Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #726334 > unrolled thread
| Started by | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2019-02-07 21:11 -0800 |
| Last post | 2019-02-11 23:49 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 117 — 13 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-07 21:11 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2019-02-08 16:54 +1100
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-07 22:08 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2019-02-08 17:14 +1100
Re: Matter doesn’t suck poraty6@gmail.com - 2019-02-07 22:35 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-08 08:07 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2019-02-08 10:07 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2019-02-08 13:18 -0500
Re: Matter doesn’t suck James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2019-02-08 10:06 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck pnalsing@gmail.com - 2019-02-08 12:30 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2019-02-08 09:42 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-08 11:16 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck pnalsing@gmail.com - 2019-02-08 12:32 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-08 13:23 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2019-02-08 16:21 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2019-02-08 15:50 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck poraty6@gmail.com - 2019-02-09 22:45 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2019-02-08 19:29 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-08 11:35 -0800
Re: Re: Matter doesn’t suck moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2019-02-08 20:32 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck poraty6@gmail.com - 2019-02-09 22:53 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck poraty6@gmail.com - 2019-02-10 01:41 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-09 16:17 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-09 19:50 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck pnalsing@gmail.com - 2019-02-09 19:56 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-10 03:46 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2019-02-10 09:45 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-10 17:51 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2019-02-10 13:35 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck pnalsing@gmail.com - 2019-02-10 15:10 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-10 15:17 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-10 07:45 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-10 16:06 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck poraty6@gmail.com - 2019-02-10 15:40 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-11 00:59 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-10 17:30 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-11 01:47 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-10 18:44 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-11 12:54 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck poraty6@gmail.com - 2019-02-11 00:01 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck poraty6@gmail.com - 2019-02-11 08:59 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-11 17:24 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-11 20:39 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-12 12:13 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck poraty6@gmail.com - 2019-02-11 23:45 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-12 13:20 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck poraty6@gmail.com - 2019-02-12 08:42 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-12 19:23 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-12 12:30 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Serg Io <invvalid@invalid.com> - 2019-02-12 14:59 -0600
Re: Matter doesn’t suck mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2019-02-12 13:07 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-12 13:23 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2019-02-12 13:35 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2019-02-12 14:41 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-12 23:12 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-12 15:41 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-12 16:19 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 03:04 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-12 20:01 -0800
Re: Re: Matter doesn’t suck moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2019-02-13 06:14 +0000
Re: Re: Matter doesn’t suck poraty6@gmail.com - 2019-02-13 08:49 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 22:46 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck poraty6@gmail.com - 2019-02-13 17:18 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-14 03:12 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-14 02:52 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-14 19:02 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-14 12:12 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-14 22:24 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck poraty6@gmail.com - 2019-02-17 11:40 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-17 19:42 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-02-17 13:03 -0700
Re: Matter doesn’t suck poraty6@gmail.com - 2019-02-17 17:48 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-18 02:15 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck poraty6@gmail.com - 2019-02-18 21:13 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-19 13:52 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2019-02-19 10:08 -0500
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-19 15:15 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2019-02-19 16:07 -0500
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2019-02-19 13:54 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2019-02-13 17:26 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 11:22 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 03:04 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-12 20:11 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2019-02-12 20:57 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 11:22 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 04:30 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 05:16 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 14:41 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 14:30 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 14:41 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 14:41 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 14:41 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 14:41 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 14:44 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 07:09 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 15:58 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 16:06 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 09:14 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 22:46 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 15:03 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 23:15 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 15:23 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-14 14:04 +0000
Re: Re: Matter doesn’t suck moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2019-02-14 22:46 +0000
Re: Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-14 15:23 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-14 23:52 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2019-02-15 05:39 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2019-02-13 15:34 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck poraty6@gmail.com - 2019-02-13 08:54 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-12 23:11 +0000
Re: Matter doesn’t suck poraty6@gmail.com - 2019-02-12 21:37 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Serg Io <invvalid@invalid.com> - 2019-02-10 15:39 -0600
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Serg Io <invvalid@invalid.com> - 2019-02-09 10:51 -0600
Re: Matter doesn’t suck mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2019-02-09 12:49 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Serg Io <invvalid@invalid.com> - 2019-02-10 15:20 -0600
Re: Matter doesn’t suck mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2019-02-10 18:32 -0800
Re: Matter doesn’t suck Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2019-02-11 23:49 -0800
Page 3 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 Next page →
| From | poraty6@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-11 08:59 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <8b1cc89c-7833-4b55-99a1-8b7a95c4e764@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #726724 |
