Re: new improved facts v011
From: jahn (susysewnshow_at_yahoo.com.au)
Date: 03/14/05
- Next message: Dirk Van de moortel: "Re: origin of inertia"
- Previous message: George Hammond: "Re: GOD=G_uv Hammond starts COSA Church"
- In reply to: Paulps: "Re: new improved facts v011"
- Next in thread: paulps: "Re: new improved facts v011"
- Reply: paulps: "Re: new improved facts v011"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 16:20:46 -0500
"Paulps" <paulpsremove@freeuk.com> wrote in message news:1110830019.11561.0@echo.uk.clara.net...
>
[snip]
> Good for them and I hope they get a good dose as it opens the pores of the
> mind.
Most of them are dearly departed. That's why everyone gets
away with putting word's in there mouths.
>
> I noticed a pore of mine open a few days back so I'm hoping to qualify
> as an idiot soon so I may soon (well give or take 50 years) be up with them.
> :-) but I'm not in competition and as soon as somebody takes up the torch of
> common sense I'm bailing out of this group for a rest cure :-) I might watch
> for a bit though but with my eyes shut as I cant stand the sight of blood.
>
> | Are you saying you aren't good enough ?
>
> How could you read me as writing I aren't good enough ? I must be
> incomprehensible like this group claims? although I don't usually get that
> response.
>
[snip ragged /n]
>
> No, just where's the b**** dictionary :-) probably not important I'll just
> make it up again but don't blame me if I tread on peoples faces :-)
>
> | I could believe that. ;-) IMHO, if it goes unused it
> | atrophies.
>
> Nice one I like you to, here's a chip off my stone mind *nspace* don't eat
> it all at once :-)
> Would you like to comment on this clip from one of your old posts? haunt
> haunt
> +
> What does Planck have to do with it ?
Probably some comment about EM propagation.
> X and gamma rays show no respect for Planck.
> But they do respect 1/r^2 .
They don't depend on atomic oscillators for emission.
Eh?
> One of the best radiation shields you can buy
> is distance. Cheap too ;-)
<< the radiation dose a person receives depends on how
close the person is to the source. The greater the distance
between the person and the source of radiation, the smaller
the dose. In fact, the dose decreases with the square of the
distance. A person ten feet from the radiation source receives
only one one-hundredth as much radiation as a person one
foot from the source.
>>
http://www.ag.ohio-state.edu/~rer/rerhtml/rer_26.html
> +
> You seem to be writing that hbar is not applicable to X and Gamma ray but
> that doesn't jibe with my texts or understanding of establishment thinking.
Establishment thinking? You mean like "CO2 isn't a greenhouse gas" or
"drilling in Alaska will cure a gasoholic nation" and
that sort of thing? Yeah... ya don't wanna go up against those types. ;-)
X and gamma rays can be born, do something useful and die without
ever getting near an atomic oscillator.
"Light is emitted or absorbed by an *atom* in discrete amounts called quanta."
--Max Planck
Methinks you are confusing the statisical formalism of Quantum Mechanics
for a qualitative theory.
Tip: If ya wanna stay off the wave/particle merry-go-round, learn all
the different ways to determine and specify "free space permeability"
Sue...
>
> Snipper:-)
> Paulps
>
>
- Next message: Dirk Van de moortel: "Re: origin of inertia"
- Previous message: George Hammond: "Re: GOD=G_uv Hammond starts COSA Church"
- In reply to: Paulps: "Re: new improved facts v011"
- Next in thread: paulps: "Re: new improved facts v011"
- Reply: paulps: "Re: new improved facts v011"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|