Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #694446 > unrolled thread
| Started by | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-07-18 06:49 -0700 |
| Last post | 2018-07-23 22:30 -0400 |
| Articles | 14 on this page of 114 — 12 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 06:49 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 14:12 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 07:20 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 14:22 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 07:30 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 07:54 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 12:19 -0400
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 16:37 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 09:56 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 17:05 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 18:27 -0400
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 22:57 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 19:27 -0400
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 01:33 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 18:54 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 12:54 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 10:47 -0400
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 15:23 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-07-18 22:32 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 11:01 -0400
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 09:52 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-07-20 10:25 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-07-20 12:05 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 14:14 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-07-20 18:30 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 12:58 -0400
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:08 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 17:14 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 18:37 -0400
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 17:08 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:17 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 17:26 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:33 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:37 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:44 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:48 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 18:43 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 18:42 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 19:14 -0400
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 01:33 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 11:23 -0400
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 15:34 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-07-18 18:14 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 11:16 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 11:19 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 11:39 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-07-18 18:44 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 11:55 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-07-18 19:16 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 18:42 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 11:06 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 11:11 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 18:43 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 19:15 -0400
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 01:33 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 11:25 -0400
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 15:39 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 14:37 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 22:12 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 16:53 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-07-20 05:35 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 18:31 -0400
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 22:57 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 19:37 -0400
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 12:16 -0400
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-07-18 15:21 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-07-18 10:58 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible poraty6@gmail.com - 2018-07-18 21:09 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-07-20 00:16 -0500
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible poraty6@gmail.com - 2018-07-19 22:59 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 05:50 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 07:22 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 07:58 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 15:21 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 08:31 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 16:54 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-07-20 15:56 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 09:59 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 17:53 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 13:50 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-07-21 14:45 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 11:23 -0400
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 15:45 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 12:32 -0400
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 19:30 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 18:19 -0400
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 15:32 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 22:40 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 22:05 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-07-22 05:11 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 22:46 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-07-21 22:56 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-07-23 05:35 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 21:43 -0400
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 09:23 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-07-21 12:48 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-22 12:41 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-22 19:58 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-23 00:23 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-23 11:55 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-07-23 20:39 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-07-23 17:25 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 13:25 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 14:47 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible poraty6@gmail.com - 2018-07-21 20:16 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-07-21 20:25 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 15:21 +0000
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 13:15 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-07-21 18:12 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-07-23 15:08 -0500
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-23 17:47 -0400
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-23 16:42 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-07-23 16:40 -0700
Re: Space is not empty- just invisible benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-23 22:30 -0400