On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 10:01:26 AM UTC+2, por...@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 2:59:36 AM UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > <poraty6@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sunday, February 10, 2019 at 6:06:24 PM UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > >> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>> Odd > > >>> What charged > > >>> radiations that travel in circles are you imagining going between them? > > >>> You have apparently never seen flux lines. > > >> > > >> First of all flux lines are not circular. > > >> Secondly, they are not the paths of any radiations, let alone charged ones. > > >> > > >> What drugs are you on? > > >> > > >> I ve already told you what flux lines are and it seems to have drifted out > > >> of your mind already. > > >> > > >>> I m not surprised. > > >>> Let me compare them to something you HAVE seen: tree rings. Perhaps > > >>> you ve noticed those lines in the wood when you re sanding? I ll bet > > >>> you ve never wondered about them. See how they go round and round? That s > > >>> like how charge works, Odd! > > >> > > >> Tree rings are like geological strata you see when you see an outcropping > > >> of sedimentary rock, John. It s also like the layers of nacre in an oyster > > >> shell. That s an artifact of accumulation. > > >> > > >> How you can look at two things that have vaguely similar shape and conclude > > >> that they stem from the same root cause is truly weird, John. > > >> > > >>> Try to pay attention next time you re making a wooden block. > > >>> > > >> > > >> How about you try to learn some basic physics before discussing it, so you > > >> don t just emit a stream of idiotic babble? > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > > =============================how about Mr pompous crock parrot > > > that you will learn about something new > > > > > > see the force lines > > > at the Faraday experiment with the permanent magnet!! > > > > > > -- > > > Y.Porat > > > ======================== > > > > > > > Yes I know. That is several hundred years old. Where have you been that you > > think this is novel? > > The lines of force are not the path of any particles. Not even Faraday > > thought they were. > > > > -- > > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > ------------------- > (:-) > > Faraday at his time > > COULD NOT UNDERSTND WAHT HE SAW AND FOUND !! > (wile be invented the first dynamo > even he could not understand > what is ''under his hands' > there is a story about him: > that after he invented it and it was physically in his hand > he was brought before the quin (Viktoria ??) > to present his machine > the quin asked him a cleaver question > ''what can be the** use of your invention ?? > Faraday answered an answer (that brings me a shiver at my back) your back cannot do it :.. > faraday answer the quin > > I AM NOT SURE- BUT MAY BE IT CAM BE TAXED '!! > > > even now I get a shiver a my back > can you Bodkin understand why > even now > I get a shiver at my back '' > while I talk about it " > how divine(( modest* and innocent can be > such giant human being > like faraday can be a human being > at our days - > you cant find another giant as > that sun Of a poor blacksmith > called > MICHEL FARADAY …. > he could not understand wahr he found in his ingenious experiment > with a permanent magnet > > > BUT WE ??? > AT OUR TIMES > CANNOT UNDRETASNDND that what he saw > in his experiment > IS A REVOLUSION IN OUR NEW PHYSICS !! > > not idiotic curved space > but > unknown force lines don an unknown > > VERY BASIC PARTICLE SOURCING FROM ***MASS**!! > and if so > ====================================================== > MASS IS THE CREATOER OF ALLFORCES INCLUDING GRAVITY !!! > ====================================================== > at this case > found by another poor father of a sun > that was > a poor building worker > and leaned. educated to be > a decent structural engineer > and spent the rest of his life > to study physics !!~ > not to be a book merchant in a fish market > ==== > > TIA > Eng > Y.Porat > ================== > > > === > > > but you idiot parrot shameless crock > at our time > scientists should be a bit more cleaver and > not least > > HONEST !!! ================ and now I recall something much more important and revolutionary !! ALL THOSE FORCE LINES HATR WE SEE TANGIBLY SEE- IN THAT FARADAY EXPERIMENT ============================== ARE SURELY NOT DONE ''CURVED SPACE TIME !!!!!! ================================== and if so what is making them instead ??!!! what is your guess about it ?? === TIA Y.P ===============================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-11 17:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <q3sb4m$aj7$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #726746 |
<poraty6@gmail.com> wrote: > On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 10:01:26 AM UTC+2, por...@gmail.com wrote: >> On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 2:59:36 AM UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> <poraty6@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Sunday, February 10, 2019 at 6:06:24 PM UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> Odd >>>>>> What charged >>>>>> radiations that travel in circles are you imagining going between them? >>>>>> You have apparently never seen flux lines. >>>>> >>>>> First of all flux lines are not circular. >>>>> Secondly, they are not the paths of any radiations, let alone charged ones. >>>>> >>>>> What drugs are you on? >>>>> >>>>> I ve already told you what flux lines are and it seems to have drifted out >>>>> of your mind already. >>>>> >>>>>> I m not surprised. >>>>>> Let me compare them to something you HAVE seen: tree rings. Perhaps >>>>>> you ve noticed those lines in the wood when you re sanding? I ll bet >>>>>> you ve never wondered about them. See how they go round and round? That s >>>>>> like how charge works, Odd! >>>>> >>>>> Tree rings are like geological strata you see when you see an outcropping >>>>> of sedimentary rock, John. It s also like the layers of nacre in an oyster >>>>> shell. That s an artifact of accumulation. >>>>> >>>>> How you can look at two things that have vaguely similar shape and conclude >>>>> that they stem from the same root cause is truly weird, John. >>>>> >>>>>> Try to pay attention next time you re making a wooden block. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> How about you try to learn some basic physics before discussing it, so you >>>>> don t just emit a stream of idiotic babble? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables >>>> =============================how about Mr pompous crock parrot >>>> that you will learn about something new >>>> >>>> see the force lines >>>> at the Faraday experiment with the permanent magnet!! >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Y.Porat >>>> =======================> > > >>> >>> Yes I know. That is several hundred years old. Where have you been that you >>> think this is novel? >>> The lines of force are not the path of any particles. Not even Faraday >>> thought they were. >>> >>> -- >>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables >> ------------------- >> (:-) >> >> Faraday at his time >> >> COULD NOT UNDERSTND WAHT HE SAW AND FOUND !! >> (wile be invented the first dynamo >> even he could not understand >> what is ''under his hands' >> there is a story about him: >> that after he invented it and it was physically in his hand >> he was brought before the quin (Viktoria ??) >> to present his machine >> the quin asked him a cleaver question >> ''what can be the** use of your invention ?? >> Faraday answered an answer (that brings me a shiver at my back) your >> back cannot do it :.. >> faraday answer the quin >> >> I AM NOT SURE- BUT MAY BE IT CAM BE TAXED '!! >> >> >> even now I get a shiver a my back >> can you Bodkin understand why >> even now >> I get a shiver at my back '' >> while I talk about it " >> how divine(( modest* and innocent can be >> such giant human being >> like faraday can be a human being >> at our days - >> you cant find another giant as >> that sun Of a poor blacksmith >> called >> MICHEL FARADAY &. >> he could not understand wahr he found in his ingenious experiment >> with a permanent magnet >> >> >> BUT WE ??? >> AT OUR TIMES >> CANNOT UNDRETASNDND that what he saw >> in his experiment >> IS A REVOLUSION IN OUR NEW PHYSICS !! >> >> not idiotic curved space >> but >> unknown force lines don an unknown >> >> VERY BASIC PARTICLE SOURCING FROM ***MASS**!! >> and if so >> =====================================================> MASS IS THE >> CREATOER OF ALLFORCES INCLUDING GRAVITY !!! >> ====================================================== >> at this case >> found by another poor father of a sun >> that was >> a poor building worker >> and leaned. educated to be >> a decent structural engineer >> and spent the rest of his life >> to study physics !!~ >> not to be a book merchant in a fish market >> ===> >> TIA >> Eng >> Y.Porat >> =================> >> >> ==> >> > >> but you idiot parrot shameless crock >> at our time >> scientists should be a bit more cleaver and >> not least >> >> HONEST !!! > =============== > and now I recall something much more important and revolutionary !! > > > ALL THOSE FORCE LINES HATR WE SEE TANGIBLY SEE- > IN THAT FARADAY EXPERIMENT > =============================ARE SURELY NOT DONE > ''CURVED SPACE TIME !!!!!! Nobody has ever said they were. No one. > ================================= > and if so > what is making them instead ??!!! They are field lines. A field has a strength and direction at every place in space. If you drop a sliver of iron in that field, it will tend to orient so that the sliver’s long axis points in the direction of the field, because (it’s easy to show) the energy is lower in that orientation. > what is your guess about it ?? This is not a guess. Only those who are uneducated about this would have to guess. > == > TIA > Y.P > ============================== > > > > -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-11 20:39 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <28b8bcc0-779b-4df6-a479-ff0b9a78b7fc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #726748 |
Odd “They are field lines. A field has a strength and direction at every place in space. ” And Odd thinks the lines really exist
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-12 12:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <q3ud9p$1m63$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #726835 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > Odd > “They are field lines. A field has a strength and direction at every place > in space. ” > And Odd thinks the lines really exist > The field exists. The lines are a way of drawing the field. We’ve discussed this. -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | poraty6@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-11 23:45 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <087abe71-cacc-4fc1-a7e9-aa2a6dab9805@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #726748 |
On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 7:24:45 PM UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> <poraty6@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 10:01:26 AM UTC+2, por...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 2:59:36 AM UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >>> <poraty6@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Sunday, February 10, 2019 at 6:06:24 PM UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >>>>> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Odd
> >>>>>> What charged
> >>>>>> radiations that travel in circles are you imagining going between them?
