Video results of my cosmology comparison
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Can thermodynamical model be fundamental: reason not result?
Next: La Théorie d'Unification de Mécanique Quantique et de Relativité Générale
From: eric gisse on 12 Jul 2010 15:31 Michael Helland wrote: > On Jul 12, 10:21 am, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> Michael Helland wrote: >> >> [snip all, unread] >> >> Learn to write a technical paper, jackass. > > > If you're not going to read it, why would I bother? Mike, as has been well established already: YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. [snip tired light idiocy]
From: Michael Helland on 13 Jul 2010 02:20 On Jul 12, 12:31 pm, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Michael Helland wrote: > > On Jul 12, 10:21 am, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Michael Helland wrote: > > >> [snip all, unread] > > >> Learn to write a technical paper, jackass. > > > If you're not going to read it, why would I bother? > > Mike, as has been well established already: > > YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. Did you watch the video? Did you see the graph at the end of the video? That's what I'm talking about. And I don't think its all that complicated.
From: eric gisse on 13 Jul 2010 03:36 Michael Helland wrote: > On Jul 12, 12:31 pm, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> Michael Helland wrote: >> > On Jul 12, 10:21 am, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Michael Helland wrote: >> >> >> [snip all, unread] >> >> >> Learn to write a technical paper, jackass. >> >> > If you're not going to read it, why would I bother? >> >> Mike, as has been well established already: >> >> YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. > > Did you watch the video? I don't need to watch a video of you talking about something you don't understand to know you don't understand. I've only been watching you talk for the last 5 goddamn years. > > Did you see the graph at the end of the video? > > That's what I'm talking about. And I don't think its all that > complicated. When can we expect you to learn undergraduate electromagnetic theory? 2015?
From: Michael Helland on 13 Jul 2010 04:38 On Jul 13, 12:36 am, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Michael Helland wrote: > > On Jul 12, 12:31 pm, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Michael Helland wrote: > >> > On Jul 12, 10:21 am, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> Michael Helland wrote: > > >> >> [snip all, unread] > > >> >> Learn to write a technical paper, jackass. > > >> > If you're not going to read it, why would I bother? > > >> Mike, as has been well established already: > > >> YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. > > > Did you watch the video? > > I don't need to watch a video of you talking about something you don't > understand to know you don't understand. I've only been watching you talk > for the last 5 goddamn years. There is no talking. Just time-sequenced results from a mathematical model and a graph summarizing the results. > > Did you see the graph at the end of the video? > > > That's what I'm talking about. And I don't think its all that > > complicated. > > When can we expect you to learn undergraduate electromagnetic theory? 2015? Give me 4 questions and we'll see if I can answer them.
From: eric gisse on 13 Jul 2010 21:41
Michael Helland wrote: [...] >> > Did you see the graph at the end of the video? >> >> > That's what I'm talking about. And I don't think its all that >> > complicated. >> >> When can we expect you to learn undergraduate electromagnetic theory? >> 2015? > > Give me 4 questions and we'll see if I can answer them. Calculate the magnetic field, at all angles, around a ring of charge with a given charge per unit length. Derive the wave equation for the travel of a free-space electromagnetic wave from Maxwell's equation. Obtain a nontrivial oscillatory solution to the wave equation. Calculate E, B, and show that they are orthogonal. |