FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups 
 ProfileProfile   PreferencesPreferences   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Forum index » Science and Technology » Physics
absolute zero
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 226 of 228 [3408 Posts] View previous topic :: View next topic
Goto page:  Previous  1, 2, 3, ..., 224, 225, 226, 227, 228 Next
Author Message
Phineas T Puddleduck
science forum Guru


Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 759

PostPosted: Mon Jun 26, 2006 1:26 pm    Post subject: Re: PHOTON MASS -- A FACT. MASSLESS PARTICLES -- NOT FACT. Reply with quote

In article <6cidnUXOh9XOTgLZnZ2dnUVZ_vudnZ2d@conversent.net>, AllYou!
<Idaman@conversent.net> wrote:

Quote:
"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote
in message
news:250620061338138996%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...

I think you are a deliberate troll.

Now you're getting it. You've explained why you keep debating this
guy in the past, and while that's all very noble, it only applies to
people who are at least sincere about what they believe. But this guy
isn't. He doesn't believe half the stuff he writes. He writes it for
no other reason than to elicit responses.

But the good news is that while he gets the attention here which he
craves, at least he's not going postal to get it.


True. It seems all part of some vast sociological experiment.

If aliens were observing the human race, as if we were under the
microscope (thank you Mr Wells Wink ) then USENET would not show a
positive profile for us, I fear ;-)

Whereas I do tend to be evil and laugh at the kooks when you prod them,
you soon realise it is actually quite sad. Rather then prolong the
agony for them, and the people around trying to hold decent
conversations - its simply better to tune them out. They have shown
they contribute nothing but background noise.

Hence why people like Potter, TomGee and Brad are now in my killfile.
All I am doing but prodding them is providing extra noise for the S/N
ratio. They can rail at the gates for all I care, I know I'm above it
and now I have to prove that ;-)

I'm still going to vote for them in the AUK polls, but I'm not going to
bother arguing with people who either refuse to see the evidence in
front of them, or suffer from a messiah complex.

--
The greatest enemy of science is pseudoscience.

Jaffa cakes. Sweet delicious orangey jaffa goodness, and an abject lesson why
parroting information from the web will not teach you cosmology.

Official emperor of sci.physics, head mumbler of the "Cult of INSANE SCIENCE".
Please pay no attention to my butt poking forward, it is expanding.

Relf's Law?
"Bullshit repeated to the limit of infinity asymptotically approaches
the odour of roses."
Back to top
T Wake
science forum Guru


Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 1978

PostPosted: Mon Jun 26, 2006 1:50 pm    Post subject: Re: PHOTON MASS -- A FACT. MASSLESS PARTICLES -- NOT FACT. Reply with quote

"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote in
message news:260620061426451762%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...
Quote:
In article <6cidnUXOh9XOTgLZnZ2dnUVZ_vudnZ2d@conversent.net>, AllYou!
Idaman@conversent.net> wrote:

"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote
in message
news:250620061338138996%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...

I think you are a deliberate troll.

Now you're getting it. You've explained why you keep debating this
guy in the past, and while that's all very noble, it only applies to
people who are at least sincere about what they believe. But this guy
isn't. He doesn't believe half the stuff he writes. He writes it for
no other reason than to elicit responses.

But the good news is that while he gets the attention here which he
craves, at least he's not going postal to get it.


True. It seems all part of some vast sociological experiment.

If aliens were observing the human race, as if we were under the
microscope (thank you Mr Wells Wink ) then USENET would not show a
positive profile for us, I fear ;-)

Whereas I do tend to be evil and laugh at the kooks when you prod them,
you soon realise it is actually quite sad. Rather then prolong the
agony for them, and the people around trying to hold decent
conversations - its simply better to tune them out. They have shown
they contribute nothing but background noise.

Hence why people like Potter, TomGee and Brad are now in my killfile.
All I am doing but prodding them is providing extra noise for the S/N
ratio. They can rail at the gates for all I care, I know I'm above it
and now I have to prove that ;-)

I'm still going to vote for them in the AUK polls, but I'm not going to
bother arguing with people who either refuse to see the evidence in
front of them, or suffer from a messiah complex.


I go through mixed feelings about this topic (Arguing with the k00ks). While
I agree there has been (to date) no examples of any of the trolling k00ks
seeing the light and learning / progressing, I still feel it is worthwhile.

