Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #699525 > unrolled thread
| Started by | mitchrae3323@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-08-21 19:45 -0700 |
| Last post | 2018-08-28 11:51 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 57 — 7 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Black holes are out in principle mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-08-21 19:45 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 20:28 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-08-21 20:32 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-08-21 20:33 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-08-21 22:14 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-08-23 16:35 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-08-23 17:54 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-08-24 10:25 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-08-24 13:02 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-08-24 14:10 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-08-24 14:11 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 10:56 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-08-28 13:48 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 14:06 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 21:36 +0000
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 16:00 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 16:14 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-08-28 15:05 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-08-24 14:30 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-08-25 18:02 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-26 07:25 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-08-26 15:36 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-08-27 03:48 +0000
Re: Black holes are out in principle mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-08-26 20:58 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-08-27 04:22 +0000
Re: Black holes are out in principle mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-08-26 21:28 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-27 08:57 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-08-27 16:21 +0000
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-27 09:42 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-08-27 18:14 +0000
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-27 11:25 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-08-27 18:46 +0000
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-27 12:07 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-27 19:27 +0000
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-27 14:26 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-27 14:31 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-27 14:40 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-27 22:20 +0000
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-27 17:03 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-27 17:11 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 01:29 +0000
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 05:15 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 13:12 +0000
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 06:18 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 13:40 +0000
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 06:20 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 06:30 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-08-28 17:47 +0000
Re: Black holes are out in principle Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 13:40 +0000
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 06:54 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 14:58 +0000
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 10:09 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-08-28 17:51 +0000
Re: Black holes are out in principle Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 20:27 +0000
Re: Black holes are out in principle moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-08-28 17:44 +0000
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 11:12 -0700
Re: Black holes are out in principle john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 11:51 -0700
Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 Next page →
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-26 07:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8115a640-4378-4421-9c8b-427a8eb5cd6c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #699982 |
mitch “theory. We are seeing something else... ” Yes it is turning Space at the center of galaxies which absorbs Light and neutrinos because it turns at c. Black Holes are a fictional critter that should have alerted us to the FACT that Suck Gravity is wrong, but so many smart people are avoiding Science, now, that it is full of people like Odd and MM- Not-smart people
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mitchrae3323@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-26 15:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ca14909c-8968-4915-ba40-1dbc997dd287@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #699982 |
On Saturday, August 25, 2018 at 6:02:53 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > Black hole gravity infinite curve singularity would > end space time. How can the end of space time keep > moving through space time? > > Drop off gravity strength happens in a black hole...? > This also eliminates black hole theory. We are seeing > something else... > > Mitchell Raemsch How can the end of space time move? Mitchell Raemsch
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 03:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <plvsa4$fb6$4@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #700067 |
mitchrae3323@gmail.com writes: >On Saturday, August 25, 2018 at 6:02:53 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: >> Black hole gravity infinite curve singularity would >> end space time. How can the end of space time keep >> moving through space time? >> >> Drop off gravity strength happens in a black hole...? >> This also eliminates black hole theory. We are seeing >> something else... >> >> Mitchell Raemsch >How can the end of space time move? That's just John babbling nonsense. John thinks nothing can spin. By that I don't mean "nothing can spin" means that things can't spin, he literally thinks that a chunk of nothing (empty space, literally nothing) can spin, and this chunk of nothing can do things to non-nothing matter. No proof or evidence, of course. So you have competition as to who can toss the best word salad.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mitchrae3323@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-26 20:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c130bd84-d4a8-4910-97cb-d33e9cb11b8b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #700103 |
On Sunday, August 26, 2018 at 8:48:24 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote: > mitchrae3323@gmail.com writes: > > >On Saturday, August 25, 2018 at 6:02:53 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > >> Black hole gravity infinite curve singularity would > >> end space time. How can the end of space time keep > >> moving through space time? > >> > >> Drop off gravity strength happens in a black hole...? > >> This also eliminates black hole theory. We are seeing > >> something else... > >> > >> Mitchell Raemsch > > >How can the end of space time move? > > That's just John babbling nonsense. John thinks nothing can spin. By that > I don't mean "nothing can spin" means that things can't spin, he literally > thinks that a chunk of nothing (empty space, literally nothing) can spin, > and this chunk of nothing can do things to non-nothing matter. > No proof or evidence, of course. > > So you have competition as to who can toss the best word salad. Gravity can't make singularities. The strength of gravity is limited... to below the speed of light... Mitchell Raemsch
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 04:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <plvuaa$sib$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #700104 |
mitchrae3323@gmail.com writes: >Gravity can't make singularities. >The strength of gravity is limited... >to below the speed of light... That makes no sense. Strength is not speed. And just because you don't understand a theory doesn't mean the theory is wrong. It just means you have more to learn before you understand it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mitchrae3323@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-26 21:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d89d4371-34cc-41de-8bb6-f7554af13caa@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #700105 |