Page 6 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-23 20:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pj5eed$3bq$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #695139 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >Odd >" >No you cannot. Violates conservation of angular momentum. Steady precession= >=20 >without external torque is impossible. High school physics. >" >When the precession is in sync with the rotation, it is possible. No, it is not. Angular momentum is a CONSERVED quantity. In a closed system, the total angular momentum remains the same. You can treat an isolated spinning whatever as a closed system. Without external effects, it will spin forever with the same angular momentum. Angular momentum is typically represented as a vector (pseudovector), with the dirction of the vector along the spin axis. Both the magnitude and direction of the vector are conserved. If you try to precess the thing, the magnitude remains the same but the direction (spin axis) rotates 360 degrees, over and over again, constantly changing the angular momentum completely over one cycle. Ratio doesn't matter (other than 0:1, not precessing at all), it cannot do that without an external torque forcing the angular momentum to change constantly. That's how gyroscopes work, they specifically resist changing their axis of rotation at all, much less precess, because their angular momentum is conserved. (Constant gravity can initiate precession as seen with a child's toy top. Angular momentum is transferred between the top and the earth) >That is the exception. No exceptions, you just pulled another "fact" from your butt again.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mitchrae3323@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-23 17:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1e18f40d-9b12-40ae-932c-25d9d9a1a586@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #695212 |
On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 1:39:44 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote: > john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: > > >Odd > >" > >No you cannot. Violates conservation of angular momentum. Steady precession= > >=20 > >without external torque is impossible. High school physics. > >" > >When the precession is in sync with the rotation, it is possible. > > No, it is not. > > Angular momentum is a CONSERVED quantity. In a closed system, the total > angular momentum remains the same. > > You can treat an isolated spinning whatever as a closed system. > Without external effects, it will spin forever with the same angular > momentum. > > Angular momentum is typically represented as a vector (pseudovector), with > the dirction of the vector along the spin axis. Both the magnitude and > direction of the vector are conserved. If you try to precess the thing, > the magnitude remains the same but the direction (spin axis) rotates 360 > degrees, over and over again, constantly changing the angular momentum > completely over one cycle. Ratio doesn't matter (other than 0:1, not > precessing at all), it cannot do that without an external torque forcing > the angular momentum to change constantly. > > That's how gyroscopes work, they specifically resist changing their > axis of rotation at all, much less precess, because their angular > momentum is conserved. > > (Constant gravity can initiate precession as seen with a child's toy > top. Angular momentum is transferred between the top and the earth) > > >That is the exception. > > No exceptions, you just pulled another "fact" from your butt again. What happens to rotation when the rocket leaves the pad? Rotation is a motion shared by us and rocket with the Earth. There is new mathematical science of how rotation is left behind leaving gravity field. Mitchell Raemsch
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-21 13:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d52944bc-4d0e-48e5-b300-0f46c53dd7e3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #694863 |
On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 8:53:21 PM UTC-4, john wrote: > ed ed ed > > > WHY would you choose the option never seen before? > > that's the question you should be asking yourself. > “ > Atoms are difficult to examine, because they are so small and fast. > So, do their constituents have structure? > Your argument seems to be that since we cannot see structure > for sure, then we must infer that there is no structure. Exactly. Even the ancient greeks recognized that the division of substance had to have a finite end point. > But I say that since everything else has structure- the > precedent has been set many times- then in this case we > also cannot see that there ISN’T structure, so the default > should be to assume there IS structure. But when you go and look for it, it isn't there. MANY Many many tests have been done on the electron to see if it has internal structure. Similar tests have been done on the proton. Results so far have been: Electron: no data indicating internal structure. Proton: Data indicating internal structure. I consists of 3 particles named quarks. Science uses the best theory supported by the evidence. No available evidence (experimental data) indicates that electrons have an internal structure. This has been true for over 100 years now. So a theory proposing an internal structure has a tough road. It's just that Nothing in the experimental data even hints at electrons being anything other than one of the fundamental particles. I suggest it is time you move on to something else. If you truly are interested, there are many books available on particle physics. It is a truly fascinating area. try learning what physicists actually agree is the best description of the subatomic world. It is confusing sometimes because it is not like the macroscopic world. But all the properties of the macroscopic world can be shown to emerge from the current standard model. Is the Standard model complete? no there will be improvements, and possibly an entirely different structure. But that is the excitement. We just have to wait for that data that cannot be explained. We can speculate on alternative. You wildly speculate that it might be another layer below. We have pointed out how your speculation does not fit known physics. It is nice to speculate sometimes. What is not nice is taking a speculation and arguing that it "has to be right". So lighten up. Your speculation was becoming an obsession. Chill out and enjoy the many fascinating aspects of physics. They are so much more interesting. Suggestion: Since you enjoy the electron so much, read and learn about the Muon. Enjoy ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-21 14:47 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <cc186599-0c35-4cb2-9350-e55c61cc2de2@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #694953 |
ed ed ed “ Is the Standard model complete? no there will be improvements, and possibly an entirely different structure. But that is the excitement. We just have to wait for that data that cannot be expl” Well, with no DM in sight, and new telescopes showing things that don’t match your screed, it won’t be long.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | poraty6@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-21 20:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c3fcfa84-af59-4e16-aada-8c34b885e0db@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #694863 |
On Saturday, July 21, 2018 at 3:53:21 AM UTC+3, john wrote: > ed ed ed > > > WHY would you choose the option never seen before? > > that's the question you should be asking yourself. > “ > Atoms are difficult to examine, because they are so small and fast. > So, do their constituents have structure? > Your argument seems to be that since we cannot see structure for sure, then we must infer that there is no structure. > But I say that since everything else has structure- the precedent has been set many times- then in this case we also cannot see that there ISN’T structure, so the default should be to assume there IS structure. ================================ you are more than right 100 percent right !!! see Google http://sites.google.com/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract indeed ** unprecedented** but it is there black on white AND 3D!!! provided that you are trained to read 3D on a flat paper . engineers are trained to it not mumbles the nucleus has a very very definite structure ( unequivocal order'' there or else we would be defused and dispersed to the infinity at once!! .. ========================= TIA Eng …. Y.Porat ==========