> >>>>>> You have apparently never seen flux lines.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> First of all flux lines are not circular.
> >>>>> Secondly, they are not the paths of any radiations, let alone charged ones.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What drugs are you on?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I ve already told you what flux lines are and it seems to have drifted out
> >>>>> of your mind already.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> I m not surprised.
> >>>>>> Let me compare them to something you HAVE seen: tree rings. Perhaps
> >>>>>> you ve noticed those lines in the wood when you re sanding? I ll bet
> >>>>>> you ve never wondered about them. See how they go round and round? That s
> >>>>>> like how charge works, Odd!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Tree rings are like geological strata you see when you see an outcropping
> >>>>> of sedimentary rock, John. It s also like the layers of nacre in an oyster
> >>>>> shell. That s an artifact of accumulation.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> How you can look at two things that have vaguely similar shape and conclude
> >>>>> that they stem from the same root cause is truly weird, John.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Try to pay attention next time you re making a wooden block.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> How about you try to learn some basic physics before discussing it, so you
> >>>>> don t just emit a stream of idiotic babble?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> >>>> =============================how about Mr pompous crock parrot
> >>>> that you will learn about something new
> >>>>
> >>>> see the force lines
> >>>> at the Faraday experiment with the permanent magnet!!
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Y.Porat
> >>>> =======================> > >
> >>>
> >>> Yes I know. That is several hundred years old. Where have you been that you
> >>> think this is novel?
> >>> The lines of force are not the path of any particles. Not even Faraday
> >>> thought they were.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> >> -------------------
> >> (:-)
> >>
> >> Faraday at his time
> >>
> >> COULD NOT UNDERSTND WAHT HE SAW AND FOUND !!
> >> (wile be invented the first dynamo
> >> even he could not understand
> >> what is ''under his hands'
> >> there is a story about him:
> >> that after he invented it and it was physically in his hand
> >> he was brought before the quin (Viktoria ??)
> >> to present his machine
> >> the quin asked him a cleaver question
> >> ''what can be the** use of your invention ??
> >> Faraday answered an answer (that brings me a shiver at my back) your
> >> back cannot do it :..
> >> faraday answer the quin
> >>
> >> I AM NOT SURE- BUT MAY BE IT CAM BE TAXED '!!
> >>
> >>
> >> even now I get a shiver a my back
> >> can you Bodkin understand why
> >> even now
> >> I get a shiver at my back ''
> >> while I talk about it "
> >> how divine(( modest* and innocent can be
> >> such giant human being
> >> like faraday can be a human being
> >> at our days -
> >> you cant find another giant as
> >> that sun Of a poor blacksmith
> >> called
> >> MICHEL FARADAY &.
> >> he could not understand wahr he found in his ingenious experiment
> >> with a permanent magnet
> >>
> >>
> >> BUT WE ???
> >> AT OUR TIMES
> >> CANNOT UNDRETASNDND that what he saw
> >> in his experiment
> >> IS A REVOLUSION IN OUR NEW PHYSICS !!
> >>
> >> not idiotic curved space
> >> but
> >> unknown force lines don an unknown
> >>
> >> VERY BASIC PARTICLE SOURCING FROM ***MASS**!!
> >> and if so
> >> =====================================================> MASS IS THE
> >> CREATOER OF ALLFORCES INCLUDING GRAVITY !!!
> >> ======================================================
> >> at this case
> >> found by another poor father of a sun
> >> that was
> >> a poor building worker
> >> and leaned. educated to be
> >> a decent structural engineer
> >> and spent the rest of his life
> >> to study physics !!~
> >> not to be a book merchant in a fish market
> >> ===>
> >> TIA
> >> Eng
> >> Y.Porat
> >> =================>
> >>
> >> ==>
> >>
> >
> >> but you idiot parrot shameless crock
> >> at our time
> >> scientists should be a bit more cleaver and
> >> not least
> >>
> >> HONEST !!!
> > ===============
> > and now I recall something much more important and revolutionary !!
> >
> >
> > ALL THOSE FORCE LINES HATR WE SEE TANGIBLY SEE-
> > IN THAT FARADAY EXPERIMENT
> > =============================ARE SURELY NOT DONE
> > ''CURVED SPACE TIME !!!!!!
>
> Nobody has ever said they were. No one.
==========================
dirty liar !!
the common 'understanding ''is
that'' curved space ''
is what is ''curving it
or even worse
''IT IS DON ''BY ITSELF'' Automatically
OR
GOG and Einstein and f en parrots liars like you
'''know how it is done'' !!!
> > =================================
> > and if so
> > what is making them instead ??!!!!!!!!!
>
> They are field lines. A field has a strength and direction at every place
> in space.
======================
why!!!!and how ?!!!! should your magic word field
should know and do it ???!!
are we in the jungle with voodoo physics ???
===
If you drop a sliver of iron
--
what is a sliver of iron ???!!!
in that field, it will tend to
> orient so that the sliver’s long axis points in the direction of the field,
==??
and how is that field look like
why not straight lines
why curved lines ??
after all that curved lines IS THE MAIN POINT WE DEAL WITH
-
why curved and not straight lines as the simplest alternative ??
after all that is actually
the
to be or not to be''' question !!!
and you hide it 'under the carpet
by bubbling WORDS !!!
=
> because (it’s easy to show) the energy is lower in that orientation.