The main reason is sheer entertainment. There is some vicarious pleasure to
be gaining in watching the fruitcakes squirm when they are taken to task and
the vast majority of people's replies to the k00k-elite here are actually
very humorous. (Best long term example: James "Kibo" Parry replies to tj
Frazir). Some people try to think of USENET as a "serious" education tool. I
don't and I don't think it has been since about 1988.

Also, the arguments are often very, very educational. Because of the
run-of-the-mill Cranks sheer reluctance to learn, some people here have
become amazingly adapt at explaining difficult concepts in simple terms.
This is genuinely useful - often the explanations can be taken into the real
world and used to help educate the educatable.

Last but not least of my "quick lits o'ideas" is just practice at spotting
logical flaws and inconsistencies. Always a useful skill to have :-)

The truly uneducable, uninteresting and non-entertaining trolls remain
killfiled for quite some time (a list that includes the likes of Potter,
TomGee, Min, Androcles, Plutonium etc), while the fr0thier ones (Guth,
Porat, Spaceman) move in and out depending how busy I am and how many other
cranks there are on the go. Some cranks (Relf, Porat, Frazir etc) never seem
to end up in the Kill Fill because they are so stupid it remains interesting
for quite some time. Smile
Back to top
T Wake
science forum Guru


Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 1978

PostPosted: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:10 pm    Post subject: Re: PHOTON MASS -- A FACT. MASSLESS PARTICLES -- NOT FACT. Reply with quote

"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote in
message news:260620061459168851%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...
Quote:
In article <HaednXeVCuuBewLZRVny2g@pipex.net>, T Wake
Usenet.es7AT@gishpuppy.com> wrote:

"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote in
message
news:260620061426451762%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...
In article <6cidnUXOh9XOTgLZnZ2dnUVZ_vudnZ2d@conversent.net>, AllYou!
Idaman@conversent.net> wrote:

"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote
in message
news:250620061338138996%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...

I think you are a deliberate troll.

Now you're getting it. You've explained why you keep debating this
guy in the past, and while that's all very noble, it only applies to
people who are at least sincere about what they believe. But this guy
isn't. He doesn't believe half the stuff he writes. He writes it for
no other reason than to elicit responses.

But the good news is that while he gets the attention here which he
craves, at least he's not going postal to get it.


True. It seems all part of some vast sociological experiment.

If aliens were observing the human race, as if we were under the
microscope (thank you Mr Wells Wink ) then USENET would not show a
positive profile for us, I fear ;-)

Whereas I do tend to be evil and laugh at the kooks when you prod them,
you soon realise it is actually quite sad. Rather then prolong the
agony for them, and the people around trying to hold decent
conversations - its simply better to tune them out. They have shown
they contribute nothing but background noise.

Hence why people like Potter, TomGee and Brad are now in my killfile.
All I am doing but prodding them is providing extra noise for the S/N
ratio. They can rail at the gates for all I care, I know I'm above it
and now I have to prove that ;-)

I'm still going to vote for them in the AUK polls, but I'm not going to
bother arguing with people who either refuse to see the evidence in
front of them, or suffer from a messiah complex.


I go through mixed feelings about this topic (Arguing with the k00ks).
While
I agree there has been (to date) no examples of any of the trolling k00ks
seeing the light and learning / progressing, I still feel it is
worthwhile.


My killfile has a 60 day limit. I'll review it after then. Brad is just
a no-hope case, and I swap and change between the validity of arguing
with him, and the excitement in seeing just how frothy he can make a
reply. Its evil, but I never claimed to be good.

LOL. It was as a result of reading some replies to Brad I moved him back
out - sadly, I never seem to elicit the same level of k00kspittle as
everyone else. Oh well.

Quote:
The main reason is sheer entertainment. There is some vicarious pleasure
to
be gaining in watching the fruitcakes squirm when they are taken to task
and
the vast majority of people's replies to the k00k-elite here are actually
very humorous. (Best long term example: James "Kibo" Parry replies to tj
Frazir). Some people try to think of USENET as a "serious" education
tool. I
don't and I don't think it has been since about 1988.

Kibo replying to him was very funny. And I think the significance of
the event was lost on tj.

