Prev: EINSTEIN TOPPLED BY MOVING OBSERVER
Next: Gamma ray origin when Uranium splits
From: PD on 24 Jul 2010 10:26
On Jul 24, 9:15 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 23, 7:22 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 23, 6:31 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 21, 11:11 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > NATURE: Large Hadron Collider gets yet more exotic "to-do" list
> > > > The Large Hadron Collider could throw up evidence of new physics earlier
> > > > than expectedhttp://links.email.scientificamerican.com/ctt?kn=16&m=35619630&r=NTM5...
>
> > > ------------------
> > > dont you see from  heir high  talking about should in a cople of yere
> > > etc etc
> > > THAT  THEY ARE IN BIG TROUBLE ??...
>
> > Why? From the very *design* of the accelerator, long before it was
> > built, it was known that it would take a couple years of data taking
> > to get at some of the desired physics results.
>
> > Why would running as planned be considered trouble?
>
> > Where do you get the idea that an experimental facility that doesn't
> > give you the answer you're looking for in the first week must be in
> > trouble?
>
> > > i espacially like that quote from them
> > > (just a littel example
> > > quote
> > > ''giving infinite answers for the strength of particle interactions,
> > > unless physicists fudge the numbers.
>
> > > end of quote
> > > (:-)
> > > dont you see the pathetic talking
>
> > > 'INFINITE    ANSWERS '''
> > > common   stupid   crooks...
>
> > > WE DONT NED INFINITE ANSWERS !!
>
> > > WE NEED  just   A FEW GOD ONCE !!!
> > > we like  modest people !!!
>
> > > not to mention that
> > > 'curved space' is not even in their big mouth   !!!
>
> > > with big hands
>
> > > and small mouths    !!!
>
> > > ATB
> > > Y.Porat
> > > ----------------------
>
> because  i know betetr the basic of physics
> than tose parrots

And there, Porat, you've just shown yourself to be a deluded, arrogant
fool.

You'd be a fool to tell a surgeon that he's wasting his time with
surgical procedures because you understand the basics of medicine
better than surgeons.
You'd be a fool to tell an aeronautical engineer that he's wasting his
time with his designs because you understand the basics of aeronautics
better than aeronautical engineers.
You'd be a fool to tell a molecular biologist that he's wasting his
time with his work on DNA because you understand the basics of biology
better than molecular biologists.

And you're a fool here.

>
> for instance
>
> NO MASS (THE ONLY ONE!) NO REAL PHYSICS!
> and if right wich i am pretty sure
> no Higgs bosons that delivers particles teir mass
> a real particle
> DOES NOT6 NEED ANUYHING TO  DELIVER IT ITS MASS
> because ?? guess what
> a mattwer of basic intelligence
> based on the above rule!!
> 2
> NO FORCE MESSENGER CAN BE '!!
> BIGGER IN ANY ASPECT THAN ITS' MOTHER
>
> that is as well basics of physics understandings
> for instance
> conservation of momentum !!
> 3
> no ''force messenger'' that moves in a straight line
> canm be an atttraction force agent
> there for for instance
> a photon cannot be any attraction agent  !!!
> etc etc
> anyone who does not understand those basics
> and goes on teaching it to  the young generation
> is sinning against  advance of science
> or
> at least tell them:
> thjere are scientists that reject those
> silly  questionable    paradigms
>
> and you  young guys
> dont   take the parroting for  granted   --
> just take it is questionable paradigms  !!
>
> ATB
> Y.Porat
> ----------------------------
>
> ATB
> Y.Porat
> --------------------------

From: Robert Higgins on 25 Jul 2010 14:26
On Jul 24, 10:15 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 23, 7:22 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 23, 6:31 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 21, 11:11 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > NATURE: Large Hadron Collider gets yet more exotic "to-do" list
> > > > The Large Hadron Collider could throw up evidence of new physics earlier
> > > > than expectedhttp://links.email.scientificamerican.com/ctt?kn=16&m=35619630&r=NTM5...
>
> > > ------------------
> > > dont you see from  heir high  talking about should in a cople of yere
> > > etc etc
> > > THAT  THEY ARE IN BIG TROUBLE ??...
>
> > Why? From the very *design* of the accelerator, long before it was
> > built, it was known that it would take a couple years of data taking
> > to get at some of the desired physics results.
>
> > Why would running as planned be considered trouble?
>
> > Where do you get the idea that an experimental facility that doesn't
> > give you the answer you're looking for in the first week must be in
> > trouble?
>
> > > i espacially like that quote from them
> > > (just a littel example
> > > quote
> > > ''giving infinite answers for the strength of particle interactions,
> > > unless physicists fudge the numbers.
>
> > > end of quote
> > > (:-)
> > > dont you see the pathetic talking
>
> > > 'INFINITE    ANSWERS '''
> > > common   stupid   crooks...
>
> > > WE DONT NED INFINITE ANSWERS !!
>
> > > WE NEED  just   A FEW GOD ONCE !!!
> > > we like  modest people !!!
>
> > > not to mention that
> > > 'curved space' is not even in their big mouth   !!!
>
> > > with big hands
>
> > > and small mouths    !!!
>
> > > ATB
> > > Y.Porat
> > > ----------------------
>
> because  i know betetr the basic of physics
> than tose parrots
>
> for instance
>
> NO MASS (THE ONLY ONE!) NO REAL PHYSICS!

No Mass - No REAL Catholicism!

> and if right wich i am pretty sure

that you're not.

> no Higgs bosons that delivers particles teir mass
> a real particle
> DOES NOT6 NEED ANUYHING TO  DELIVER IT ITS MASS
> because ?? guess what
> a mattwer of basic intelligence

How could you even comment on issues of "basic intelligence", since
you have none?