===
why should that energy be lower-
\''IN THAT DIEDTION ??
do you think you discuss with little children here ??
>
> > what is your guess about it ??
>
> This is not a guess. Only those who are uneducated about this would have to
> guess.
---
??what to guess ??
who is guessing ??
me or you crock crock
indeed
many of innovations start with a guess
the question is
which is what is more widely can explain (''works''')
and even more simply work !!and explain more
more facts phenomenon
one of the examinations should be
simplicity ''
are you able agree with ti
ie
simpler has a better chance to be right
and I would adds to it
the less mathematics ricks
the better
physics
is not just mathematics !!
if you see curved force lines
the simplest is to assume
'that is how it ''was born ''
and not because some
unseen magician vuddoo is standing behind
''and do' it
that is
''how it was born
and because
it is beyond our direct sight ability
to look for the simplest
'that is how it was born ''
provided it enables us to
go further and quicker !!
=
my y circlon mechanism''
enables me to explain
why
a particle can do all the folowings at the same time
as I indicated in my new thread:
solving the enigma of a particle
can do all the following even contradictory' facts''
the simplest way !!!
see that new thread of mine
TIA
Y.Porat
=======
don't tell me about your f em education crock education
>
> > ==
> > TIA
> > Y.P
> > ==============================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-12 13:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <q3uh6g$917$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #726851 |
<poraty6@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 7:24:45 PM UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> <poraty6@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 10:01:26 AM UTC+2, por...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 2:59:36 AM UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>> <poraty6@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sunday, February 10, 2019 at 6:06:24 PM UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>>> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Odd
>>>>>>>> What charged
>>>>>>>> radiations that travel in circles are you imagining going between them?
>>>>>>>> You have apparently never seen flux lines.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> First of all flux lines are not circular.
>>>>>>> Secondly, they are not the paths of any radiations, let alone charged ones.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What drugs are you on?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I ve already told you what flux lines are and it seems to have drifted out
>>>>>>> of your mind already.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I m not surprised.
>>>>>>>> Let me compare them to something you HAVE seen: tree rings. Perhaps
>>>>>>>> you ve noticed those lines in the wood when you re sanding? I ll bet
>>>>>>>> you ve never wondered about them. See how they go round and round? That s
>>>>>>>> like how charge works, Odd!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tree rings are like geological strata you see when you see an outcropping
>>>>>>> of sedimentary rock, John. It s also like the layers of nacre in an oyster
>>>>>>> shell. That s an artifact of accumulation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How you can look at two things that have vaguely similar shape and conclude
>>>>>>> that they stem from the same root cause is truly weird, John.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Try to pay attention next time you re making a wooden block.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How about you try to learn some basic physics before discussing it, so you
>>>>>>> don t just emit a stream of idiotic babble?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>>>>>> =============================how about Mr pompous crock parrot
>>>>>> that you will learn about something new
>>>>>>
>>>>>> see the force lines
>>>>>> at the Faraday experiment with the permanent magnet!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Y.Porat
>>>>>> =======================> > >
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes I know. That is several hundred years old. Where have you been that you
>>>>> think this is novel?
>>>>> The lines of force are not the path of any particles. Not even Faraday
>>>>> thought they were.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>>>> -------------------
>>>> (:-)
>>>>
>>>> Faraday at his time
>>>>
>>>> COULD NOT UNDERSTND WAHT HE SAW AND FOUND !!
>>>> (wile be invented the first dynamo
>>>> even he could not understand
>>>> what is ''under his hands'
>>>> there is a story about him:
>>>> that after he invented it and it was physically in his hand
>>>> he was brought before the quin (Viktoria ??)
>>>> to present his machine
>>>> the quin asked him a cleaver question
>>>> ''what can be the** use of your invention ??
>>>> Faraday answered an answer (that brings me a shiver at my back) your
>>>> back cannot do it :..
>>>> faraday answer the quin
>>>>
>>>> I AM NOT SURE- BUT MAY BE IT CAM BE TAXED '!!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> even now I get a shiver a my back
>>>> can you Bodkin understand why
>>>> even now
>>>> I get a shiver at my back ''
>>>> while I talk about it "
>>>> how divine(( modest* and innocent can be
>>>> such giant human being
>>>> like faraday can be a human being
>>>> at our days -
>>>> you cant find another giant as
>>>> that sun Of a poor blacksmith
>>>> called
>>>> MICHEL FARADAY &.
>>>> he could not understand wahr he found in his ingenious experiment
>>>> with a permanent magnet
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> BUT WE ???
>>>> AT OUR TIMES
>>>> CANNOT UNDRETASNDND that what he saw
>>>> in his experiment
>>>> IS A REVOLUSION IN OUR NEW PHYSICS !!
>>>>
>>>> not idiotic curved space
>>>> but
>>>> unknown force lines don an unknown
>>>>
>>>> VERY BASIC PARTICLE SOURCING FROM ***MASS**!!
>>>> and if so
>>>> =====================================================> MASS IS THE
>>>> CREATOER OF ALLFORCES INCLUDING GRAVITY !!!
>>>> ======================================================
>>>> at this case
>>>> found by another poor father of a sun
>>>> that was
>>>> a poor building worker
>>>> and leaned. educated to be
>>>> a decent structural engineer
>>>> and spent the rest of his life
>>>> to study physics !!~
>>>> not to be a book merchant in a fish market
>>>> ===>
>>>> TIA
>>>> Eng
>>>> Y.Porat
>>>> =================>
>>>>
>>>> ==>
>>>>
>>>
>>>> but you idiot parrot shameless crock
>>>> at our time
>>>> scientists should be a bit more cleaver and
>>>> not least
>>>>
>>>> HONEST !!!
>>> ==============> > and now I recall something much more important and revolutionary !!
>>>
>>>
>>> ALL THOSE FORCE LINES HATR WE SEE TANGIBLY SEE-
>>> IN THAT FARADAY EXPERIMENT
>>> =============================ARE SURELY NOT DONE
>>> ''CURVED SPACE TIME !!!!!!
>>
>> Nobody has ever said they were. No one.
> =========================dirty liar !!
> the common 'understanding ''is
> that'' curved space ''
> is what is ''curving it
> or even worse
No. Curved space is NOT and never has been lifted up as the cause of those
field lines. You are imagining things.
>
> ''IT IS DON ''BY ITSELF'' Automatically
> OR
> GOG and Einstein and f en parrots liars like you
> '''know how it is done'' !!!