Most things are lost on tj. I spent months trying to explain a mathematical
flaw in one of his arguments (well, there were lots but only one we focused
on) only for him to do a vanishing trick for a few weeks and come back with
my figures claiming they were his. Smile Little bugger. Still since his
k00k-date with Jeff, I think Frazir will be hiding for quite some time.

Quote:
Also, the arguments are often very, very educational. Because of the
run-of-the-mill Cranks sheer reluctance to learn, some people here have
become amazingly adapt at explaining difficult concepts in simple terms.
This is genuinely useful - often the explanations can be taken into the
real
world and used to help educate the educatable.

Its fun on a sociological level as well. I wonder sometimes how well
these cranks got on in school with such inherent distrust ofthe status
quo.

They were probably all bullied by girls five or six years younger.

Quote:
Last but not least of my "quick lits o'ideas" is just practice at
spotting
logical flaws and inconsistencies. Always a useful skill to have :-)


In some cases though, the logical holes could fit a planet ;-)

The truly uneducable, uninteresting and non-entertaining trolls remain
killfiled for quite some time (a list that includes the likes of Potter,
TomGee, Min, Androcles, Plutonium etc), while the fr0thier ones (Guth,
Porat, Spaceman) move in and out depending how busy I am and how many
other
cranks there are on the go. Some cranks (Relf, Porat, Frazir etc) never
seem
to end up in the Kill Fill because they are so stupid it remains
interesting
for quite some time. :-)


I agree with this last statement, Jeff I feel is a special case as his
murdering of modern cosmology riles me up, and I am trying not to
overpost w.r.t him. The rest I can't be bothered with, and I see their
responses sometimes when people quote them. It reminds me why they're
there.

Yeah, I suspect it is more to do with how much you empathise with the
subject being k00ked into idiocy. For example, I bet if some one went all
postal on EM you wouldn't give a toss Smile
Back to top
Phineas T Puddleduck
science forum Guru


Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 759

PostPosted: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:15 pm    Post subject: Re: PHOTON MASS -- A FACT. MASSLESS PARTICLES -- NOT FACT. Reply with quote

In article <U6Kdnf-iQLeodgLZnZ2dnUVZ8qWdnZ2d@pipex.net>, T Wake
<Usenet.es7AT@gishpuppy.com> wrote:

Quote:
I agree with this last statement, Jeff I feel is a special case as his
murdering of modern cosmology riles me up, and I am trying not to
overpost w.r.t him. The rest I can't be bothered with, and I see their
responses sometimes when people quote them. It reminds me why they're
there.

Yeah, I suspect it is more to do with how much you empathise with the
subject being k00ked into idiocy. For example, I bet if some one went all
postal on EM you wouldn't give a toss Smile

Who me (innocent whistle)? Electronics as well. Its all witchcraft I
tell you. These "diodes" are the devils work !!!

--
The greatest enemy of science is pseudoscience.

Jaffa cakes. Sweet delicious orangey jaffa goodness, and an abject lesson why
parroting information from the web will not teach you cosmology.

Official emperor of sci.physics, head mumbler of the "Cult of INSANE SCIENCE".
Please pay no attention to my butt poking forward, it is expanding.

Relf's Law?
"Bullshit repeated to the limit of infinity asymptotically approaches
the odour of roses."
Back to top
PD
science forum Guru


Joined: 03 May 2005
Posts: 4363

PostPosted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 4:12 am    Post subject: Re: PHOTON MASS -- A FACT. MASSLESS PARTICLES -- NOT FACT. Reply with quote

tomgee wrote:
Quote:
Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
In article <1151176827.213536.254900@y41g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>,
tomgee <tyropress@yahoo.com> wrote:

Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
In article <1151169183.266072.19540@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
tomgee <tyropress@yahoo.com> wrote:

Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
In article <EF9ng.500195$0R1.12595228@phobos.telenet-ops.be>, Dirk Van
de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com> wrote:

"TomGee" <lvl_us@peoplepc.com> wrote in message
news:1151149354.029242.138960@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...

Peter Christensen wrote:
"Vert" <avergon@verizon.net> skrev i en meddelelse
news:1150992050.310579.256480@r2g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
They *believe* there are such things as massless particles and
massless
photons.

It has been known for almost 100 years. It's not just a belief.

It has been accepted in the field that massless particles exist.
That conflicts with the energy and mass interdependence
principle which has also been long-accepted.

Maybe you could try to argue why the photon should have a non-zero
mass?

