Age of Universe Edges Closer to Officer Bert's Prediction!

In article ,
"Painius" wrote:

Phineas you ignorant slut...

I wonder if you've mistaken Brad for Alan again?

Alan for Brad? You po li'l ho, you allus gettin'
dem 2 confo0o0o0sed an' confucntionated,

...aincha.

FOAD


Losing it,kook? Sockpuppet accusations, cheap lames and losing your temper -
meds running dry?

Of course, believing there is no iron in high mass stars is a PHENOMENAL
mistake for someone who calls himself an astronomer - and only proves just how
LITTLE you know about stellar physics, kook!!!

--
Saucerheads - denying the blatantly obvious since 2000.

In article ,
Art Deco wrote:

Nope, sorry, you're still a sto0pid ho, Mother Goose.

The fact that you consider this issue trivial is just another
indication of your abject ignorance of basic science.


Real scientists don't need no steenkin units ;-)

--
Saucerheads - denying the blatantly obvious since 2000.

In article .com,
wrote:

Yo Paine


The recent dialog er, imbroglio with the Duck was *very* revealing and
eye-opening to the intensity and zeal of the VS-ers' worldview. Such
an up-close and personal encounter with it really drives it home. They
do believe avowedly in the "geometry-as-cause, gravity is a pseudo-
force" explanation of gravity. And apparently they see no conundrum in
declaring space to be pure void on the one hand, and on the other hand
claiming, by virture of its geometry/distortion, it accomplishes the
herculean tasks of gravity. Seeing the stark contrast between the VS
worldview and the true mechanism of gravity gives even greater
appreciation for the latter. And the Sun and stars shine even brighter
in the firmament.

Post a single defining equation.


The Duck has been hollering that Wolter is a fictitious character,
which he assuredly was not. Insofar as his FS-gravity model, which was
a mere 'sidebar' of the larger CBB model, one can forget Wolter..
because others, working independantly and without collaboration, have
deduced _exactly_ that same mechanism. I.e., a monopolar,
omnidirectional, "reverse starburst" flow of a *literal* medium,
pressure-driven and accelerating into mass, with mass synonymous with
flow sink.

Ah now you cannot prove this guy exists, you give up the pretense.

Can you point me to one defining paper which gives the properties of the fluid
and their derivations? So far, its all faith....



Over the years, links to the webpages of Lindner, Shifman, Paxton and
Warren have been posted here (and recently, H.G. Ellis, a 'mainstream'
scientist). Warren has periodically updated his site, as seen here,
replete with the attendant math as usual -

http://www.olypen.com/hcwarren/

Ellis' work is from 1974, and his later stuff doesn't gel so well. Ether
theories are pretty dead in the water.

Linder's stuff is worthless. This is slightly better in that he does the math
for the GR case, but the flowing space stuff is all "suppose" and I see no
defining equations for the property of the fluid. Still more nonsense. Still no
more discussion of singularities... More poor physics

For example, this predicts that mass moving in empty space will feel a drag
that slows it down! Nowhere does it mention what happens to this fluid in the
centre of a mass. I guess this is just another tired light theory

He says "It was noted in the introduction that the math associated with this
model produces the Schwarzschild solution" not understanding that correlation
!= causation.

Talks of changing velocities for light in a gravitational field. His QM comes
from very dubious sources. The best bit is

"Kip Thorne(22) in his book Black Holes & Time Warps devotes a number of pages
in chapter 11 to the concept that if clocks and rulers are ³rubbery², that is
they really do slow and change lengths as proposed in this model, then flat
space ³appears curved² and the same experimental results are predicted. That
the universe presently appears to be flat(23) is a point in favor of the
proposed model."

Which is hysterical. He doesn't understand the difference between local and
global geometry. KT was using an analogy... This is the point, we talk of the
underlying geometry being Euclidean or non-Euclidean. Its hardly a point in
favour.

WHAT A WHOPPER OF A BLOOPER "The reason that the energy remaining in the vacuum
at 0oC is not detectable is that the fabric or medium of space is non
electromagnetic in nature."

I think he meant K not c! Such a whopper is pretty fatal if thats the level of
checks went into this paper!

He also says "The author would like to reiterate here his preference for the
terminology ³medium in or of space² when referencing spatial flow in this
model, because he is uncertain whether it is the stuff of space itself which is
flowing and varying in density or ³gravitons² or something else to which we are
electromagnetically blind.: So even he is aware there is no proof here!