>>> ================================> > and if so
>>> what is making them instead ??!!!!!!!!!
>>
>> They are field lines. A field has a strength and direction at every place
>> in space.
>
> =====================why!!!!and how ?!!!! should your magic word field
> should know and do it ???!!
Fields are not magical. They’ve been known about for two centuries. What do
you find magical about them?
> are we in the jungle with voodoo physics ???
> ==If you drop a sliver of iron
> --
> what is a sliver of iron ???!!!
An iron filing. A tiny, needle-shaped piece of iron.
>
>
> in that field, it will tend to
>> orient so that the slivers long axis points in the direction of the field,
>
> ==??
>
> and how is that field look like
> why not straight lines
> why curved lines ??
It’s a dipole field. You get the same shape in an electric field around a
charged dipole. If you don’t know what a dipole is, I could point to a
figure in a freshman physics book for you.
> after all that curved lines IS THE MAIN POINT WE DEAL WITH
> -
> why curved and not straight lines as the simplest alternative ??
They are curved because they are the vector sum of the field contributions
from both poles in the dipole. It’s easy to make that map, drawing the
straight lines from each pole in the dipole, adding up the vectors at each
point in space and drawing the sum vector. Every beginning physics student
does this. I guess you never had that exercise.
> after all that is actually
> the
> to be or not to be''' question !!!
> and you hide it 'under the carpet
> by bubbling WORDS !!!
>
>
>> because (its easy to show) the energy is lower in that orientation.
> ==why should that energy be lower-
> \''IN THAT DIEDTION ??
It’s a straightforward calculation. I guess you’ve never had the chance to
do that. Why are you asking BASIC questions that all freshman students do?
> do you think you discuss with little children here ??
Well, I guess I’m discussing things you should know from a first course in
physics.
>
>
>>
>>> what is your guess about it ??
>>
>> This is not a guess. Only those who are uneducated about this would have to
>> guess.
> ---
> ??what to guess ??
> who is guessing ??
>
>
> me or you crock crock
> indeed
> many of innovations start with a guess
> the question is
> which is what is more widely can explain (''works''')
> and even more simply work !!and explain more
> more facts phenomenon
> one of the examinations should be
> simplicity ''
> are you able agree with ti
> ie
> simpler has a better chance to be right
>
> and I would adds to it
> the less mathematics ricks
> the better
> physics
> is not just mathematics !!
> if you see curved force lines
>
> the simplest is to assume
> 'that is how it ''was born ''
> and not because some
> unseen magician vuddoo
Fields are not magic. They are not voodoo. Are you afraid of them that you
call them pointless names?
> is standing behind
> ''and do' it
> that is
> ''how it was born
> and because
> it is beyond our direct sight ability
> to look for the simplest
>
> 'that is how it was born ''
> provided it enables us to
> go further and quicker !!
> my y circlon mechanism''
> enables me to explain
> why
> a particle can do all the folowings at the same time
>
> as I indicated in my new thread:
>
> solving the enigma of a particle
> can do all the following even contradictory' facts''
> the simplest way !!!
> see that new thread of mine
>
> TIA
> Y.Porat
> =======
>
> don't tell me about your f em education crock education
Education is useful. Especially basic freshman level physics education.
Which I guess you lack.
>>
>>> =
>>> TIA
>>> Y.P
>>> =============================
>
--
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | poraty6@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-12 08:42 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <66c48e04-5aca-4c2b-90dc-a1a219be8768@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #726851 |
On Tuesday, February 12, 2019 at 9:45:32 AM UTC+2, por...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 7:24:45 PM UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> > <poraty6@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 10:01:26 AM UTC+2, por...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >> On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 2:59:36 AM UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> > >>> <poraty6@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>> On Sunday, February 10, 2019 at 6:06:24 PM UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> > >>>>> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>> Odd
> > >>>>>> What charged
> > >>>>>> radiations that travel in circles are you imagining going between them?
> > >>>>>> You have apparently never seen flux lines.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> First of all flux lines are not circular.
> > >>>>> Secondly, they are not the paths of any radiations, let alone charged ones.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> What drugs are you on?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I ve already told you what flux lines are and it seems to have drifted out
> > >>>>> of your mind already.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> I m not surprised.
> > >>>>>> Let me compare them to something you HAVE seen: tree rings. Perhaps
> > >>>>>> you ve noticed those lines in the wood when you re sanding? I ll bet
> > >>>>>> you ve never wondered about them. See how they go round and round? That s
> > >>>>>> like how charge works, Odd!
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Tree rings are like geological strata you see when you see an outcropping
> > >>>>> of sedimentary rock, John. It s also like the layers of nacre in an oyster
> > >>>>> shell. That s an artifact of accumulation.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> How you can look at two things that have vaguely similar shape and conclude
> > >>>>> that they stem from the same root cause is truly weird, John.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Try to pay attention next time you re making a wooden block.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> How about you try to learn some basic physics before discussing it, so you
> > >>>>> don t just emit a stream of idiotic babble?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> --
> > >>>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> > >>>> =============================how about Mr pompous crock parrot
> > >>>> that you will learn about something new
> > >>>>
> > >>>> see the force lines
> > >>>> at the Faraday experiment with the permanent magnet!!
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Y.Porat
> > >>>> =======================> > >
> > >>>
> > >>> Yes I know. That is several hundred years old. Where have you been that you
> > >>> think this is novel?
> > >>> The lines of force are not the path of any particles. Not even Faraday
> > >>> thought they were.
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> > >> -------------------
> > >> (:-)
> > >>
> > >> Faraday at his time
> > >>
> > >> COULD NOT UNDERSTND WAHT HE SAW AND FOUND !!
> > >> (wile be invented the first dynamo
> > >> even he could not understand
> > >> what is ''under his hands'
> > >> there is a story about him:
> > >> that after he invented it and it was physically in his hand
> > >> he was brought before the quin (Viktoria ??)
> > >> to present his machine
> > >> the quin asked him a cleaver question
> > >> ''what can be the** use of your invention ??
> > >> Faraday answered an answer (that brings me a shiver at my back) your
> > >> back cannot do it :..
> > >> faraday answer the quin
> > >>
> > >> I AM NOT SURE- BUT MAY BE IT CAM BE TAXED '!!
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> even now I get a shiver a my back
> > >> can you Bodkin understand why
> > >> even now
> > >> I get a shiver at my back ''
> > >> while I talk about it "
> > >> how divine(( modest* and innocent can be
> > >> such giant human being
> > >> like faraday can be a human being
> > >> at our days -
> > >> you cant find another giant as
> > >> that sun Of a poor blacksmith
> > >> called
> > >> MICHEL FARADAY &.