Because it contradicts the formula E=mc^2,

which is not valid for photons to begin with.

Dirk Vdm

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/ParticleAndNuclear/photon_mass.htm
l
Read and comprehend Tomgee

That is precisely what you are doing by using a website as a
reference. Don't you have the brains to know that?

Strawman.

I'm not PARROTING. I'm providing a link for you to read.

Now we all know you don't have the brains to tell there
is no difference between the two.

Neither do you, it seems....

That's false, since I am the one who pointed that out to you.

Now If I'd
posted the link, then made a babbled reference to the contents that
distorted it without understanding, I'd hold my hands up and say
guilty.

Of what? That would not be parroting; that would be providing
proper support for your signature statement, even if it was wrong.

Nice try at a strawman.

But I merely posted a link. One I have provided to many people as it is
a pinnacle of clarity on the topic.

Why do you provide links to people who can find them just
readily as you do, and who probably read them long before
you did, and who never asked you for a link? Do you think
readers are so stupid we want you to tell us where to find
stuff?

Its a website from a respected scientist who puts it all so succintly.
If you have issues understanding that, then thats your problem.

I guess you use others to talk for you since you cannot write
well enough to tell us what you think, PD, or else you can't think
for yourself well enough to make your own arguments, so you
refer others to the library as if every book written is in agree-
ment with all the others on every issue.

Oh I forgot, you know better don't you. You're a "special" "free
thinker".....

There are no special free thinkers; that term applies to anyone
able to shrug off the overindoctrination received in the schools
enough to allow them reasonable thought. You could be one if
you made an effort to break the chains of conformity that your
teachers put around your head. But to make such an effort,
you must first realize that has been done to you, and that is the
hardest part of becoming a free thinker. After that, you have
only to make the choice to change, and soon you will attain that
task. You can do it because the human brain is very amenable
to change, which is why the brainwashing is very strong - to keep
one from ever wanting to break free.

You keep advancing the nonsense, it makes for more giggles....

No. My ideas seem like nonsense to you because of the high
level of Pavlovian conditioning that has been imprinted on your
brain. The more successful one becomes in their social circle,
the more they must be a "team player", and nothing prevents
thinking "outside the box" more than that. Those inside the box
can never see they are in there, but instead they imagine they
are objective in their analysis of any situation and not just "one
of the boys". Team players are the bane of science, history
shows us. It is los lonely boys who better serve science.

Really? Please provide an example or two from history.

PD
Back to top
PD
science forum Guru


Joined: 03 May 2005
Posts: 4363

PostPosted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 4:14 am    Post subject: Re: PHOTON MASS -- A FACT. MASSLESS PARTICLES -- NOT FACT. Reply with quote

tomgee wrote:
Quote:
Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
In article <1151228691.925752.40000@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
tomgee <tyropress@yahoo.com> wrote:

Team member status noted, in the social circle of the Stooges of
these science ngs. However, the impact of your arguments are
nullified by your inadequate understanding of the subject matter, which

so far appears to be below the level of the other Stooges in the group,

so you can't be expected to contribute much help to them until your
parroting improves to where it's closer to what the conformist
propaganda actually states.

Its interesting that the whole sum of your post (bar your fundamental
inability to grasp GR) comes down to this.

No, it doesn't. You are just saying that to get out of showing your
own
ignorance of science, physics in particular.

Since other posts have
revealed you are a sociologist (of sorts) its telling that your
arguments cancel down to this idea of groups and non-conformity

And your ignorance of those concepts you spoke of in your previous
post is telling in this one where you are unable to answer the
questions
I put to you about your bs. Clearly, you don't know what you're
talking
about, and so your only recourse is to try to put me down personally.

Readers here are not all that stupid, PD, they can all see right
through

Who are you talking to, TomGee? I thought you were talking to Phineas
Puddleduck, not me.

PD
Back to top
avergon@verizon.net
science forum Guru Wannabe


Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 282

PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 2:07 pm    Post subject: Re: PHOTON MASS -- A FACT. MASSLESS PARTICLES -- NOT FACT. Reply with quote

T Wake wrote:
Quote:
"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote in
message news:260620061426451762%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...
In article <6cidnUXOh9XOTgLZnZ2dnUVZ_vudnZ2d@conversent.net>, AllYou!
Idaman@conversent.net> wrote:

"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote
in message
news:250620061338138996%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...

