Re: more struggle with the buoyancy principle for our brilliant hydrogeologist.
- From: "George" <George@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2008 11:06:54 -0400
"Florian" <auxotectonics_deletethis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1in7uag.1qkhcwm5sgtjlN%auxotectonics_deletethis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
George <George@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Florian" <auxotectonics_deletethis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1in65pt.15dgt1216kvwt2N%auxotectonics_deletethis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
George <George@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It does not sink! It floats! If it was sinking it would go straight
to
the bottom!
Right. It is buoyant, but when additional mass is placed on it, that
additional mass overcomes the buoyancy and it is "pushed" to the
bottom.
"pushed to the bottom" is not sinking, idiot. Sinking objects don't
need
no push, they sink because they're pulled (gravity).
I tire of these games you are playing.
You are the player. According to your funky definition sinking would be
equivalent to floating. Non sense.
You need to write this out and place it on the wall of your padded cell so
you can read it over and over again. That appears to be the only way you
learn:
"Piled up ice sinks lower into water because of the mass of ice. Crustal
rocks gathered in a large pile (a mountain, for instance) do the same just
as buildings can if not properly constructed. If this were not true,
engineers wouldn't bother worrying about whether or not a building
foundation can withstand the load placed on it.
Good. I don't believe in God, either.
So quit evoking it to save your ass.
Odd that ou say that, since I thought you were. You keep claiming that
something magical
YOU are the irrational idiot claiming some magic. I don't. I'm certain
there is a rational explanation for that accumulation of new matter
inside planets, ours in particular.
Then what's the rational explanation, Floppy? If you are so sure, tell us
what it is.
Second reason is that ice does touch the bottom of the glass despite
it
floats because your glass is too small in height to immerse 9/10th
of
the total volume of icecubes.
So, gravity has no effect? None at all?
A guy asking such a moronic question as "gravity has no effect?" in an
observation related to the buoyancy principle is a plain moron. You are
a plain moron.
So I can assume that since you refuse to answer this question
And you can't read either...
Sure I can. I'm still waiting to read your explanation of where the extra
mass comes from. Well?
It is the same, moron. If they sink they must go to the bottom of the
mantle.
Why? Ice doesn't sink to the bottom of the ocean, but is certainly does
sink below the surface [...]
Ice never sinks, i.e. is going totally below the surface, because it
floats, you idiot.
Sink - To cause to descend beneath a surface.
So you are saying that there is no situation that can occur where ice can
descend (sink) beneath the surface of water? There is no amount of mass
that can be added to ice to make it sink in water? Careful how you respond.
Name-calling only hurts your argument.
George
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: Where did the extra mass come from?
- From: Florian
- Re: Where did the extra mass come from?
- From: Florian
- Re: Where did the extra mass come from?
- From: George
- Re: Where did the extra mass come from?
- From: Florian
- Re: Where did the extra mass come from?
- From: George
- more struggle with the buoyancy principle for our brilliant hydrogeologist.
- From: Florian
- Re: more struggle with the buoyancy principle for our brilliant hydrogeologist.
- From: George
- Re: more struggle with the buoyancy principle for our brilliant hydrogeologist.
- From: Florian
- Re: more struggle with the buoyancy principle for our brilliant hydrogeologist.
- From: George
- Re: more struggle with the buoyancy principle for our brilliant hydrogeologist.
- From: Florian
- Re: Where did the extra mass come from?
- Prev by Date: Re: Where did the extra mass come from?
- Next by Date: Re: Where did the extra mass come from?
- Previous by thread: Re: more struggle with the buoyancy principle for our brilliant hydrogeologist.
- Next by thread: Re: more struggle with the buoyancy principle for our brilliant hydrogeologist.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|