Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #590124
| From | Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics |
| Subject | Re: Small enough- to be zero? |
| Date | 2016-07-20 16:30 -0500 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <nmoqi4$ajf$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | <e8503c4a-fcb9-4b07-b8ac-efae66bd79cf@googlegroups.com> |
On 7/20/2016 1:11 PM, john wrote:
> Some posters, here, think that
> at small enough scales, there
> are no more particles. Just energy
> of some sort, I suppose.
particles are energy
> I'm guessing these are the same
> ones who deny that organization
> might be found on a Cosmic scale.
what type of organization ?
"might be found " ?
why be concerned on "the same ones who deny" ?
that is obtuse.
> And, probably, the same ones
> who think that Humans are a total fluke
> on our Earth alone, and chances
> of it happening on some other planet
> are nil to none.
the same ones ?
trying to blame a group of people for their beliefs ?
this is the USA
how many planets have liquid water on them that get about 1000 watts per
sq meter from its sun, and has a gravity like earths, 3 to 0.5 as much ?
got anything ?
> And *probably*, also,
> total atheists.
*weasel word*
>
> Hmm. Just trying to see the pattern:
> they're in pattern-denial
patterns are a human construct.
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 11:11 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 13:18 -0500
Re: Small enough- to be zero? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-20 12:57 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-20 16:30 -0500
Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 14:45 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:06 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:16 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:42 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:59 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:58 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 16:32 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-20 18:39 -0500
Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 17:03 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-20 20:06 -0500
Re: Small enough- to be zero? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-21 14:20 +0000
Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 07:51 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 08:25 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-22 16:36 -0400
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-07-22 14:05 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-07-22 14:52 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-21 15:25 +0000
Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 11:25 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-22 00:48 +0000
haxacontaDELTAhedronic noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 13:47 -0700
stab a guess (or an i.s.i.s): hexacontaDELTAhedron a.k.a C_sixty noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 11:52 -0700
stab a guess (or those flamethrowers): hexacontaDELTAhedron a.k.a C_sixty noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 19:27 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-20 20:55 -0400
Re: Small enough- to be zero? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 18:04 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-20 20:37 -0400
Re: Small enough- to be zero? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 07:44 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-22 16:33 -0400
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-20 18:39 -0500
Re: Small enough- to be zero? "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-07-24 02:08 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? "Eduardo J. Berringer" <invalid@example.com> - 2016-07-24 11:21 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-07-24 12:48 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 09:39 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-07-21 15:21 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-22 16:49 -0400
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-07-22 12:04 +1000
Re: Small enough- to be zero? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-21 23:54 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-07-23 11:57 +1000
Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-23 17:01 -0400
Re: Small enough- to be zero? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-07-24 10:52 +1000
Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-23 21:25 -0400
Re: Small enough- to be zero? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-22 18:09 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-23 13:31 -0700
Re: Small enough- to be zero? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-23 17:20 -0400
csiph-web