I think you are a deliberate troll.

Now you're getting it. You've explained why you keep debating this
guy in the past, and while that's all very noble, it only applies to
people who are at least sincere about what they believe. But this guy
isn't. He doesn't believe half the stuff he writes. He writes it for
no other reason than to elicit responses.

But the good news is that while he gets the attention here which he
craves, at least he's not going postal to get it.


True. It seems all part of some vast sociological experiment.

If aliens were observing the human race, as if we were under the
microscope (thank you Mr Wells Wink ) then USENET would not show a
positive profile for us, I fear ;-)

Whereas I do tend to be evil and laugh at the kooks when you prod them,
you soon realise it is actually quite sad. Rather then prolong the
agony for them, and the people around trying to hold decent
conversations - its simply better to tune them out. They have shown
they contribute nothing but background noise.

Hence why people like Potter, TomGee and Brad are now in my killfile.
All I am doing but prodding them is providing extra noise for the S/N
ratio. They can rail at the gates for all I care, I know I'm above it
and now I have to prove that ;-)

I'm still going to vote for them in the AUK polls, but I'm not going to
bother arguing with people who either refuse to see the evidence in
front of them, or suffer from a messiah complex.


I go through mixed feelings about this topic (Arguing with the k00ks). While
I agree there has been (to date) no examples of any of the trolling k00ks
seeing the light and learning / progressing, I still feel it is worthwhile.

The main reason is sheer entertainment. There is some vicarious pleasure to
be gaining in watching the fruitcakes squirm when they are taken to task and
the vast majority of people's replies to the k00k-elite here are actually
very humorous. (Best long term example: James "Kibo" Parry replies to tj
Frazir). Some people try to think of USENET as a "serious" education tool. I
don't and I don't think it has been since about 1988.

Also, the arguments are often very, very educational. Because of the
run-of-the-mill Cranks sheer reluctance to learn, some people here have
become amazingly adapt at explaining difficult concepts in simple terms.
This is genuinely useful - often the explanations can be taken into the real
world and used to help educate the educatable.

Last but not least of my "quick lits o'ideas" is just practice at spotting
logical flaws and inconsistencies. Always a useful skill to have :-)

The truly uneducable, uninteresting and non-entertaining trolls remain
killfiled for quite some time (a list that includes the likes of Potter,
TomGee, Min, Androcles, Plutonium etc), while the fr0thier ones (Guth,
Porat, Spaceman) move in and out depending how busy I am and how many other
cranks there are on the go. Some cranks (Relf, Porat, Frazir etc) never seem
to end up in the Kill Fill because they are so stupid it remains interesting
for quite some time. Smile

VERGON
Other than sitting in lofty judgement, what do YOU offer?

(Basically, I agree with you.)
Back to top
T Wake
science forum Guru


Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 1978

PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:17 pm    Post subject: Re: PHOTON MASS -- A FACT. MASSLESS PARTICLES -- NOT FACT. Reply with quote

"Vert" <avergon@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:1151503675.367165.19310@d56g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
Quote:

T Wake wrote:
"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote in
message
news:260620061426451762%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...
In article <6cidnUXOh9XOTgLZnZ2dnUVZ_vudnZ2d@conversent.net>, AllYou!
Idaman@conversent.net> wrote:

"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote
in message
news:250620061338138996%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...

I think you are a deliberate troll.

Now you're getting it. You've explained why you keep debating this
guy in the past, and while that's all very noble, it only applies to
people who are at least sincere about what they believe. But this guy
isn't. He doesn't believe half the stuff he writes. He writes it for
no other reason than to elicit responses.

But the good news is that while he gets the attention here which he
craves, at least he's not going postal to get it.


True. It seems all part of some vast sociological experiment.

If aliens were observing the human race, as if we were under the
microscope (thank you Mr Wells Wink ) then USENET would not show a
positive profile for us, I fear ;-)

Whereas I do tend to be evil and laugh at the kooks when you prod them,
you soon realise it is actually quite sad. Rather then prolong the
agony for them, and the people around trying to hold decent
conversations - its simply better to tune them out. They have shown
they contribute nothing but background noise.