> based on the above rule!!
> 2
> NO FORCE MESSENGER CAN BE '!!
> BIGGER IN ANY ASPECT THAN ITS' MOTHER

Are you "bigger" than your mother?

>
> that is as well basics of physics understandings
> for instance
> conservation of momentum !!
> 3
> no ''force messenger'' that moves in a straight line
> canm be an atttraction force agent
> there for for instance
> a photon cannot be any attraction agent  !!!
> etc etc
> anyone who does not understand those basics
> and goes on teaching it to  the young generation
> is sinning against  advance of science

"Please bless me father, for I have sinned. It has been three months
since my last Confession."

> or
> at least tell them:
> thjere are scientists that reject those
> silly  questionable    paradigms

No, there aren't. Lying "engineers" who can't do simple math don't
qualify as "scientists".

>
> and you  young guys
> dont   take the parroting for  granted   --
> just take it is questionable paradigms  !!
>
> ATB
> Y.Porat
> ----------------------------
>
> ATB
> Y.Porat
> --------------------------

From: eric gisse on 25 Jul 2010 14:54
artful wrote:
[...]

>
> You really are paranoid and delusional .. get help.

I think it is getting worse.
From: michael michalchik on 25 Jul 2010 15:07
Nobody wants infinite answers that is why we do experiments and work
on theories that give more specific ones.

On Jul 23, 4:31 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 21, 11:11 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > NATURE: Large Hadron Collider gets yet more exotic "to-do" list
> > The Large Hadron Collider could throw up evidence of new physics earlier
> > than expectedhttp://links.email.scientificamerican.com/ctt?kn=16&m=35619630&r=NTM5...
>
> ------------------
> dont you see from  heir high  talking about should in a cople of yere
> etc etc
> THAT  THEY ARE IN BIG TROUBLE ??...
>
> i espacially like that quote from them
> (just a littel example
> quote
> ''giving infinite answers for the strength of particle interactions,
> unless physicists fudge the numbers.
>
> end of quote
> (:-)
> dont you see the pathetic talking
>
> 'INFINITE    ANSWERS '''
> common   stupid   crooks...
>
> WE DONT NED INFINITE ANSWERS !!
>
> WE NEED  just   A FEW GOD ONCE !!!
> we like  modest people !!!
>
> not to mention that
> 'curved space' is not even in their big mouth   !!!
>
> with big hands
>
> and small mouths    !!!
>
> ATB
> Y.Porat
> ----------------------

From: Y.Porat on 26 Jul 2010 00:21
On Jul 25, 8:22 pm, Robert Hi > > -----------------------------
>
> > and here is th epublishing bussiness that that
> > nasty   hypocrite    thief   Paul   Draper
> > is dealing with:
> > quote from Who is
>
> Houghton Mifflin is one of the largest publishers of textbooks in the
> US. What's the big deal?
>
------------------------
you are playing the fool
ie more a fool than even you are !

every one should understand that
once someone has a private
interest in publishing business

HE WANTS AND HAS INTEREST

IN PUBLISHING!!!
now what shell he publish and make big money??
in publishing old paotong stuff??

or in publishing INNOVATIONS !!!
take for an example a judge in a supreme court
who will have
say a private jail .....

take a basketball refer y
that is gambling the Lottery of basketball games etc etc etc

A FUCKEN CROOK LIKE PD
OR MAY BEEVEN YOU HIGGINS
SHOULD ADD TO ANY OF HIS POST
A DISCLAIMER LIKE THAT:

TH EAUTHORE OF THAT POST
HAS PART IN A SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHING
BUSINESS

(AGAIN *** BUSINESS ** !!!)
it is not an objective scientist
that gets his sallary and income

ONLY FROM HIS UNIVERSITY !!
and in addition to that
someone like PD and his 'polite' matters
palyes the objective clear hands- scientist
a super scientist that is teaching others science
JUST FOR THE SAKE OF SCIENCE !!
WHILE THAT IS NOT THE CASE
if he i staking part
in a private (again PRIVATE )
PUBLISHING BUSSINESS
2
if you add on it that parrot has neverin his life
innovated something realy new and innovative
he wil have the push
to steal from others !!
just follow his begaviour along years -with me
he was ALWAYS interested n my posts !!
if i was worthless to him
he would not bother to discuss with me
solongish as he did !!!
why did he got my book
and never let me know about it??

if my book is nonsense
WHY SHOULD HE GET IT BY SOME CROOCKED WAY ???
CHEATING THAT I SENT IT TO HIM ??!!

i asked him
just bring evidence that i sent it to you !!
and he could never show it!!
not the slighterst corespondence
between us about say
sending me his address tosend to etc

i ad to any book that i send
a private personal dedication
soi asked him
jusr show me the dedication TO YOU
on the book

he never could do it !!
ETC ETC
in another case
i prsented that
F = gamma m a
as
F/gamma == m a
and m relains constance
he presented as hid insight
and while i told him
Hey man
wahy dont you menstion my name as innovatore
he answered me
'it was done 80 years ago ''
soi asked him
jsut bring a quote that
it was done 80 years a go
the 'innocent lamb' could vever bring such a quote !!!
etc etc etc
now
once you disocover
something that--
that 'innocent lamb' never bothered to mentioned
that this innocent lamb
has some publishing business interest

EVERY THING BECOMES CLEAR !!
and it seesmt that he is not alone in that
BUSINESS !!!
he has his cooperators
(and might well be that all those
***anonymous pigs ** are he himself or business cooperators

got it at last --
-- dear*** honest*** readers ???!!
Y.Porat
-----------------------------









First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: EINSTEIN TOPPLED BY MOVING OBSERVER
Next: Gamma ray origin when Uranium splits