More nonsense" Further, the dictum of special relativity that forces cannot
propagate faster than the speed of light, leads to the conclusion that as the
speed of light is approached electrons peel off, nuclei fall apart, and
material matter disintegrates into photons, which is consistent with both
Einstein's belief that particles such as electrons are held together by gravity
and his equivalence of energy and mass. This is contrary to what conventional
wisdom understands SR predicts. It is consistent with a velocity redshift"

Matter CANNOT reach c. Matter doesn't "disintegrate" as you reach c. Its
absolute nonsense with no mathematical backing. He keeps the maths for the
normal physics, and at best brings out some algebra for his other stuff....

He also says (answering his nine points here)

1. A consequence of this theory is that as the universe varied in spatial
density through time, the speed of light also varied. Light is posited to have
been much faster shortly after the Big Bang and to have decreased with
expansion. That the permittivity of the vacuum ?0 is believed to be dependent
on spacetime geometry is consistent with this model¹s assertion that the
velocity of light varies with the state of expansion of the universe.(18)(26)*
Indeed, recent tests and analysis suggest that the speed of light may have
slowed over time.(33)

* There is no evidence for this (VSL), and this breaks several known things
such as Supernovae...


2. The flatness problem i.e. the issue of whether or not the universe is open
or closed, which is really a rate of expansion problem and not a shape of the
universe problem, is said to be resolved by a variable speed of light(25).

* Variable speed of light theories are pretty dead in the water.

3. The horizon problem clearly is solved by the variable speed of light as
proposed in this model as communication in any early big bang universe would
have occurred at a near infinite speed.

* As above and as Wiki says:

"The varying speed of light cosmology
A variable speed of light cosmology has been proposed independently by John
Moffat and the two-man team of Andreas Albrecht and João Magueijo to explain
the horizon problem of cosmology.[20][21][22] [23] [24] [25] [26] The idea is
that light propagated as much as sixty times faster in the distant past, and
thus distant regions of the expanding universe have had time to interact since
the beginning of the universe. As such, it was proposed as an alternative to
cosmic inflation, although it is less clear how it reproduces the other
successes of inflationary cosmology such as the monopole and flatness problems
and how it reproduces the observed homogeneity and isotropy of the universe,
and the scale invariance of the spectrum of initial perturbations.

There is no known way to solve the horizon problem with variation of the
fine-structure constant, because its variation does not change the causal
structure of spacetime. To do so would require modifying gravity by varying
Newton's constant or redefining special relativity. (See equivalence principle
for further details.) Varying speed of light cosmologies propose to circumvent
this by varying the dimensionful quantity c by breaking the Lorentz invariance
of Einstein's theories of general and special relativity in a particular
way.[27] However, it has been pointed out by Ellis and Uzan[28] that the VSL
cosmology is an ad hoc modification of various equations of physics without a
consistent underlying scheme, such as a Lagrangian from which the equations of
motion can be derived. It has been suggested out[29] that a modification of the
Einstein-Maxwell action can cause light to propagate at a speed faster than the
speed of light defined by the metric, but this necessarily causes problems with
causality and quantum mechanics.[30]"

4. Experimental evidence indicates that the universe is presently flat(23). It
may be that the universe at one time had a curved geometry and was flattened by
inflation. But a variable speed of light provides a possible mechanism for the
universe having always been flat.

* As above Varying the fine structure constant leads to bad mojo....

5. Since all velocities and physical processes are referenced to Co in this
model and to c in both special and general relativity, an ultimate reference
frame, which has varied over time, is implied. That ultimate reference frame is
the universe, itself, possibly with the cosmic background radiation standing in
as proxy for that reference frame. Local variations in density would occur
depending on the distribution of gravitational entities and other factors and
all entities would respond to local conditions, but on the grand scale the
universe and the background reference it provides can be considered homogenous.*

It cannot absorb GR and proclaim a global reference frame.

6. Changes in clock rates and rod lengths are real. A distinction is made
between measurements such as clock rates and the flow of time per se, which is
referenced to the history of the universe as a whole. If people at different
locations in the universe measure different times for the age of the universe,
that is a measurement problem and does not impact the history of the universe
anymore than an unlucky person suffering a premature aging disease affects the
lifespan of the earth.

* Huh? Again under the illusion there is a global reference frame.