Hence why people like Potter, TomGee and Brad are now in my killfile.
All I am doing but prodding them is providing extra noise for the S/N
ratio. They can rail at the gates for all I care, I know I'm above it
and now I have to prove that ;-)

I'm still going to vote for them in the AUK polls, but I'm not going to
bother arguing with people who either refuse to see the evidence in
front of them, or suffer from a messiah complex.


I go through mixed feelings about this topic (Arguing with the k00ks).
While
I agree there has been (to date) no examples of any of the trolling k00ks
seeing the light and learning / progressing, I still feel it is
worthwhile.

The main reason is sheer entertainment. There is some vicarious pleasure
to
be gaining in watching the fruitcakes squirm when they are taken to task
and
the vast majority of people's replies to the k00k-elite here are actually
very humorous. (Best long term example: James "Kibo" Parry replies to tj
Frazir). Some people try to think of USENET as a "serious" education
tool. I
don't and I don't think it has been since about 1988.

Also, the arguments are often very, very educational. Because of the
run-of-the-mill Cranks sheer reluctance to learn, some people here have
become amazingly adapt at explaining difficult concepts in simple terms.
This is genuinely useful - often the explanations can be taken into the
real
world and used to help educate the educatable.

Last but not least of my "quick lits o'ideas" is just practice at
spotting
logical flaws and inconsistencies. Always a useful skill to have :-)

The truly uneducable, uninteresting and non-entertaining trolls remain
killfiled for quite some time (a list that includes the likes of Potter,
TomGee, Min, Androcles, Plutonium etc), while the fr0thier ones (Guth,
Porat, Spaceman) move in and out depending how busy I am and how many
other
cranks there are on the go. Some cranks (Relf, Porat, Frazir etc) never
seem
to end up in the Kill Fill because they are so stupid it remains
interesting
for quite some time. :-)

VERGON
Other than sitting in lofty judgement, what do YOU offer?

Humour.

Quote:
(Basically, I agree with you.)

That's nice.
Back to top
Phineas T Puddleduck
science forum Guru


Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 759

PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:22 pm    Post subject: Re: PHOTON MASS -- A FACT. MASSLESS PARTICLES -- NOT FACT. Reply with quote

In article <I-ydnU-4MLxrbD_ZnZ2dnUVZ8qednZ2d@pipex.net>, T Wake
<Usenet.es7AT@gishpuppy.com> wrote:

Quote:
VERGON
Other than sitting in lofty judgement, what do YOU offer?

Humour.

(Basically, I agree with you.)

That's nice.


Get your coat TW, I think you've pulled.

--
The greatest enemy of science is pseudoscience.

Jaffa cakes. Sweet delicious orangey jaffa goodness, and an abject lesson why
parroting information from the web will not teach you cosmology.

Official emperor of sci.physics, head mumbler of the "Cult of INSANE SCIENCE".
Please pay no attention to my butt poking forward, it is expanding.

Relf's Law?
"Bullshit repeated to the limit of infinity asymptotically approaches
the odour of roses."

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Back to top
T Wake
science forum Guru


Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 1978

PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2006 10:54 pm    Post subject: Re: PHOTON MASS -- A FACT. MASSLESS PARTICLES -- NOT FACT. Reply with quote

"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote in
message news:280620062222010710%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...
Quote:
In article <I-ydnU-4MLxrbD_ZnZ2dnUVZ8qednZ2d@pipex.net>, T Wake
Usenet.es7AT@gishpuppy.com> wrote:

VERGON
Other than sitting in lofty judgement, what do YOU offer?

Humour.

(Basically, I agree with you.)

That's nice.


Get your coat TW, I think you've pulled.


Cool. This so soon after Brad says he [blushes] *likes* me..... Ace what
working away for a day does...
Back to top
avergon@verizon.net
science forum Guru Wannabe


Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 282

PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 12:50 am    Post subject: Re: PHOTON MASS -- A FACT. MASSLESS PARTICLES -- NOT FACT. Reply with quote

tomgee wrote:
Quote:
Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
In article <1151176827.213536.254900@y41g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>,
tomgee <tyropress@yahoo.com> wrote:

Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
In article <1151169183.266072.19540@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
tomgee <tyropress@yahoo.com> wrote:

Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
In article <EF9ng.500195$0R1.12595228@phobos.telenet-ops.be>, Dirk Van
de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com> wrote:

"TomGee" <lvl_us@peoplepc.com> wrote in message
news:1151149354.029242.138960@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...