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mitchrae3323@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-21 20:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a2fd9522-4940-4f66-9ad3-2e5007e7303d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #695027 |
On Saturday, July 21, 2018 at 8:16:35 PM UTC-7, por...@gmail.com wrote: > On Saturday, July 21, 2018 at 3:53:21 AM UTC+3, john wrote: > > ed ed ed > > > > > WHY would you choose the option never seen before? > > > > that's the question you should be asking yourself. > > “ > > Atoms are difficult to examine, because they are so small and fast. > > So, do their constituents have structure? > > Your argument seems to be that since we cannot see structure for sure, then we must infer that there is no structure. > > But I say that since everything else has structure- the precedent has been set many times- then in this case we also cannot see that there ISN’T structure, so the default should be to assume there IS structure. > > ================================ > you are more than right 100 percent right !!! > see Google > > http://sites.google.com/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract > > indeed ** unprecedented** but it is there black on white > AND 3D!!! > > provided that you are trained to read 3D on a flat paper . > engineers are trained to it > not mumbles > the nucleus has a very very definite structure > ( unequivocal order'' there or else we would be > defused and dispersed to the infinity at once!! .. > ========================= > TIA > Eng …. > Y.Porat > ========== Black holes drain into white holes through worm holes... But that is absurdity. We don't observe that order. Another science flunk out... Science wants to hold fast to what has been disproven. Just as the world of science had to judge its genius Albert Einstein. But Einstein won them in history. No one has to doubt it now... Mitchell Raemsch
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-20 15:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pisulp$1gg2$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #694767 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > ed ed edha > “John is on his recursive "its turtles all the way down" > tirades again. he has forgotten how to learn, so it > is better to just ignore him. > ” > What’s to learn about ‘quantum foam’? > > Who convinced you that things don’t need structure? > That’s totally insane!! Why is it totally insane? Because it is counter to your unsupported belief that all things have structure, just because? > Even the slight misplacement of a bolt in your car could crash you. And > you guys think atoms- operating on timescales of 10^-16seconds- are random. > > Totally. > Bizarre. > -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-21 13:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <712b9d30-ef2d-4da7-a32e-46fe61236d3f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #694446 |
On Wednesday, July 18, 2018 at 6:49:48 AM UTC-7, john wrote: > Space is made from smaller-gauge matter that is too small to be seen by our emr. It is actually disturbances in this smaller-gauge sea of matter that ARE our emr. > Nothing is nothing- even our science has SOME value if properly interpreted. The most dynamic parts of the universe are eyes can not see.We understand stars of all types,but not the space between them.We know alot about particles but not the space around them,or inside them.Bert
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-21 18:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <pj0llu$tst$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #694952 |
"reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> <snip> cuz everyone says Bert is wrong + a fool and not cool. Bert has as a lame noodle that stinks like Bert's stool. > See SwineGlazier's Dossier: <http://tinyurl.com/Swine-Glazier-s-REAL-intent> wherein SwineBert refuses to explain why SwineBert's has posted these items in word & by name: > (1) On 07Feb 2015 & on 08Feb2015, Face-Shitter Glazier wrote: Harlow Campbell HVAC, Mr.HVAC@gmail.com, & Saul Levy <saullevy1@cox.net & Jacoby Benj, <nobody@gmail.com>: "I'll be sitting on your faces to take a shit & say: "Open wide". <http://pbs.twimg.com/media/A8MGOU-CQAEaZw4.jpg> > (2) On 06Dec2014, when the Christian-Hater, JewPigBert Glazier said to "benj" <nobody@gmail.com>: "Reality is you always post under me for you are an ass kisser. For Christmas I'll shit on your kisser." <http://pbs.twimg.com/media/A8MGOU-CQAEaZw4.jpg> "Benj, you can thank me in advance". - TreBert. ... addinng > (3) On 03Aug2017: "benj, you eat shit and your shitty brain is coming out your ears." On 20Jul2018: Benj, my posts are way over your head.Reality is your head is up your ass.So fart it out before you get constipated.Bert > (4) On 25Mar2008, Graveyard Vandal Glazier wrote in: <https://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/3ffe7b2257cf8a9a> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/sci.physics/uYtpFTRnW4k/morPVyJ7_j8J> "Hanson, I will piss on your grave. And have a good laugh when it seeps down on your face". -- Bert > (5) On 24Jun2018 SwineBert Glazier said to Mark Earnest <gmearnest@att.net> "your nose is in a shit bucket all the time. Eat shit and you fit" -- Bert
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-23 15:08 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <pj5ck2$14im$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #694446 |
On 7/18/2018 8:49 AM, john wrote: > Space is made from smaller-gauge matter that is too small to be seen by our emr. It is actually disturbances in this smaller-gauge sea of matter that ARE our emr. > Nothing is nothing- even our science has SOME value if properly interpreted. > but nothing IS something !
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-23 17:47 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pj5icj$1fv6$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #695207 |
On 7/23/2018 4:08 PM, Sergio wrote: > On 7/18/2018 8:49 AM, john wrote: >> Space is made from smaller-gauge matter that is too small to be seen by our emr. It is actually disturbances in this smaller-gauge sea of matter that ARE our emr. >> Nothing is nothing- even our science has SOME value if properly interpreted. >> > > > but nothing IS something ! > Since nothing at all has the property of being completely devoid of anything that means that nothing has properties and therefore is something! We'd better get a discussion out of Boinker on this conundrum! This is his kind of science thinking!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-23 16:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2df3b8eb-d77d-48bc-8de3-029027e6e04c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #695236 |
benj “We'd better get a discussion out of Boinker on this conundrum! This is his kind of science thinking! ” Yesyes Odd Odd Odd!!! Speak!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-23 16:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7edea054-3708-4de8-94ed-1728814c65f7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #695207 |
Sergio “nothing IS something ! ” Hahahaha
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-23 22:30 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pj62vb$ajt$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #695275 |
On 7/23/2018 7:40 PM, john wrote: > Sergio > “nothing IS something ! ” > Hahahaha > And even more importantly, John, in media politics today something is also nothing. Works for climate change too.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web