> > >> he could not understand wahr he found in his ingenious experiment
> > >> with a permanent magnet
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> BUT WE ???
> > >> AT OUR TIMES
> > >> CANNOT UNDRETASNDND that what he saw
> > >> in his experiment
> > >> IS A REVOLUSION IN OUR NEW PHYSICS !!
> > >>
> > >> not idiotic curved space
> > >> but
> > >> unknown force lines don an unknown
> > >>
> > >> VERY BASIC PARTICLE SOURCING FROM ***MASS**!!
> > >> and if so
> > >> =====================================================> MASS IS THE
> > >> CREATOER OF ALLFORCES INCLUDING GRAVITY !!!
> > >> ======================================================
> > >> at this case
> > >> found by another poor father of a sun
> > >> that was
> > >> a poor building worker
> > >> and leaned. educated to be
> > >> a decent structural engineer
> > >> and spent the rest of his life
> > >> to study physics !!~
> > >> not to be a book merchant in a fish market
> > >> ===>
> > >> TIA
> > >> Eng
> > >> Y.Porat
> > >> =================>
> > >>
> > >> ==>
> > >>
> > >
> > >> but you idiot parrot shameless crock
> > >> at our time
> > >> scientists should be a bit more cleaver and
> > >> not least
> > >>
> > >> HONEST !!!
> > > ===============
> > > and now I recall something much more important and revolutionary !!
> > >
> > >
> > > ALL THOSE FORCE LINES HATR WE SEE TANGIBLY SEE-
> > > IN THAT FARADAY EXPERIMENT
> > > =============================ARE SURELY NOT DONE
> > > ''CURVED SPACE TIME !!!!!!
> >
> > Nobody has ever said they were. No one.
> ==========================
> dirty liar !!
> the common 'understanding ''is
> that'' curved space ''
> is what is ''curving it
> or even worse
>
> ''IT IS DON ''BY ITSELF'' Automatically
> OR
> GOG and Einstein and f en parrots liars like you
> '''know how it is done'' !!!
> > > =================================
> > > and if so
> > > what is making them instead ??!!!!!!!!!
> >
> > They are field lines. A field has a strength and direction at every place
> > in space.
>
> ======================
> why!!!!and how ?!!!! should your magic word field
> should know and do it ???!!
> are we in the jungle with voodoo physics ???
> ===
> If you drop a sliver of iron
> --
> what is a sliver of iron ???!!!
>
>
> in that field, it will tend to
> > orient so that the sliver’s long axis points in the direction of the field,
>
> ==??
>
> and how is that field look like
> why not straight lines
> why curved lines ??
> after all that curved lines IS THE MAIN POINT WE DEAL WITH
> -
> why curved and not straight lines as the simplest alternative ??
> after all that is actually
> the
> to be or not to be''' question !!!
> and you hide it 'under the carpet
> by bubbling WORDS !!!
>
> =
>
> > because (it’s easy to show) the energy is lower in that orientation.
> ===
> why should that energy be lower-
> \''IN THAT DIEDTION ??
> do you think you discuss with little children here ??
>
>
> >
> > > what is your guess about it ??
> >
> > This is not a guess. Only those who are uneducated about this would have to
> > guess.
> ---
> ??what to guess ??
> who is guessing ??
>
>
> me or you crock crock
> indeed
> many of innovations start with a guess
> the question is
> which is what is more widely can explain (''works''')
> and even more simply work !!and explain more
> more facts phenomenon
> one of the examinations should be
> simplicity ''
> are you able agree with ti
> ie
> simpler has a better chance to be right
>
> and I would adds to it
> the less mathematics ricks
> the better
> physics
> is not just mathematics !!
> if you see curved force lines
>
> the simplest is to assume
> 'that is how it ''was born ''
> and not because some
> unseen magician vuddoo is standing behind
> ''and do' it
> that is
> ''how it was born
> and because
> it is beyond our direct sight ability
> to look for the simplest
>
> 'that is how it was born ''
> provided it enables us to
> go further and quicker !!
> =
> my y circlon mechanism''
> enables me to explain
> why
> a particle can do all the folowings at the same time
>
> as I indicated in my new thread:
>
> solving the enigma of a particle
> can do all the following even contradictory' facts''
> the simplest way !!!
> see that new thread of mine
>
> TIA
> Y.Porat
> =======
>
> don't tell me about your f em education crock education
> >
> > > ==
>
> > > TIA
> > > Y.P
> > > ==============================
and another question to parrot anomymous Bodkin
you peep hand waving education
you don't stop waving your handa wit
fields filrlds and again firlds
but did a parrot idiot
like you
asked yourself
=========================================
=what from are those magic fields of yours
---ARE MADE OF ??
========================================
indeed too difficult for a born parrot !!!
===============================================
TIA
Y.P
=============
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-12 19:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <q3v6gd$1fo5$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #726873 |
<poraty6@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 12, 2019 at 9:45:32 AM UTC+2, por...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 7:24:45 PM UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>> <poraty6@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 10:01:26 AM UTC+2, por...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, February 11, 2019 at 2:59:36 AM UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>> <poraty6@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sunday, February 10, 2019 at 6:06:24 PM UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>>>> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Odd
>>>>>>>>> What charged
>>>>>>>>> radiations that travel in circles are you imagining going between them?
>>>>>>>>> You have apparently never seen flux lines.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> First of all flux lines are not circular.
>>>>>>>> Secondly, they are not the paths of any radiations, let alone charged ones.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What drugs are you on?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I ve already told you what flux lines are and it seems to have drifted out
>>>>>>>> of your mind already.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I m not surprised.
>>>>>>>>> Let me compare them to something you HAVE seen: tree rings. Perhaps
>>>>>>>>> you ve noticed those lines in the wood when you re sanding? I ll bet
>>>>>>>>> you ve never wondered about them. See how they go round and round? That s
>>>>>>>>> like how charge works, Odd!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tree rings are like geological strata you see when you see an outcropping
>>>>>>>> of sedimentary rock, John. It s also like the layers of nacre in an oyster
>>>>>>>> shell. That s an artifact of accumulation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How you can look at two things that have vaguely similar shape and conclude
>>>>>>>> that they stem from the same root cause is truly weird, John.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Try to pay attention next time you re making a wooden block.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How about you try to learn some basic physics before discussing it, so you
>>>>>>>> don t just emit a stream of idiotic babble?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>>>>>>> =============================how about Mr pompous crock parrot
>>>>>>> that you will learn about something new
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> see the force lines
>>>>>>> at the Faraday experiment with the permanent magnet!!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Y.Porat
>>>>>>> =======================> > >
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes I know. That is several hundred years old. Where have you been that you
>>>>>> think this is novel?