Peter Christensen wrote:
"Vert" <avergon@verizon.net> skrev i en meddelelse
news:1150992050.310579.256480@r2g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
They *believe* there are such things as massless particles and
massless
photons.

It has been known for almost 100 years. It's not just a belief.

It has been accepted in the field that massless particles exist.
That conflicts with the energy and mass interdependence
principle which has also been long-accepted.

Maybe you could try to argue why the photon should have a non-zero
mass?

Because it contradicts the formula E=mc^2,

which is not valid for photons to begin with.

Dirk Vdm

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/ParticleAndNuclear/photon_mass.htm
l
Read and comprehend Tomgee

That is precisely what you are doing by using a website as a
reference. Don't you have the brains to know that?

Strawman.

I'm not PARROTING. I'm providing a link for you to read.

Now we all know you don't have the brains to tell there
is no difference between the two.

Neither do you, it seems....

That's false, since I am the one who pointed that out to you.

Now If I'd
posted the link, then made a babbled reference to the contents that
distorted it without understanding, I'd hold my hands up and say
guilty.

Of what? That would not be parroting; that would be providing
proper support for your signature statement, even if it was wrong.

Nice try at a strawman.

But I merely posted a link. One I have provided to many people as it is
a pinnacle of clarity on the topic.

Why do you provide links to people who can find them just
readily as you do, and who probably read them long before
you did, and who never asked you for a link? Do you think
readers are so stupid we want you to tell us where to find
stuff?

Its a website from a respected scientist who puts it all so succintly.
If you have issues understanding that, then thats your problem.

I guess you use others to talk for you since you cannot write
well enough to tell us what you think, PD, or else you can't think
for yourself well enough to make your own arguments, so you
refer others to the library as if every book written is in agree-
ment with all the others on every issue.

Oh I forgot, you know better don't you. You're a "special" "free
thinker".....

There are no special free thinkers; that term applies to anyone
able to shrug off the overindoctrination received in the schools
enough to allow them reasonable thought. You could be one if
you made an effort to break the chains of conformity that your
teachers put around your head. But to make such an effort,
you must first realize that has been done to you, and that is the
hardest part of becoming a free thinker. After that, you have
only to make the choice to change, and soon you will attain that
task. You can do it because the human brain is very amenable
to change, which is why the brainwashing is very strong - to keep
one from ever wanting to break free.

You keep advancing the nonsense, it makes for more giggles....

No. My ideas seem like nonsense to you because of the high
level of Pavlovian conditioning that has been imprinted on your
brain. The more successful one becomes in their social circle,
the more they must be a "team player", and nothing prevents
thinking "outside the box" more than that. Those inside the box
can never see they are in there, but instead they imagine they
are objective in their analysis of any situation and not just "one
of the boys". Team players are the bane of science, history
shows us. It is los lonely boys who better serve science.

VERGON
Yea! I'm with you. Well put. At least there are two of us here -- maybe
three.
Sad, isn't it?
Back to top
Phineas T Puddleduck
science forum Guru


Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 759

PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 12:52 am    Post subject: Re: PHOTON MASS -- A FACT. MASSLESS PARTICLES -- NOT FACT. Reply with quote

In article <1151628604.567665.74600@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>, Vert
<avergon@verizon.net> wrote:

Quote:

VERGON
Yea! I'm with you. Well put. At least there are two of us here -- maybe
three.
Sad, isn't it?


Oh there's plenty more of you kooks in here. But the funny thing is,
neither of you can agree how wrong Einstein is. You're like the groups
in Life of Brian ....

--
The greatest enemy of science is pseudoscience.

Jaffa cakes. Sweet delicious orangey jaffa goodness, and an abject lesson why
parroting information from the web will not teach you cosmology.

Official emperor of sci.physics, head mumbler of the "Cult of INSANE SCIENCE".
Please pay no attention to my butt poking forward, it is expanding.

Relf's Law?
"Bullshit repeated to the limit of infinity asymptotically approaches
the odour of roses."

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Back to top
T Wake
science forum Guru


Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 1978

PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 1:16 pm    Post subject: Re: PHOTON MASS -- A FACT. MASSLESS PARTICLES -- NOT FACT. Reply with quote

"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote in
message news:300620060152433853%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...
Quote:
In article <1151628604.567665.74600@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>, Vert
avergon@verizon.net> wrote:


VERGON
Yea! I'm with you. Well put. At least there are two of us here -- maybe
three.
Sad, isn't it?


