Prev: * * * Why has this been hidden for so long ? ?
Next: An aether orbit around the Sun
From: Transition Zone on 7 May 2010 10:56
On May 6, 1:15 pm, "Eddie Haskell" <io...(a)ddvtt.com> wrote:
> "Siobhan Medeiros" <sbm2...(a)telus.net> wrote in message
>
> news:586d69e1-15fa-4747-ae47-d9d41e48de81(a)q32g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> On May 5, 11:55 am, Neolibertarian <cognac...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <e10574ad-ef65-455f-a6b3-896cf9b11...(a)i10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
> > Transition Zone <mogu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > The Purple Panther wrote:
>
> > > Global warming poses twice as great a threat to the planet as has so
> > > far been
> > > believed, the world's leading scientists have concluded.
>
> > 1st, you need to check those hard returns.
> > Huh?
>
> > 2nd, there is no global warming disaster. There never was. There never
> > was going to be.
>
> > Hmmm...who should I believe...3000 of the world's top scientists...or
> > some Usenet rightard who hasn't been right once...Hmmmmm.....
>
> And they are "top" because their governments pay them how much to render a
> conclusion that garners them more money and power? Is it that you know that
> the GW scam is a corrupt enterprise and are in on it, or is it that you are
> simply a dumbass? Stupid or evil?
>
> -Eddie Haskell-

HAHAHA, you use the terms 'Stupid' and 'Evil' after GW,

(hard to avoid that, even for repubs).
From: spudnik on 7 May 2010 15:47
so, why do *you* believe that oil companies do not "like"
the Kyoto Protocol and other capNtrade schemes ...
even though several openly support them and GW
("Beyond Petroleum (TM)" e.g.) ??

> HAHAHA, you use the terms 'Stupid' and 'Evil' after GW,

thus:
find Hipparchus' "lunes" proof of the pythagorean theorem
-- if it was not the original proof --
and you'll see that circles are better fro areal mensuration;
generalize to prove the spatial pythagorean theorems
-- there are two of them --
and you'll see that, not only does second-powering
have nothing in particular to with the tetragon, but
also not with a two-dimensional object.

thus:
like I said, dimensional analysis is fine, and
woe to he who ignores it, but it cannot be used
ex post facto to remake a wave-form into a particle. surely,
the wave can impart, at least, internal "momentum"
to the atomic system that is tuned to absorb it. that is,
whatever energy propogates through the *medium*
of space, not a vacuum, is in its effect
upon that medium just as waves in H2O.

so, do not apply "momentum" to the wave, only
as a formalism for the seemingly-aimed "photon"
that was speared by the cone of your eye. so,
you can use other, valid formlisms, like E=hf,
or what ever. otherwise, you get absurdities
like the EPR paradox, and simplistic statements
about the photoelectrical effect.

not to say that a total formalism of rocks o'light
is not possible, and a gravity that is "pushed" by such-like, but
it is probably at present "intractible," even as Huyghens wavelets
are intractible, except for getting a concept of light,
propogating. (photons are massless & cannot propogate
at any speed, because they don't exist, is my feeling, even though
they are the only "zero-D particle" that can "go at c.")

as for wlym.com, folks who pretend to "do the math,"
should know what *mathematica* ("maths") is; if
you "go" to wlym.com, and hit the Fermat button,
and find the Geometrical Fragments pdf,
you''ll find his reconstruction of Euclid's porisms,
whis are quite elementary (and planar).

lastly, here is a thought experiment:
what are those little black & white paddle-wheels,
tht rotate in the sunlight in clear globe?... since
there is no actual vacuum in the globe,
provide an *aerodynamical/thermal* explanation
of the force, after waves of light have been absorbed
by the black pigment in the vanes. thought of that,
yesterday, after more of this chat.

> Get rid of that [M] dimension in the photon equation

thus:
Moon could have supported life, a long time ago (i.e.,
smaller bodies have shorter lives), as is evidences
by the remnants of plate tectonics (maria & highlands).
> >http://www.meteorite.com/meteorite-gallery/meteorites-alpha_frame.htm

thus:
you call that, an explanation,
"photons wedged apart by light rays?"
an interesting relationship between two things
that only exist as mathematics, both representing
"rocks o'light!"

thus:
you are pretending to define "complex 4-vectors,"
but "real" 4-vectors are part of the gross and
unfinished porgramme of Minkowski, to "spatialize" time,
while it is quite obvious that the "time part"
is not symmetrical with the spatial coordinates,
either in 4-vectors or quaternions. anyway,
bi-quaternions would be 8-dimensional or octonions.

and, it is all obfuscation, trying to insist that
a phase-space tells you what time really is;
it's very useful for seeing patterns "in" time though,
as in electronics (although, NB,
electronics is mostly done in "1-1" complex phase-space,
instead of quaternions, as it could be,
for some reason .-)

maybe, all you and polysignosis need to do,
is work the math of quaternions ...
that'll take me wome time, as well. (I mean,
what is the difference in labeling a coordinate axis
with a "different sign" and a different letter,
whether or not negatives are even needed?)

--Light: A History!
http://wlym.com

--Stop Waxman's #2 capNtrade rip-off (unless,
you like gasoline at a dime per drop)
From: tadchem on 15 May 2010 18:12
2 x 0 = 0

Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA
From: Androcles on 15 May 2010 18:15

"tadchem" <tadchem(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
news:c014c4cc-e3c2-4233-af48-bd6b0f0fdd8b(a)z33g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
>2 x 0 = 0
>
> Tom Davidson
> Richmond, VA

Dividing both sides by 0,
2 = 0/0 :-)


First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: * * * Why has this been hidden for so long ? ?
Next: An aether orbit around the Sun