Aunt Al plays pool with LHC's proton collider
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: De Walls shows, all forces come from charge
Next: Centre of mass inertial framesy are the unique ones in 1905 Relativity
From: PD on 29 Jun 2010 09:10 On Jun 29, 12:20 am, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 28, 2:38 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 26, 5:34 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 26, 10:08 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jun 25, 8:48 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jun 25, 11:52 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 25, 5:32 am, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Some important formulas show it's impossible for cosmic rays to > > > > > > > produce 10^20 eV. > > > > > > > A formula is useless if it "proves" something cannot exist that has > > > > > > been observed directly to exist. > > > > > > #1. That or the observation is incorrect. > > > > > It's independently confirmed. What now? > > > > Not really, if so then what is an electron cloud, since it's much > > > bigger than an electron, then what is it? > > > > How can they tell how many electrons in a cloud if they can't tell > > > it's an electron in orbit? > > > > From what I read they can't really detect particles...just mass and > > > velocity by radiation deviation and momentum. > > > > Show me how their detectors determined the mass of a cosmic ray that > > > produces 10^20 eV, you don't know how, and now you are precipitating > > > to find how. > > > Try googling High Resolution Fly's Eye Detector. > > Well you ran nicely, and it is exactly how I said they do it: > > > From what I read they can't really detect particles...just mass and > > > velocity by radiation deviation and momentum. > > The cetector cannot decipher if one or more particles are hitting it's > detector simultaneously. That's not correct. > > It just records the energy (Luminosity) that occurs per unit of time, Luminosity is not deposition of energy. Try again. > all it knows is that's it's the highest light energy per unit of time > from a collision ever recorded by a camera. > > Further more it defies the most dominant rule: > > Which is they need to go high up to record the higher energies cause > that's where the PRIMARY collisions occur. The Fly's eye is much > lower. > > Go back to school PD or should I say to your internet. Would you like journal articles to read instead? > > > > > > > > Strange how you need the internet to convey your claim. > > > > > > #2. A brain is useless is it "proves" it cannot understand what is > > > > > also written below here@! > > > > > > > >..Hawking's formula shows it's impossible for Aunt Al > > > > > > > & LHC to produce a black hole. > > > > > > > > 10^17 eV cosmic ray simulation produces 14 TeV particles. > > > > > > > > In pool, a cue ball collision can cause three or more balls to stick > > > > > > > together as they move forward...thus generating a higher kinetic > > > > > > > energy. ....but in no way do these 3 pool balls occupy the space thus > > > > > > > density of one ball, likewise for 10^20 eV to produce a black hole.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: guskz on 29 Jun 2010 21:43 On Jun 29, 9:10 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 29, 12:20 am, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jun 28, 2:38 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 26, 5:34 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jun 26, 10:08 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jun 25, 8:48 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 25, 11:52 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Jun 25, 5:32 am, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Some important formulas show it's impossible for cosmic rays to > > > > > > > > produce 10^20 eV. > > > > > > > > A formula is useless if it "proves" something cannot exist that has > > > > > > > been observed directly to exist. > > > > > > > #1. That or the observation is incorrect. > > > > > > It's independently confirmed. What now? > > > > > Not really, if so then what is an electron cloud, since it's much > > > > bigger than an electron, then what is it? > > > > > How can they tell how many electrons in a cloud if they can't tell > > > > it's an electron in orbit? > > > > > From what I read they can't really detect particles...just mass and > > > > velocity by radiation deviation and momentum. > > > > > Show me how their detectors determined the mass of a cosmic ray that > > > > produces 10^20 eV, you don't know how, and now you are precipitating > > > > to find how. > > > > Try googling High Resolution Fly's Eye Detector. > > > Well you ran nicely, and it is exactly how I said they do it: > > > > From what I read they can't really detect particles...just mass and > > > > velocity by radiation deviation and momentum. > > > The cetector cannot decipher if one or more particles are hitting it's > > detector simultaneously. > > That's not correct. > You are correcting me? I know & "understand" how it works, how about you tell everyone in two sentences how it works. And in your own words, any idiot can copy and paste. Uh oh! > > > It just records the energy (Luminosity) that occurs per unit of time, > > Luminosity is not deposition of energy. Try again. You're an idiot, otherwise you wouldn't be saying that, brightness recorded tells you the entire luminosity, thus energy of a collision. If not an idiot, then a TROLL. > > > all it knows is that's it's the highest light energy per unit of time > > from a collision ever recorded by a camera. > > > Further more it defies the most dominant rule: > > > Which is they need to go high up to record the higher energies cause > > that's where the PRIMARY collisions occur. The Fly's eye is much > > lower. > > > Go back to school PD or should I say to your internet. > > Would you like journal articles to read instead? > > > > > > > Strange how you need the internet to convey your claim. > > > > > > > #2. A brain is useless is it "proves" it cannot understand what is > > > > > > also written below here@! > > > > > > > > >..Hawking's formula shows it's impossible for Aunt Al > > > > > > > > & LHC to produce a black hole. > > > > > > > > > 10^17 eV cosmic ray simulation produces 14 TeV particles. > > > > > > > > > In pool, a cue ball collision can cause three or more balls to stick > > > > > > > > together as they move forward...thus generating a higher kinetic > > > > > > > > energy. ....but in no way do these 3 pool balls occupy the space thus > > > > > > > > density of one ball, likewise for 10^20 eV to produce a black hole.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > >
From: BURT on 29 Jun 2010 22:14 On Jun 29, 6:43 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 29, 9:10 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 29, 12:20 am, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 28, 2:38 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jun 26, 5:34 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jun 26, 10:08 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 25, 8:48 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Jun 25, 11:52 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Jun 25, 5:32 am, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Some important formulas show it's impossible for cosmic rays to > > > > > > > > > produce 10^20 eV. > > > > > > > > > A formula is useless if it "proves" something cannot exist that has > > > > > > > > been observed directly to exist. > > > > > > > > #1. That or the observation is incorrect. > > > > > > > It's independently confirmed. What now? > > > > > > Not really, if so then what is an electron cloud, since it's much > > > > > bigger than an electron, then what is it? > > > > > > How can they tell how many electrons in a cloud if they can't tell > > > > > it's an electron in orbit? > > > > > > From what I read they can't really detect particles...just mass and > > > > > velocity by radiation deviation and momentum. > > > > > > Show me how their detectors determined the mass of a cosmic ray that > > > > > produces 10^20 eV, you don't know how, and now you are precipitating > > > > > to find how. > > > > > Try googling High Resolution Fly's Eye Detector. > > > > Well you ran nicely, and it is exactly how I said they do it: > > > > > From what I read they can't really detect particles...just mass and > > > > > velocity by radiation deviation and momentum. > > > > The cetector cannot decipher if one or more particles are hitting it's > > > detector simultaneously. > > > That's not correct. > > You are correcting me? > > I know & "understand" how it works, how about you tell everyone in two > sentences how it works. And in your own words, any idiot can copy and > paste. > > Uh oh! > > > > > > It just records the energy (Luminosity) that occurs per unit of time, > > > Luminosity is not deposition of energy. Try again. > > You're an idiot, otherwise you wouldn't be saying that, brightness > recorded tells you the entire luminosity, thus energy of a collision. > > If not an idiot, then a TROLL. > > > > > > > > all it knows is that's it's the highest light energy per unit of time > > > from a collision ever recorded by a camera. > > > > Further more it defies the most dominant rule: > > > > Which is they need to go high up to record the higher energies cause > > > that's where the PRIMARY collisions occur. The Fly's eye is much > > > lower. > > > > Go back to school PD or should I say to your internet. > > > Would you like journal articles to read instead? > > > > > > Strange how you need the internet to convey your claim. > > > > > > > > #2. A brain is useless is it "proves" it cannot understand what is > > > > > > > also written below here@! > > > > > > > > > >..Hawking's formula shows it's impossible for Aunt Al > > > > > > > > > & LHC to produce a black hole. > > > > > > > > > > 10^17 eV cosmic ray simulation produces 14 TeV particles. > > > > > > > > > > In pool, a cue ball collision can cause three or more balls to stick > > > > > > > > > together as they move forward...thus generating a higher kinetic > > > > > > > > > energy. ....but in no way do these 3 pool balls occupy the space thus > > > > > > > > > density of one ball, likewise for 10^20 eV to produce a black hole.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Anti matter would never make it intact through the atmosphere let alone find itself in a matter container like a PET. Mitch Raemsch
From: PD on 30 Jun 2010 12:12 On Jun 29, 8:43 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 29, 9:10 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 29, 12:20 am, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 28, 2:38 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jun 26, 5:34 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jun 26, 10:08 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 25, 8:48 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Jun 25, 11:52 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Jun 25, 5:32 am, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Some important formulas show it's impossible for cosmic rays to > > > > > > > > > produce 10^20 eV. > > > > > > > > > A formula is useless if it "proves" something cannot exist that has > > > > > > > > been observed directly to exist. > > > > > > > > #1. That or the observation is incorrect. > > > > > > > It's independently confirmed. What now? > > > > > > Not really, if so then what is an electron cloud, since it's much > > > > > bigger than an electron, then what is it? > > > > > > How can they tell how many electrons in a cloud if they can't tell > > > > > it's an electron in orbit? > > > > > > From what I read they can't really detect particles...just mass and > > > > > velocity by radiation deviation and momentum. > > > > > > Show me how their detectors determined the mass of a cosmic ray that > > > > > produces 10^20 eV, you don't know how, and now you are precipitating > > > > > to find how. > > > > > Try googling High Resolution Fly's Eye Detector. > > > > Well you ran nicely, and it is exactly how I said they do it: > > > > > From what I read they can't really detect particles...just mass and > > > > > velocity by radiation deviation and momentum. > > > > The cetector cannot decipher if one or more particles are hitting it's > > > detector simultaneously. > > > That's not correct. > > You are correcting me? Yes. You are wrong. > > I know & "understand" how it works, how about you tell everyone in two > sentences how it works. And in your own words, any idiot can copy and > paste. > > Uh oh! > > > > > > It just records the energy (Luminosity) that occurs per unit of time, > > > Luminosity is not deposition of energy. Try again. > > You're an idiot, otherwise you wouldn't be saying that, brightness > recorded tells you the entire luminosity, thus energy of a collision. Not in particle collisions. Try again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminosity#In_scattering_theory_and_accelerator_physics > > If not an idiot, then a TROLL. > > > > > > > > all it knows is that's it's the highest light energy per unit of time > > > from a collision ever recorded by a camera. > > > > Further more it defies the most dominant rule: > > > > Which is they need to go high up to record the higher energies cause > > > that's where the PRIMARY collisions occur. The Fly's eye is much > > > lower. > > > > Go back to school PD or should I say to your internet. > > > Would you like journal articles to read instead? > > > > > > Strange how you need the internet to convey your claim. > > > > > > > > #2. A brain is useless is it "proves" it cannot understand what is > > > > > > > also written below here@! > > > > > > > > > >..Hawking's formula shows it's impossible for Aunt Al > > > > > > > > > & LHC to produce a black hole. > > > > > > > > > > 10^17 eV cosmic ray simulation produces 14 TeV particles. > > > > > > > > > > In pool, a cue ball collision can cause three or more balls to stick > > > > > > > > > together as they move forward...thus generating a higher kinetic > > > > > > > > > energy. ....but in no way do these 3 pool balls occupy the space thus > > > > > > > > > density of one ball, likewise for 10^20 eV to produce a black hole.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: guskz on 1 Jul 2010 15:56
On Jun 30, 12:12 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 29, 8:43 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jun 29, 9:10 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 29, 12:20 am, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jun 28, 2:38 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jun 26, 5:34 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 26, 10:08 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Jun 25, 8:48 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Jun 25, 11:52 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Jun 25, 5:32 am, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Some important formulas show it's impossible for cosmic rays to > > > > > > > > > > produce 10^20 eV. > > > > > > > > > > A formula is useless if it "proves" something cannot exist that has > > > > > > > > > been observed directly to exist. > > > > > > > > > #1. That or the observation is incorrect. > > > > > > > > It's independently confirmed. What now? > > > > > > > Not really, if so then what is an electron cloud, since it's much > > > > > > bigger than an electron, then what is it? > > > > > > > How can they tell how many electrons in a cloud if they can't tell > > > > > > it's an electron in orbit? > > > > > > > From what I read they can't really detect particles...just mass and > > > > > > velocity by radiation deviation and momentum. > > > > > > > Show me how their detectors determined the mass of a cosmic ray that > > > > > > produces 10^20 eV, you don't know how, and now you are precipitating > > > > > > to find how. > > > > > > Try googling High Resolution Fly's Eye Detector. > > > > > Well you ran nicely, and it is exactly how I said they do it: > > > > > > From what I read they can't really detect particles...just mass and > > > > > > velocity by radiation deviation and momentum. > > > > > The cetector cannot decipher if one or more particles are hitting it's > > > > detector simultaneously. > > > > That's not correct. > > > You are correcting me? > > Yes. You are wrong. > > > > > I know & "understand" how it works, how about you tell everyone in two > > sentences how it works. And in your own words, any idiot can copy and > > paste. > > > Uh oh! > > > > > It just records the energy (Luminosity) that occurs per unit of time, > > > > Luminosity is not deposition of energy. Try again. > > > You're an idiot, otherwise you wouldn't be saying that, brightness > > recorded tells you the entire luminosity, thus energy of a collision. > > Not in particle collisions. Try again.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminosity#In_scattering_theory_and_acce... > > > > > If not an idiot, then a TROLL. > > > > > all it knows is that's it's the highest light energy per unit of time > > > > from a collision ever recorded by a camera. > > > > > Further more it defies the most dominant rule: > > > > > Which is they need to go high up to record the higher energies cause > > > > that's where the PRIMARY collisions occur. The Fly's eye is much > > > > lower. > > > > > Go back to school PD or should I say to your internet. > > > > Would you like journal articles to read instead? > > > > > > > Strange how you need the internet to convey your claim. > > > > > > > > > #2. A brain is useless is it "proves" it cannot understand what is > > > > > > > > also written below here@! > > > > > > > > > > >..Hawking's formula shows it's impossible for Aunt Al > > > > > > > > > > & LHC to produce a black hole. > > > > > > > > > > > 10^17 eV cosmic ray simulation produces 14 TeV particles. > > > > > > > > > > > In pool, a cue ball collision can cause three or more balls to stick > > > > > > > > > > together as they move forward...thus generating a higher kinetic > > > > > > > > > > energy. ....but in no way do these 3 pool balls occupy the space thus > > > > > > > > > > density of one ball, likewise for 10^20 eV to produce a black hole.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > TROLL AWAY YOU & YOUR STUPID THEORY |