Oh there's plenty more of you kooks in here. But the funny thing is,
neither of you can agree how wrong Einstein is. You're like the groups
in Life of Brian ....

I am the leaders of the Relativity Liberation Front, how dare you open a
discourse with the Peoples Liberation Front of Special Relativity...
Back to top
Phineas T Puddleduck
science forum Guru


Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 759

PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 2:47 pm    Post subject: Re: PHOTON MASS -- A FACT. MASSLESS PARTICLES -- NOT FACT. Reply with quote

In article <vtKdnaHSC-jZuTjZnZ2dnUVZ8qKdnZ2d@pipex.net>, T Wake
<Usenet.es7AT@gishpuppy.com> wrote:

Quote:
"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote in
message news:300620060152433853%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...
In article <1151628604.567665.74600@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>, Vert
avergon@verizon.net> wrote:


VERGON
Yea! I'm with you. Well put. At least there are two of us here -- maybe
three.
Sad, isn't it?


Oh there's plenty more of you kooks in here. But the funny thing is,
neither of you can agree how wrong Einstein is. You're like the groups
in Life of Brian ....

I am the leaders of the Relativity Liberation Front, how dare you open a
discourse with the Peoples Liberation Front of Special Relativity...



SPLITTERS!!!!!!!!!

--
The greatest enemy of science is pseudoscience.

e=pc / p=hk

Jaffa cakes. Sweet delicious orangey jaffa goodness, and an abject lesson why
parroting information from the web will not teach you cosmology.

Official emperor of sci.physics, head mumbler of the "Cult of INSANE SCIENCE".
Please pay no attention to my butt poking forward, it is expanding.

Relf's Law?
"Bullshit repeated to the limit of infinity asymptotically approaches
the odour of roses."

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Back to top
avergon@verizon.net
science forum Guru Wannabe


Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 282

PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 8:46 pm    Post subject: Re: PHOTON MASS -- A FACT. MASSLESS PARTICLES -- NOT FACT. Reply with quote

Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
Quote:
In article <vtKdnaHSC-jZuTjZnZ2dnUVZ8qKdnZ2d@pipex.net>, T Wake
Usenet.es7AT@gishpuppy.com> wrote:

"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote in
message news:300620060152433853%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...
In article <1151628604.567665.74600@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>, Vert
avergon@verizon.net> wrote:


VERGON
Yea! I'm with you. Well put. At least there are two of us here -- maybe
three.
Sad, isn't it?


Oh there's plenty more of you kooks in here. But the funny thing is,
neither of you can agree how wrong Einstein is. You're like the groups
in Life of Brian ....

I am the leaders of the Relativity Liberation Front, how dare you open a
discourse with the Peoples Liberation Front of Special Relativity...



SPLITTERS!!!!!!!!!

--
The greatest enemy of science is pseudoscience.

e=pc / p=hk

VERGON

Since there is no explanation to this nonsense, this post does not
merit an answer.
Back to top
Google

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 226 of 228 [3408 Posts] Goto page:  Previous  1, 2, 3, ..., 224, 225, 226, 227, 228 Next
View previous topic :: View next topic
The time now is Mon Dec 11, 2017 6:57 pm | All times are GMT
Forum index » Science and Technology » Physics
Jump to:  

Similar Topics
Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
No new posts Regression equation using absolute errors draccarlawpet Math 3 Tue Jun 27, 2006 5:39 pm
No new posts Maxwell's equation suggests absolute space and defy TWO N... guskz@hotmail.com Relativity 14 Thu Jun 08, 2006 1:46 pm
No new posts "Measuring Our Absolute Velocity" Klim Relativity 1 Thu Jun 01, 2006 11:57 am
No new posts "Measuring Our Absolute Velocity" Klim Particle 0 Thu Jun 01, 2006 11:57 am
No new posts "Measuring Our Absolute Velocity" Klim New Theories 0 Thu Jun 01, 2006 11:56 am

Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
Other DeniX Solutions sites: Electronics forum |  Medicine forum |  Unix/Linux blog |  Unix/Linux documentation |  Unix/Linux forums  |  send newsletters
 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0703s ][ Queries: 16 (0.0324s) ][ GZIP on - Debug on ]