Newton's law of gravitational attraction
in [Relativity]
|
From: doug on 23 Sep 2009 23:40 NoEinstein wrote: > On Sep 20, 4:02 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear PD: "Engineering" is taught in various colleges of engineering > NOT in the useless college of physics. Can you show otherwise? � > NoEinstein � This is from john, the uneducated fool who knows nothing of any physics from the last few centuries. It is amazing that he is so starved for attention that he is wants to come here even though he always looks like a complete fool. > >>On Sep 20, 9:09 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: >> >> >>>On Sep 18, 3:31 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>Dear PD, the Parasite Dunce: Architecture is primarily an art over >>>engineering discipline. If the world were put under the control of >>>architects and engineers�forgetting about the head-in-clouds scientists >>>�the world would be a better place. � NE � >> >>Why do you say that? Engineers practice physics. >>What's head-in-the-clouds about that? >>Note that a lot of the physics that is used by architects and >>engineers is the stuff you've rejected. >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>On Sep 18, 3:07 pm, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: >> >>>>>PD wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On Sep 18, 1:09 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: >> >>>>>>>On Sep 16, 6:22 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>On Sep 16, 4:58 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>On Sep 14, 5:32 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>Dear PD, the Parasite Dunce: >> >>>>>>>>>Einstein "made-up-out-of-thin-air" the infinite energy needed (sic) to >>>>>>>>>get even a tiny mass to travel to velocity 'c'. What you call "made >>>>>>>>>up", in my case, is objective reasoning ability and teleologic >>>>>>>>>projection (reasoning so as to see the unseen). I have put into my >>>>>>>>>own words a history of Einstein's blunders, and how I came to deduce >>>>>>>>>the true, new science for the Universe. Have YOU ever put anything >>>>>>>>>about science into your own words? You can't, because the dead status >>>>>>>>>quo is all that you know. When you can express yourself regarding any >>>>>>>>>area of science as good as I can, then, you will have arrived. In >>>>>>>>>your DREAMS, that is! � NoEinstein � >> >>>>>>>>I think you have confused "making stuff up" with "putting science in >>>>>>>>your own words". >>>>>>>>You do know that the fiction aisles and the nonfiction aisles in the >>>>>>>>bookstore are in separate places, right? Or is reality and fantasy a >>>>>>>>blurred distinction? >> >>>>>>>Dear PD, the Parasite Dunce: All physics texts are in the FICTION >>>>>>>aisles! � NoEinstein � >> >>>>>>All of them. Imagine! >>>>>>Must be true of the chemistry texts, too, since so much of chemistry >>>>>>is based on physics. >>>>>>And that must be true of the biology texts, too, since so much of >>>>>>biology is based on chemistry. >>>>>>Why, there's absolutely nothing in science books at all that can be >>>>>>believed! >>>>>>All that stuff about levers they taught you in the 3rd grade is >>>>>>probably wrong, too. >> >>>>>This means all the architecture texts must be wrong since they >>>>>rely on physics as well. That makes john a fraud by his own >>>>>criteria. >> >>>>John would be happy to tell you that he pulled the wool over the >>>>licensing board by doing what he had to in order to be licensed, but >>>>seeing right through all the mistakes in those architectural >>>>principles from the very beginning. He was only playing along to get >>>>the license.- Hide quoted text - >> >>>>- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - >> >>- Show quoted text - > >
From: Y.Porat on 23 Sep 2009 23:10 On Sep 24, 5:38 a > >>>>>>>>>>the license. > > > >>>>>>>>>from the architects who did read the books? > > >>>>>>>>Apparently so! Because clearly none of those calculations can be close > >>>>>>>>to right! > > >>>>>>>------------------ > >>>>>>>now PD became an expert for buildings as well !!! > >>>>>>>and all that by his fucken QM !! > >>>>>>>the man is a pathologic ------- > > >>>>>>>-----Napoleon Bonaparte !!! > >>>>>>>who thinks he can cheat every one > > >>>>>>What cheat? You asked me how to calculate the volume of an atom, and I > >>>>>>told you. > >>>>>>It's a simple exercise in any freshman chemistry text. > > >>>>>>>forever !!! > >>>>>>>poor pupils of his !! > > >>>>>>>Y.P > >>>>>>>=------------------------ > > >>>>>you forgot to say that i sked you tocalculate the volume