Re: Earth rotation

From: Greg Neill (gneillREM_at_OVE.THIS.netcom.ca)
Date: 06/22/04 

Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 20:23:24 -0400

"don findlay" <don@tower.net.au> wrote in message
news:5f164087.0406211542.d9ac08b@posting.google.com...
> "Greg Neill" <gneillREM@OVE.netcom.ca> wrote in message
news:<D7CBc.50328$603.657727@weber.videotron.net>...

> > Let us keep it simple, for our purposes here and your benefit.
> > If a system is modeled by some function, say f, of a variable,
> > x, then if we expand that function as a Taylor serious about a
> > certain point (which is often the "operating point" of the
> > system being modeled), then first order effects correspond to
> > those terms of the series which are linear in x. Similarly,
> > second order effects correspond to quadratic terms, and so
> > forth.
>
> Word salad? What "purpose does this have here"? Does this mean the
> Ocean Floors are not big? And the Earth is not bigger?

I cannot fathom the purpose of your quotation marks in the
above. Your question would appear to be wholly unrelated to
the point.

>
> > You have no mathematical model, and your terminology is strongly
> > at variance with accepted usage.
>
> Keep telling you (all) - I don't *have* any model. I'm just
> dealing with the geological facts, ...in which the ocean floors have
> got bigger about the operating point/line of the spreading ridges.

I note that you have incorporated my expression, "operating
point", into your word salad.

> If
> you can make equations out of that lot that prove convection without
> attending to Mr Russell's caution (Panthalassa thread), then you are
> more devious in your manipulations than a whole worldful of
> convectioneers thus far. (..let this be that and that be this, where
> this is that and that is this..). Indications are (geological ones
> that is) that growth has been not simply linear, but exponential.
> (Where does 'exponential' fit in your definition of "order"?)

You do like to move the goalposts when you're cornered,
rambling off in new directions to obfuscate the fact
that you're hopelessly lost.

[snip]

> > > Or I'll get Jo to work you over..
> >
> > I offered no physical threat. You, however, seem to have just done
> > so. Tut, tut.
>
> Piker. It's not a threat, it's a promise. So there. And we're still
> waiting for the concept that's behind that word salad you just served
> up - as it's relevant to the matter at hand, that is - ocean floor
> growth and its torsional expression.

Now you've adopted the expression, "word salad". It seems
that you can't muster a single original thought.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Earth rotation
    ... > that is) that growth has been not simply linear, ... >> I offered no physical threat. ... Tut, tut. ... > waiting for the concept that's behind that word salad you just served ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: Earth rotation
    ... > I cannot fathom the purpose of your quotation marks in the ... I also incorporated your "word salad" You don't recognise ... >> that is) that growth has been not simply linear, ... differential equations, and tell us what they're actually referring to ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Earth rotation
    ... > I cannot fathom the purpose of your quotation marks in the ... I also incorporated your "word salad" You don't recognise ... >> that is) that growth has been not simply linear, ... differential equations, and tell us what they're actually referring to ...
    (sci.geo.geology)