>>>>>> The lines of force are not the path of any particles. Not even Faraday
>>>>>> thought they were.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>>>>> -------------------
>>>>> (:-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Faraday at his time
>>>>>
>>>>> COULD NOT UNDERSTND WAHT HE SAW AND FOUND !!
>>>>> (wile be invented the first dynamo
>>>>> even he could not understand
>>>>> what is ''under his hands'
>>>>> there is a story about him:
>>>>> that after he invented it and it was physically in his hand
>>>>> he was brought before the quin (Viktoria ??)
>>>>> to present his machine
>>>>> the quin asked him a cleaver question
>>>>> ''what can be the** use of your invention ??
>>>>> Faraday answered an answer (that brings me a shiver at my back) your
>>>>> back cannot do it :..
>>>>> faraday answer the quin
>>>>>
>>>>> I AM NOT SURE- BUT MAY BE IT CAM BE TAXED '!!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> even now I get a shiver a my back
>>>>> can you Bodkin understand why
>>>>> even now
>>>>> I get a shiver at my back ''
>>>>> while I talk about it "
>>>>> how divine(( modest* and innocent can be
>>>>> such giant human being
>>>>> like faraday can be a human being
>>>>> at our days -
>>>>> you cant find another giant as
>>>>> that sun Of a poor blacksmith
>>>>> called
>>>>> MICHEL FARADAY &.
>>>>> he could not understand wahr he found in his ingenious experiment
>>>>> with a permanent magnet
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> BUT WE ???
>>>>> AT OUR TIMES
>>>>> CANNOT UNDRETASNDND that what he saw
>>>>> in his experiment
>>>>> IS A REVOLUSION IN OUR NEW PHYSICS !!
>>>>>
>>>>> not idiotic curved space
>>>>> but
>>>>> unknown force lines don an unknown
>>>>>
>>>>> VERY BASIC PARTICLE SOURCING FROM ***MASS**!!
>>>>> and if so
>>>>> =====================================================> MASS IS THE
>>>>> CREATOER OF ALLFORCES INCLUDING GRAVITY !!!
>>>>> ======================================================
>>>>> at this case
>>>>> found by another poor father of a sun
>>>>> that was
>>>>> a poor building worker
>>>>> and leaned. educated to be
>>>>> a decent structural engineer
>>>>> and spent the rest of his life
>>>>> to study physics !!~
>>>>> not to be a book merchant in a fish market
>>>>> ===>
>>>>> TIA
>>>>> Eng
>>>>> Y.Porat
>>>>> =================>
>>>>>
>>>>> ==>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> but you idiot parrot shameless crock
>>>>> at our time
>>>>> scientists should be a bit more cleaver and
>>>>> not least
>>>>>
>>>>> HONEST !!!
>>>> ==============> > > and now I recall something much more important
>>>> and revolutionary !!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ALL THOSE FORCE LINES HATR WE SEE TANGIBLY SEE-
>>>> IN THAT FARADAY EXPERIMENT
>>>> =============================ARE SURELY NOT DONE
>>>> ''CURVED SPACE TIME !!!!!!
>>>
>>> Nobody has ever said they were. No one.
>> =========================> dirty liar !!
>> the common 'understanding ''is
>> that'' curved space ''
>> is what is ''curving it
>> or even worse
>>
>> ''IT IS DON ''BY ITSELF'' Automatically
>> OR
>> GOG and Einstein and f en parrots liars like you
>> '''know how it is done'' !!!
>>>> ================================> > > and if so
>>>> what is making them instead ??!!!!!!!!!
>>>
>>> They are field lines. A field has a strength and direction at every place
>>> in space.
>>
>> =====================> why!!!!and how ?!!!! should your magic word field
>> should know and do it ???!!
>> are we in the jungle with voodoo physics ???
>> ==> If you drop a sliver of iron
>> --
>> what is a sliver of iron ???!!!
>>
>>
>> in that field, it will tend to
>>> orient so that the slivers long axis points in the direction of the field,
>>
>> ==??
>>
>> and how is that field look like
>> why not straight lines
>> why curved lines ??
>> after all that curved lines IS THE MAIN POINT WE DEAL WITH
>> -
>> why curved and not straight lines as the simplest alternative ??
>> after all that is actually
>> the
>> to be or not to be''' question !!!
>> and you hide it 'under the carpet
>> by bubbling WORDS !!!
>>
>>>
>>> because (its easy to show) the energy is lower in that orientation.
>> ==> why should that energy be lower-
>> \''IN THAT DIEDTION ??
>> do you think you discuss with little children here ??
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> what is your guess about it ??
>>>
>>> This is not a guess. Only those who are uneducated about this would have to
>>> guess.
>> ---
>> ??what to guess ??
>> who is guessing ??
>>
>>
>> me or you crock crock
>> indeed
>> many of innovations start with a guess
>> the question is
>> which is what is more widely can explain (''works''')
>> and even more simply work !!and explain more
>> more facts phenomenon
>> one of the examinations should be
>> simplicity ''
>> are you able agree with ti
>> ie
>> simpler has a better chance to be right
>>
>> and I would adds to it
>> the less mathematics ricks
>> the better
>> physics
>> is not just mathematics !!
>> if you see curved force lines
>>
>> the simplest is to assume
>> 'that is how it ''was born ''
>> and not because some
>> unseen magician vuddoo is standing behind
>> ''and do' it
>> that is
>> ''how it was born
>> and because
>> it is beyond our direct sight ability
>> to look for the simplest
>>
>> 'that is how it was born ''
>> provided it enables us to
>> go further and quicker !!
>>> my y circlon mechanism''
>> enables me to explain
>> why
>> a particle can do all the folowings at the same time
>>
>> as I indicated in my new thread:
>>
>> solving the enigma of a particle
>> can do all the following even contradictory' facts''
>> the simplest way !!!