of the Atom > >>>>>based on your shell theory > >>>>>isit possible that you ddint understand what i am talking about > > >>>>>2 > >>>>>i asked youas well > >>>>>tobring a clacualtion thwat shows that > >>>>>based on your shell model > >>>>>toshow a calcualtion > >>>>>that will show that teh Atom > >>>>>of Al > >>>>>MUST HAVE THE SAME VOLUME AS SAY Au > >>>>> ie Gold > >>>>>(and a tom with 13 electrons around it > >>>>>is according to you must have the same volume > >>>>>as that og Gold with > >>>>>79 electrons and muchmore 'shells' around it!! > >>>>>if you say it is easy > >>>>>you ether dont know about what youare talking about > >>>>>or yiou are a crook > >>>>>just one of the problems fo rthat > >>>>>is > >>>>>how differnt electons > > >>>>Since you cannot even write a coherent sentence, > >>>>it is not surprising that you cannot do any > >>>>science. > > >>>>>in different shells > >>>>>repel each other !! > >>>>>**in all 3D direction > >>>>>even that 'simple problem > >>>>>is > >>>>>shells repalling themselves* in all 3 dimensions * > >>>>>those that are beside them > >>>>>those that are above and > >>>>>below them etc > >>>>>and all that in additionto the > >>>>>Attraction of the positive charge of the nuc > >>>>>and that i s only one of many > >>>>>other oroblems !!! > >>>>>another problem is > >>>>>why should there be a screening effect > >>>>>of closer shells on those > >>>>>further away!! > >>>>>i can promis you that even God > >>>>>would not take control on that > >>>>>turmoil > >>>>>it seems much better > >>>>>that you dont have a green ideal > >>>>>about waht is going on there !!! > >>>>>(by your fantastic model) > >>>>>remember that word > >>>>>'fantastic ' !!(lunatic ) > > >>>>>and if you don thave that calcualtion > >>>>>just show a quote > >>>>>you can ask the hjelp of all > >>>>>universites of the world > >>>>>but still dont forget totellthem > >>>>>that they must 'fiddle ' their calculation to show that > >>>>>Al volume is the same as Au > >>>>>btw > >>>>>if i am not wrong you said jsut lately that > >>>>>heavy atoms have a bigger ------------------ now the psycho leech has a new name -- john !!! Y.P -----------------------
From: doug on 24 Sep 2009 00:27 Y.Porat wrote: > On Sep 24, 5:38 a > >>>>>>>>>>the license. > > >>>>>>>>>>>from the architects who did read the books? >> >>>>>>>>>>Apparently so! Because clearly none of those calculations can be close >>>>>>>>>>to right! >> >>>>>>>>>------------------ >>>>>>>>>now PD became an expert for buildings as well !!! >>>>>>>>>and all that by his fucken QM !! >>>>>>>>>the man is a pathologic ------- >> >>>>>>>>>-----Napoleon Bonaparte !!! >>>>>>>>>who thinks he can cheat every one >> >>>>>>>>What cheat? You asked me how to calculate the volume of an atom, and I >>>>>>>>told you. >>>>>>>>It's a simple exercise in any freshman chemistry text. >> >>>>>>>>>forever !!! >>>>>>>>>poor pupils of his !! >> >>>>>>>>>Y.P >>>>>>>>>=------------------------ >> >>>>>>>you forgot to say that i sked you tocalculate the volume of the Atom >>>>>>>based on your shell theory >>>>>>>isit possible that you ddint understand what i am talking about >> >>>>>>>2 >>>>>>>i asked youas well >>>>>>>tobring a clacualtion thwat shows that >>>>>>>based on your shell model >>>>>>>toshow a calcualtion >>>>>>>that will show that teh Atom >>>>>>>of Al >>>>>>>MUST HAVE THE SAME VOLUME AS SAY Au >>>>>>>ie Gold >>>>>>>(and a tom with 13 electrons around it >>>>>>>is according to you must have the same volume >>>>>>>as that og Gold with >>>>>>>79 electrons and muchmore 'shells' around it!! >>>>>>>if you say it is easy >>>>>>>you ether dont know about what youare talking about >>>>>>>or yiou are a crook >>>>>>>just one of the problems fo rthat >>>>>>>is >>>>>>>how differnt electons >> >>>>>>Since you cannot even write a coherent sentence, >>>>>>it is not surprising that you cannot do any >>>>>>science. >> >>>>>>>in different shells >>>>>>>repel each other !! >>>>>>>**in all 3D direction >>>>>>>even that 'simple problem >>>>>>>is >>>>>>>shells repalling themselves* in all 3 dimensions * >>>>>>>those that are beside them >>>>>>>those that are above and >>>>>>>below them etc >>>>>>>and all that in additionto the >>>>>>>Attraction of the positive charge of the nuc >>>>>>>and that i s only one of many >>>>>>>other oroblems !!! >>>>>>>another problem is >>>>>>>why should there be a screening effect >>>>>>>of closer shells on those >>>>>>>further away!! >>>>>>>i can promis you that even God >>>>>>>would not take control on that >>>>>>>turmoil >>>>>>>it seems much better >>>>>>>that you dont have a green ideal >>>>>>>about waht is going on there !!! >>>>>>>(by your fantastic model) >>>>>>>remember that word >>>>>>>'fantastic ' !!(lunatic ) >> >>>>>>>and if you don thave that calcualtion >>>>>>>just show a quote >>>>>>>you can ask the hjelp of all >>>>>>>universites of the world >>>>>>>but still dont forget totellthem >>>>>>>that they must 'fiddle ' their calculation to show that >>>>>>>Al volume is the same as Au >>>>>>>btw >>>>>>>if i am not wrong you said jsut lately that >>>>>>>heavy atoms have a bigger > > > > ------------------ > now the psycho leech > has a new name -- > john !!! So you are changing your name? > > Y.P > -----------------------
