Prev: THIS IS WHAT CARL SAGAN LEARNED ABOUT HINDU PRINCIPLES
Next: PNAC of course said it "wanted" the 9/11 attacks"
From: PD on 28 Jun 2010 14:38
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.

>
> 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 -

From: guskz on 29 Jun 2010 01:20
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.

It just records the energy (Luminosity) that occurs per unit of time,
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.



>
>
> > 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 -
>
>

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
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: THIS IS WHAT CARL SAGAN LEARNED ABOUT HINDU PRINCIPLES
Next: PNAC of course said it "wanted" the 9/11 attacks"