Black holes violate laws
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Finding particles and their quantum wave of vibration
Next: Trajectory branching in Liouville space as the source ofirreversibility
From: BURT on 2 Jun 2010 15:13 On Jun 2, 12:04 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 2, 12:51 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 1, 9:40 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 1, 11:10 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jun 1, 8:51 pm, purple <pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: > > > > > > On 6/1/2010 10:39 PM, BURT wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 1, 8:08 pm, purple<pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: > > > > > >> On 6/1/2010 6:26 PM, BURT wrote: > > > > > > >>> You mean bert not me. > > > > > > >> You're both similarly nuts. > > > > > > > I think you have a need to get back at me. > > > > > > That presumes that what you think matters to me. It > > > > > doesn't. > > > > > > > Black holes violate laws. > > > > > > So do you. > > > > > Stop following me around unless you have something to say to me. > > > > > We are not seeing black holes but the extreme of red shift in a > > > > limited strength gravity. > > > > Well, Mitch, people around you don't see you either - they see the > > > photons emitted by your atoms.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Does a photon have a light of its own? > > We have never seen a photon. Only the photoelectric effect which > > doesn't require a particle. The light wave alone can explain it. > > OK, then go with "people around you don't see you either - they see > the photons or waves or both, whichever one is considering given the > particle/wave dual nature of light emitted by your atoms".- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - No. There is no neeed for a particle at absorption. In fact it can be shown to be wrong by asking the right question. Mitch Raemsch
From: BURT on 2 Jun 2010 15:15 On Jun 2, 11:59 am, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 2, 1:48 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 2, 4:23 am, purple <pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: > > > > On 6/1/2010 11:10 PM, BURT wrote: > > > > > On Jun 1, 8:51 pm, purple<pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: > > > >> On 6/1/2010 10:39 PM, BURT wrote: > > > > >>> On Jun 1, 8:08 pm, purple<pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: > > > >>>> On 6/1/2010 6:26 PM, BURT wrote: > > > > >>>>> You mean bert not me. > > > > >>>> You're both similarly nuts. > > > > >>> I think you have a need to get back at me. > > > > >> That presumes that what you think matters to me. It > > > >> doesn't. > > > > >>> Black holes violate laws. > > > > >> So do you. > > > > > Stop following me around unless you have something to say to me. > > > > I've said it before and I'll say it again, you're crazy. And to > > > think anyone would "follow you around" helps exemplify it. > > > > > We are not seeing black holes but the extreme of red shift in a > > > > limited strength gravity. > > > > You have yet to define "limited strength gravity." You have yet to > > > define "black hole." In fact, you have yet to define anything > > > at all. You only blather in generalities and then tell us > > > what a genius you are.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Yes I am a genius. There are only a few. I have been recognised by > > John Nash as a genius personally. > > But John Nash was nutso himself.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - The point is he is a genius recognising me as a genius. He told me so after seeing some of my work in 2006. I am not afraid to say I am a genius and I have been validated by others. Mitch Raemsch
From: purple on 2 Jun 2010 16:05 On 6/2/2010 1:59 PM, Don Stockbauer wrote: > On Jun 2, 1:48 pm, BURT<macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> On Jun 2, 4:23 am, purple<pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> On 6/1/2010 11:10 PM, BURT wrote: >> >>>> On Jun 1, 8:51 pm, purple<pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: >>>>> On 6/1/2010 10:39 PM, BURT wrote: >> >>>>>> On Jun 1, 8:08 pm, purple<pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On 6/1/2010 6:26 PM, BURT wrote: >> >>>>>>>> You mean bert not me. >> >>>>>>> You're both similarly nuts. >> >>>>>> I think you have a need to get back at me. >> >>>>> That presumes that what you think matters to me. It >>>>> doesn't. >> >>>>>> Black holes violate laws. >> >>>>> So do you. >> >>>> Stop following me around unless you have something to say to me. >> >>> I've said it before and I'll say it again, you're crazy. And to >>> think anyone would "follow you around" helps exemplify it. >> >>>> We are not seeing black holes but the extreme of red shift in a >>>> limited strength gravity. >> >>> You have yet to define "limited strength gravity." You have yet to >>> define "black hole." In fact, you have yet to define anything >>> at all. You only blather in generalities and then tell us >>> what a genius you are.- Hide quoted text - >> >>> - Show quoted text - >> >> Yes I am a genius. There are only a few. I have been recognised by >> John Nash as a genius personally. > > But John Nash was nutso himself. The last person who told me he was a genius was 40something, living with and off his parents who had to tell him to brush his teeth and to take a shower. Between those events with his parents he achieved nothing. The measure of a genius is achievement. Neither that 40something guy, nor you, achieved anything so the genius label doesn't belong to either of you. Did you remember to brush your teeth? What was the last time you had a bath or shower? Any time in the past 3 months? Do you have any teeth?