From: PD on 24 Sep 2009 08:40 On Sep 23, 9:00 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > On Sep 20, 4:02 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear PD: "Engineering" is taught in various colleges of engineering > NOT in the useless college of physics. Can you show otherwise? > NoEinstein This may not be familiar to you, NoEinstein, but all engineers are required to take physics courses from the physics department, not the engineering department. They use the physics that they learn in the physics department later in their engineering work. > > > > > On Sep 20, 9:09 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > On Sep 18, 3:31 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Dear PD, the Parasite Dunce: Architecture is primarily an art over > > > engineering discipline. If the world were put under the control of > > > architects and engineersforgetting about the head-in-clouds scientists > > > the world would be a better place. NE > > > Why do you say that? Engineers practice physics. > > What's head-in-the-clouds about that? > > Note that a lot of the physics that is used by architects and > > engineers is the stuff you've rejected. > > > > > On Sep 18, 3:07 pm, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: > > > > > > PD wrote: > > > > > > On Sep 18, 1:09 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > >>On Sep 16, 6:22 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > >>>On Sep 16, 4:58 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > >>>>On Sep 14, 5:32 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > >>>>Dear PD, the Parasite Dunce: > > > > > > >>>>Einstein "made-up-out-of-thin-air" the infinite energy needed (sic) to > > > > > >>>>get even a tiny mass to travel to velocity 'c'. What you call "made > > > > > >>>>up", in my case, is objective reasoning ability and teleologic > > > > > >>>>projection (reasoning so as to see the unseen). I have put into my > > > > > >>>>own words a history of Einstein's blunders, and how I came to deduce > > > > > >>>>the true, new science for the Universe. Have YOU ever put anything > > > > > >>>>about science into your own words? You can't, because the dead status > > > > > >>>>quo is all that you know. When you can express yourself regarding any > > > > > >>>>area of science as good as I can, then, you will have arrived.. In > > > > > >>>>your DREAMS, that is! NoEinstein > > > > > > >>>I think you have confused "making stuff up" with "putting science in > > > > > >>>your own words". > > > > > >>>You do know that the fiction aisles and the nonfiction aisles in the > > > > > >>>bookstore are in separate places, right? Or is reality and fantasy a > > > > > >>>blurred distinction? > > > > > > >>Dear PD, the Parasite Dunce: All physics texts are in the FICTION > > > > > >>aisles! NoEinstein > > > > > > > All of them. Imagine! > > > > > > Must be true of the chemistry texts, too, since so much of chemistry > > > > > > is based on physics. > > > > > > And that must be true of the biology texts, too, since so much of > > > > > > biology is based on chemistry. > > > > > > Why, there's absolutely nothing in science books at all that can be > > > > > > believed! > > > > > > All that stuff about levers they taught you in the 3rd grade is > > > > > > probably wrong, too. > > > > > > This means all the architecture texts must be wrong since they > > > > > rely on physics as well. That makes john a fraud by his own > > > > > criteria. > > > > > John would be happy to tell you that he pulled the wool over the > > > > licensing board by doing what he had to in order to be licensed, but > > > > seeing right through all the mistakes in those architectural > > > > principles from the very beginning. He was only playing along to get > > > > the license.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > >
From: David Bostwick on 24 Sep 2009 09:54
Get a room, folks, and save us the nonsense. Or maybe you could get on WWE Raw. Anywhere other than here. |