Prev: Daffodils
Next: Proposed experiment for detection of BP's cap&trade in the "financial reform bill."
From: spudnik on 15 Jul 2010 19:12
is the study that you cite unworthy of analysis -- although
there is no discernible paradox with waves of light -- since,
with fullerenes we have a true manifestation
of de Broglie's concerns?

how can you get anything out of this, without actually looking
at the particulars of the experiment -- was it actually carried-out,
according to the authors?

oh, well; have a nice day, anyway, cause I can't waste any more
of my life on this kind of "debate."

> How does a C-60 molecule enter, travel through, and exit multiple
> slits simultaneously without losing momentum?

--the Queen of the sciences!
http://wlym.com

--les ducs d'oil!
http://tarpley.net
From: mpc755 on 15 Jul 2010 19:19
On Jul 15, 7:12 pm, spudnik <Space...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> is the study that you cite unworthy of analysis -- although
> there is no discernible paradox with waves of light -- since,
> with fullerenes we have a true manifestation
> of de Broglie's concerns?
>
> how can you get anything out of this, without actually looking
> at the particulars of the experiment -- was it actually carried-out,
> according to the authors?
>
> oh, well; have a nice day, anyway, cause I can't waste any more
> of my life on this kind of "debate."
>

How does a C-60 molecule enter, travel through, and exit multiple
slits simultaneously without losing momentum?

How does a C-60 molecule travel through the divider without losing
momentum?

It doesn't.

A C-60 molecule travels a single path and always enters and exits a
single slit in a double slit experiment. It is the associated dark
matter displacement wave which enters and exits multiple slits.
From: spudnik on 15 Jul 2010 20:25
uh-huh; thanks for leaving my polemical header.

> It doesn't.

thus:
anyway, this is the sum-total of the Bush and Obama policy
for energy, which should be called, Free-er Trade, although
referred to as Captain Tax by Murdoch's Climategateways,
the WSurinal etc.... surely, it'll work, as apparently Waxman's bill
of '91 worked for acid rain; so, Where's the beef on that?

the OP's citation seems to assume that cap&trade is the way to go,
whereas I have at least two sources that admitted that
good effect could be achieved by an actual, small, accountable tax
on carbon, instead of this "free trade" nostrum, which is already huge
in the USA (CCX and ICE e.g.; tens of bllions in hedging per year,
since 2003 and 2005, repsectively), but dwarfed by the mandatory EU
one.

Waxman's bill, just like his '91 bill, just like Kyoto, presaged
by Montreal, mandatorizes the voluntary system. however,
the main problem is the incoming "reform" bill,
which is a total sop to the derivatives freaks that causes the current
blow-out.

--the Queen of the sciences!
http://wlym.com

--les ducs d'oil!
http://tarpley.net
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Daffodils
Next: Proposed experiment for detection of BP's cap&trade in the "financial reform bill."