From: purple on 2 Jun 2010 16:06 On 6/2/2010 3:05 PM, purple wrote: > On 6/2/2010 1:59 PM, Don Stockbauer wrote: >> On Jun 2, 1:48 pm, BURT<macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>> On Jun 2, 4:23 am, purple<pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On 6/1/2010 11:10 PM, BURT wrote: >>> >>>>> On Jun 1, 8:51 pm, purple<pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: >>>>>> On 6/1/2010 10:39 PM, BURT wrote: >>> >>>>>>> On Jun 1, 8:08 pm, purple<pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> On 6/1/2010 6:26 PM, BURT wrote: >>> >>>>>>>>> You mean bert not me. >>> >>>>>>>> You're both similarly nuts. >>> >>>>>>> I think you have a need to get back at me. >>> >>>>>> That presumes that what you think matters to me. It >>>>>> doesn't. >>> >>>>>>> Black holes violate laws. >>> >>>>>> So do you. >>> >>>>> Stop following me around unless you have something to say to me. >>> >>>> I've said it before and I'll say it again, you're crazy. And to >>>> think anyone would "follow you around" helps exemplify it. >>> >>>>> We are not seeing black holes but the extreme of red shift in a >>>>> limited strength gravity. >>> >>>> You have yet to define "limited strength gravity." You have yet to >>>> define "black hole." In fact, you have yet to define anything >>>> at all. You only blather in generalities and then tell us >>>> what a genius you are.- Hide quoted text - >>> >>>> - Show quoted text - >>> >>> Yes I am a genius. There are only a few. I have been recognised by >>> John Nash as a genius personally. >> >> But John Nash was nutso himself. > > The last person who told me he was a genius was 40something, living > with and off his parents who had to tell him to brush his teeth and > to take a shower. Between those events with his parents he achieved > nothing. > > The measure of a genius is achievement. Neither that 40something > guy, nor you, achieved anything so the genius label doesn't belong > to either of you. > > Did you remember to brush your teeth? What was the last time you > had a bath or shower? Any time in the past 3 months? > > Do you have any teeth? Don, that was directer at BURT.
From: purple on 2 Jun 2010 16:12
On 6/2/2010 2:15 PM, BURT wrote: > On Jun 2, 11:59 am, Don Stockbauer<donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> On Jun 2, 1:48 pm, BURT<macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Jun 2, 4:23 am, purple<pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: >> >>>> On 6/1/2010 11:10 PM, BURT wrote: >> >>>>> On Jun 1, 8:51 pm, purple<pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: >>>>>> On 6/1/2010 10:39 PM, BURT wrote: >> >>>>>>> On Jun 1, 8:08 pm, purple<pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> On 6/1/2010 6:26 PM, BURT wrote: >> >>>>>>>>> You mean bert not me. >> >>>>>>>> You're both similarly nuts. >> >>>>>>> I think you have a need to get back at me. >> >>>>>> That presumes that what you think matters to me. It >>>>>> doesn't. >> >>>>>>> Black holes violate laws. >> >>>>>> So do you. >> >>>>> Stop following me around unless you have something to say to me. >> >>>> I've said it before and I'll say it again, you're crazy. And to >>>> think anyone would "follow you around" helps exemplify it. >> >>>>> We are not seeing black holes but the extreme of red shift in a >>>>> limited strength gravity. >> >>>> You have yet to define "limited strength gravity." You have yet to >>>> define "black hole." In fact, you have yet to define anything >>>> at all. You only blather in generalities and then tell us >>>> what a genius you are.- Hide quoted text - >> >>>> - Show quoted text - >> >>> Yes I am a genius. There are only a few. I have been recognised by >>> John Nash as a genius personally. >> >> But John Nash was nutso himself.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > The point is he is a genius recognising me as a genius. He told me so > after seeing some of my work in 2006. According to the IP address that you're posting from, you're in Tuscon, Arizona. John Nash is in Princeton, New Jersey. Tell us how it was that he saw your work and told you you're a genius? John is heavily supervised in his daily activities. Is it possible the two of you were roomies at a mental hospital? > I am not afraid to say I am a genius and I have been validated by > others. Bwahahaha. Did they take the strait jacket off you when they "validated" you? Did "validation" have something to do with putting electrodes on your head? |