sites/google.come/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract > > that is only an **abstract*!! of the model > got it shameless crock ?? > each sub particle has its exact **3D**location !! > ======= > Y. Porat > ============================== sorry a very little typo ... http://sites.google.com.site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract === Y.P =======================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | poraty149@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-29 08:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ea170e16-c4b5-4aca-8b74-d6ed0927139b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #687653 |
On Tuesday, May 29, 2018 at 6:32:46 PM UTC+3, pora...@gmail.com wrote: > On Tuesday, May 29, 2018 at 6:26:10 PM UTC+3, pora...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Tuesday, May 29, 2018 at 6:07:33 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > > john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Odd > > > > “They are in the nucleus mostly. No picture available or needed. Mind your > > > > promise. ” > > > > Did I promise not to bother you guys about WHERE ur particles are, or > > > > what pathways they follow because you have no answer for that? Sorry > > > > > > > > > > Well yes. Again you have rather simple minded fixations in what a physical > > > model is. In your mind, a physical model MUST have specific locations, well > > > defined pathways and a picture. None of these are what a physical model > > > is. We’ve talked about the criteria for a physical model. > > > > > > I know you WANT physicists to present explanations to you in a way that > > > makes sense to you, which is pretty limited because you don’t have the > > > basic concepts, you don’t know the lingo, and you don’t do math, all three > > > of which are needed to be able to follow a physics model. I have heard you > > > whine that physicists SHOULD be able to make those descriptions accessible > > > to laypeople without those skills. Frankly, I disagree and I’m pretty sure > > > physicists disagree. They do not owe that to laypeople. Can you explain why > > > you think they should? > > > > > > -- > > > Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > ======================== > > no pictures ??!!' > > ' > > imbecile moron crock > > no need for pictures > > do you idiot criminal think that the > > nucleus is a** porridge* of sub particles > > you are a criminal against mankind!! > > to nucleus is not a 'porridge of sub particles > > if you are a n ignorant about it > > at least admit it > > and don't pose as a teacher of it : > > ====== > > see > > http://sites/google.come/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract > > > > that is only an **abstract*!! of the model > > got it shameless crock ?? > > each sub particle has its exact **3D**location !! > > ======= > > Y. Porat > > ============================== > > sorry > a very little typo ... > > http://sites.google.com.site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract > === > Y.P > ======================= sorry it seems that I am becoming older .. each ]pips is counting.. -- http://sites.google.com/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract === Y.Porat =================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | poraty149@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-29 08:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0935269c-483b-4a32-aec3-7a0af713ea88@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #687656 |
On Tuesday, May 29, 2018 at 6:38:45 PM UTC+3, pora...@gmail.com wrote: > On Tuesday, May 29, 2018 at 6:32:46 PM UTC+3, pora...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Tuesday, May 29, 2018 at 6:26:10 PM UTC+3, pora...@gmail.com wrote: > > > On Tuesday, May 29, 2018 at 6:07:33 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > > > john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Odd > > > > > “They are in the nucleus mostly. No picture available or needed. Mind your > > > > > promise. ” > > > > > Did I promise not to bother you guys about WHERE ur particles are, or > > > > > what pathways they follow because you have no answer for that? Sorry > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well yes. Again you have rather simple minded fixations in what a physical > > > > model is. In your mind, a physical model MUST have specific locations, well > > > > defined pathways and a picture. None of these are what a physical model > > > > is. We’ve talked about the criteria for a physical model. > > > > > > > > I know you WANT physicists to present explanations to you in a way that > > > > makes sense to you, which is pretty limited because you don’t have the > > > > basic concepts, you don’t know the lingo, and you don’t do math, all three > > > > of which are needed to be able to follow a physics model. I have heard you > > > > whine that physicists SHOULD be able to make those descriptions accessible > > > > to laypeople without those skills. Frankly, I disagree and I’m pretty sure > > > > physicists disagree. They do not owe that to laypeople. Can you explain why > > > > you think they should? > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > > ======================== > > > no pictures ??!!' > > > ' > > > imbecile moron crock > > > no need for pictures > > > do you idiot criminal think that the > > > nucleus is a** porridge* of sub particles > > > you are a criminal against mankind!! > > > to nucleus is not a 'porridge of sub particles > > > if you are a n ignorant about it > > > at least admit it > > > and don't pose as a teacher of it : > > > ====== > > > see > > > http://sites/google.come/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract > > > > > > that is only an **abstract*!! of the model > > > got it shameless crock ?? > > > each sub particle has its exact **3D**location !! > > > ======= > > > Y. Porat > > > ============================== > > > > sorry > > a very little typo ... > > > > http://sites.google.com.site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract > > === > > Y.P > > ======================= > sorry > it seems that I am becoming older .. > each ]pips is counting.. > -- > http://sites.google.com/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract > === > Y.Porat > =================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web