On Sunday, August 26, 2018 at 9:22:38 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote: > mitchrae3323@gmail.com writes: > > >Gravity can't make singularities. > >The strength of gravity is limited... > >to below the speed of light... > > That makes no sense. Strength is not speed. Sure it is. Gravity cannot push speed to light speed. > > And just because you don't understand a theory doesn't mean the theory is > wrong. No. It is wrong in the case of singularities. Do you understand them Moronee? Mitchell Raemsch
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 08:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <aec75932-cfea-45f6-a8e9-d08c32d4b7f6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #700103 |
MM “empty space, literally nothing) can spin, ” NO such THING as NOTHING, Michael. Even YOU have SOME smarts. Why don’t you try using them? If Space has properties, and those properties are different from place to place, then your nothing over here is DIFFERENT from your nothing over there, Michael. NOTHING =/ NOTHING? Cool
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 16:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pm18ds$lm3$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #700129 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >MM >"empty space, literally nothing) can spin, " >NO such THING as NOTHING, Michael. So you claim, never with evidence. >If Space has properties, and those properties are different from place to >place, then your nothing over here is DIFFERENT from your nothing over >there, Michael. Perhaps it's different because one of the nothings is not nothing. For example, a black hole has loads of mass in it, definitely NOT nothing! So yes, a black hole WILL be very different from a region of (truly) empty space! >NOTHING =/ NOTHING? >Cool Only in John's fantasy world.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 09:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fdc87b0f-db8f-4a34-b5d5-5286a5e23480@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #700133 |
MM “Perhaps it's different because one of the nothings is not nothing. For ” There’s NEVER nothing, Michael. Did you like my new S orbital? Here’s a link- I rotated it 22.5 degrees to get it on-axis: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=2128164747443356&set=gm.559038064514719&type=3 Sorry it’s a Facebook link- my new phone rejects my old computer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 18:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pm1f1t$q4t$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #700138 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >MM >"Perhaps it's different because one of the nothings is not nothing. > For " >There's NEVER nothing, Michael. Again, So you claim, never with evidence. (Assertions are not evidence, John) >Did you like my new S orbital? >Here's a link- I rotated it 22.5 degrees to get it on-axis: I already know it's wrong, without even having to look at all! S orbitals are spherically symmetrical. If you rotated it at all, and it's different from before the rotation, then obviously it does not have spherical symmetry, and therefore must be wrong! You didn't learn from your methane attempt. All 4 of the carbon bonds are perfectly identical in methane, and there is no way to do that if the central carbon is rotating relative to the bonds.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 11:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2fe77886-a390-483d-b810-1cd9b91f211f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #700154 |
MM “already know it's wrong, without even having to look at all! S orbitals are spherically symmetrical. I” Let’s look at this: you are saying that in H and He, the electrons are distributed exactly spherically, always? How would that happen, Michael? So if ANYTHING moves, that is no longer true? :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 18:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pm1gu9$glj$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #700156 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >you are saying that in H and He, the electrons are distributed exactly >spherically, always? In the isolated unbonded atom, yes. >How would that happen, Michael? Because that is the solution of the Schrodinger wave equation for the 1s orbital. > So if ANYTHING moves, that is no longer true? I assume this comment arises from your habit of thinking of the electron as being a little ball/thing orbiting the nucleus like a planet orbiting the sun. Oh and precessing, your OCD will insist on that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 12:07 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b41f2345-a67d-4eb1-8561-7f8aae7c4dfe@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #700157 |
MM “Because that is the solution of the Schrodinger wave equation for the 1s orbital. ” And is this another of your math fantasies that you can’t point to ONE visible example in reality? Yes. There are a few organisms that are spherically-symmetric- it means you can cut them in two halves anywhere and get two equal halves. What you are talking about only exist in math- you know, like singularities. Too bad ur scared to look at the link- I’m getting breakthroughs because of it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 19:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pm1jab$1vgt$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #700162 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > MM > “Because that is the solution of the Schrodinger wave equation for the 1s > orbital. ” > And is this another of your math fantasies that you can’t point to ONE > visible example in reality? Yes. You are saying that reality for you consists of visible things? Can you see polystyrene molecules? Are they reality? > > There are a few organisms that are spherically-symmetric- it means you > can cut them in two halves anywhere and get two equal halves. That’s not what spherically symmetric means. At all. > What you are talking about only exist in math- you know, like singularities. > Too bad ur scared to look at the link- I’m getting breakthroughs because of it. > -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 14:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f7468122-e425-4589-940e-38cfd8485f1a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #700163 |
Odd “That’s not what spherically symmetric means. At all. > What you are talking about only exist in math- you know, like singularities, and probabilities generated by numbers in the 10^23 range
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 14:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0c16907e-0eee-4c45-9f82-549096809f8a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #700170 |
Odd “That’s not what spherically symmetric means. At all. > What you are talking about only exist in math- you know, like singularities. ” After many, many runs.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 14:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <40852e22-69b1-4222-9931-78c48c5f072c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #700171 |
Odd You’re so lost in mathworld
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 22:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pm1tfp$h84$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #700172 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > Odd > You’re so lost in mathworld > That’s adorable. People who know what spherically symmetric are list in mathworld, and you’re in the real world because you can’t figure out what it means. -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 17:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b7bfbe3a-435e-4987-b21a-d166a4395890@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #700176 |
Odd “you’re in the real world because you can’t figure out what it means. ” I know you can approach it if you plot enough Schroedinger dots. In theory you can have your type of perfect spherical symmetry. But you need lotta lotta dots, and you’ll get as close to it as you can get to infinity
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 17:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ec4222a0-90c8-473c-bd3d-ee7f0cce273b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #700186 |
Odd But in YOUR world, your ‘fundamental particle’ separates into as many little bits as is needed to make a perfectly spherical shell, right? And then none of them go anywhere (what do you call them- ‘shell-ums’?- but none of them go anywhere, they just have kinetic energy. Is that right? And then when there are TWO electrons, that just goes double. Right? I love your science, Odd.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web