>> see that new thread of mine
>>
>> TIA
>> Y.Porat
>> =======
>>
>> don't tell me about your f em education crock education
>>>
>>>> =>
>>>> TIA
>>>> Y.P
>>>> =============================and another question to parrot anomymous Bodkin
>
> you peep hand waving education
> you don't stop waving your handa wit
> fields filrlds and again firlds
> but did a parrot idiot
> like you
> asked yourself
> =========================================
> =what from are those magic fields of yours
> ---ARE MADE OF ??
You mean, like what kind of material?
What makes you think fields have to be made of some material stuff?
What do you think light is made of?
> =======================================indeed too difficult for a born parrot !!!
> ==============================================
> TIA
> Y.P
> ============
>
>
>
>
>
--
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-12 12:30 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <31e95803-d5b9-497e-913f-79e87838a301@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #726905 |
Odd “You mean, like what kind of material? What makes you think fields have to be made of some material stuff? ” Your fields are made of pure magic, Odd.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Serg Io <invvalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-12 14:59 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <q3vc37$b38$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #726914 |
On 2/12/2019 2:30 PM, john wrote: > Odd > “You mean, like what kind of material? > What makes you think fields have to be made of some material stuff? ” > Your fields are made of pure magic, Odd. > you can measure a gravitational field, a magnetic field, and electrostatic field, magnitude and direction. But we can't measure really small values. I think the argument of "field" being there or not, is due to the different meanings of a field. sometimes it is only a mathematical construct, nothing there. is a magnetic field composed of real stuff, or just a vector field that can be measured ?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mitchrae3323@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-12 13:07 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a8b2776c-5154-4103-ba38-0c0ca2b68e51@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #726920 |
On Tuesday, February 12, 2019 at 12:59:25 PM UTC-8, Serg Io wrote: > On 2/12/2019 2:30 PM, john wrote: > > Odd > > “You mean, like what kind of material? > > What makes you think fields have to be made of some material stuff? ” > > Your fields are made of pure magic, Odd. > > > > you can measure a gravitational field, a magnetic field, and > electrostatic field, magnitude and direction. But we can't measure > really small values. When do we measure gravity... in freefall or when there is weight? No. God creates gravity. Mitchell Raemsch > I think the argument of "field" being there or not, is due to the > different meanings of a field. > > sometimes it is only a mathematical construct, nothing there. > > is a magnetic field composed of real stuff, or just a vector field that > can be measured ?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-12 13:23 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a66b6d6c-3c87-498d-9523-b1e2466f6a26@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #726920 |
See gio “is a magnetic field composed of real stuff, or just a vector field that can be measured ? ” I have answered this. Ask Odd- he’ll answer, won’t you Odd?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mitchrae3323@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-12 13:35 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <78f41b9d-b918-423c-8c95-57a703d02dac@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #726925 |
On Tuesday, February 12, 2019 at 1:24:00 PM UTC-8, john wrote: > See gio > “is a magnetic field composed of real stuff, or just a vector field that > can be measured ? ” > I have answered this. > Ask Odd- he’ll answer, won’t you Odd? You have answers? I don't think so. On Earth we are in the Solar field... How do we measure that gravity that we participate in? God creates gravity. Mitchell Raemsch
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-12 14:41 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <6ae6fa5c-c78f-4bc3-bcec-83c92840c810@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #726929 |
On Tuesday, February 12, 2019 at 4:35:31 PM UTC-5, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > On Tuesday, February 12, 2019 at 1:24:00 PM UTC-8, john wrote: > > See gio > > “is a magnetic field composed of real stuff, or just a vector field that > > can be measured ? ” > > I have answered this. > > Ask Odd- he’ll answer, won’t you Odd? > > You have answers? > I don't think so. > On Earth we are in the Solar field... > How do we measure that gravity that > we participate in? We simply throw you down the stairs. > God creates gravity. And she's buying a stairway to heaven. Led Zeppelin. No escalator, no elevator, no ladder, ... just a stairway. > Mitchell Raemsch -- Mahipal “IPMM... माहिपाल ७६३८: d(me) != 0 ... me alwa(y)s changes...”
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-12 23:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <q3vjrv$1ebk$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #726925 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > See gio > “is a magnetic field composed of real stuff, or just a vector field that > can be measured ? ” > I have answered this. > Ask Odd- he’ll answer, won’t you Odd? > I don’t even know what either of you means by “real stuff”. You mean matter? How can anyone answer whether a field is made of real stuff if you can’t put your finger on what you mean by real stuff? What do you believe is the kind of stuff that light is made of? -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-12 15:41 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a7df95da-35c8-4184-b92c-a6d5be1423fc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #726946 |
Odd “I don’t even know what either of you means by “real stuff”. ” You don’t really have any clues, Odd. You don’t think
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-12 16:19 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <f5856ed2-72c0-4c69-a822-551c50f4e005@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #726952 |
Odd “Nothing magic about them. What do you find about their properties and traits that seems impossible to you? ” What do you understand a field to be? :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-13 03:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <q401fb$18lv$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #726955 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > Odd > “Nothing magic about them. What do you find about their properties and > traits that seems impossible to you? ” > > What do you understand a field to be? > :) > Answer my question with something other than a question. -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-12 20:01 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <99b6194f-e1c7-4cf2-8ded-a3e28aea175d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #726955 |
Odd “Nothing magic about them. What do you find about their properties and traits that seems impossible to you? ” ” A ‘field’ is a MEASUREMENT of certain values or effects in one art of Space. It is not a thing in and of itself. You do not seem to be able to process that. I have no idea why not. It has been explained to you time and time again
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-13 06:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <q40cka$sdr$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #726977 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >Odd >"Nothing magic about them. What do you find about their properties and >traits that seems impossible to you? " Describing fields an such as "magic" isn't productive. Fields are simply some effect that has a value that exists everywhere over its domain, or all of spacetime. The easiest to understand is a weather map, which has a temperature and wind speed for everywhere in the map. The temperature field is scalar, there is just a number (temperature) for every point. The wind speed is a vector field, there is a speed and direction for every point. >A 'field' is a MEASUREMENT of certain values or effects in one art of Space. No, the field is the effect itself, over some domain (or everywhere). (Do you consider the reading on a voltmeter to be voltage? Do you consider reading a thermometer to be temperature?) >It is not a thing in and of itself. It is a property over some region of space/spacetime. Force on charges from other charges/radiation. Force on mass from other masses (Newtonian view). Temperature on a weather map. >You do not seem to be able to process that. >I have no idea why not. >It has been explained to you time and time again Making up your own definitions is counterproductive, unless your goal is creation of word salad. You need to learn how science uses the words it does, rather than inventing your own definitions for terms you don't understand or believe in.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web