7. The depletion of the spatial fabric between gravitational bodies should
interact with the Casimir effect.*
*
No proof

8. The ramifications of the preceding paragraphs for the calculations of the
size and age of the universe could be profound.

* Not really - VSL as above

9. This model posits that where gravitational fields overlap the depletion of
the spatial fabric will be the result of the combined effects of both fields at
all locations in where they overlap. Thus, at the nodes where two massive
bodies offset each other there will be no gravitational flow, but the combined
depletion of the spatial fabric will result in the velocity of light and
propagation of forces through such a node being appropriately retarded.


* No proof whatsoever Under *A PROPOSED TEST OF THE THEORY he talks of a
spacecraft with the relevant equipment - already exists as there are FTS
spectrometers in space and any variation in c as predicted would break space
based spectroscopy as the effect would not be isotropic.

On the whole 3/10. Needs some real checks.

Under *A PROPOSED TEST OF THE THEORY he talks of a spacecraft with the relevant
equipment - already exists as there are FTS spectrometers in space and any
variation in c as predicted would break space based spectroscopy.




As a 'sidebar', he also goes into discussion of the Casimir effect and
is saying essentially the same thing we've been saying here- that it
demonstrates the unification of gravity and the subnuclear forces.

No proof.



OK Windows, do your stuff and show how efficient your spam filters
are.




--
Saucerheads - denying the blatantly obvious since 2000.

In article ,
"Painius" wrote:

The fusing of iron nuclei leads to a net energy loss within the core of
a supernova, this sudden loss of energy leads to an instability that
basically results in a core suddenly collapsing and rebounding, hitting
the outer layers whilst they are still wondering WTF.

Simplified for you. I'm sure I could point you to some elementary
stellar physics notes

That makes about as much sense as how science
used to view the Sun before we knew about nuclear
energy.

You are certainly no astronomer. This is BASIC level astronomy...!

Where is the tremendous, no wait, make
that **T R E E - ****ing - M E N D O U S** amount
of pressure required to induce and to result in the
supernova explosion?

Please try to remember this time that the amount of
iron in any star is much less than a spit in the ocean.


Nonsense - Your knowledge of stellar physics is pitiful for someone who calls
himself an astronomer. Where do you think all elements above ~ Lithium COME
FROM? Plus have you heard of DEGENERACY PRESSURE?

Its statements such as the above which mean you have a FAR bigger problem with
credibility then me....

Here's some Uni level Stellar Physics notes.

http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/...tro/lec14.html

14.1 CORE FUSION IN MASSIVE STARS
In a low-mass (main sequence mass M 8 Msun) star, degenerate electron
pressure halts the contraction of the carbon/oxygen core (produced by helium
fusion) before it gets hot enough to ignite carbon fusion.
In a high-mass star, the core contracts and heats to a temperature where carbon
can fuse.
After the core runs out of carbon, it contracts again, until it becomes hot
enough for oxygen fusion.
The core of the star continues through fusion cycles, building up an ``onion''
structure of layered elements.
Heavier elements are less efficient nuclear fuel, so each cycle takes less
time. For a 20Msun star, which has a main-sequence (hydrogen-fusion) lifetime
of about 8 million years, silicon fuses to iron in about a week!


14.2 CORE COLLAPSE AND ENVELOPE EXPLOSION
Eventually, fusion in a massive star turns the core to iron. But fusing iron
into heavier elements releases no energy. (In fact, it takes energy.)
Without a fusion energy source, the core cannot maintain its pressure, and it
is too massive to be supported by degenerate electrons. It implodes to a size
of about 50 km in a fraction of a second.
The core now has enormously high density and temperature. The iron nuclei
disintegrate, and the electrons are ``squeezed'' into the protons, turning them
into neutrons and producing neutrinos.
Iron disintegration robs the core of its remaining heat, and it collapses to
the density of an atomic nucleus, and beyond. The collapse is finally halted by
the nuclear interaction, which becomes repulsive at extremely high densities.
The core `bounces' and runs into the still infalling envelope. The collision
drives a blast wave which rips through the envelope, exploding the star.

This web page even shows it GRAPHICALLY

http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys230...res/sn/sn.html

So, for example,
€ if you fuse hydrogen into helium, you get a LOT of energy per reaction
€ if you fuse helium into carbon, you get a little energy per reaction
€ if you fuse silicon into iron, you get a tiny bit of energy per reaction

Q: What happens when you fuse iron into
heavier elements?
The answer is -- you LOSE energy! Instead of generating energy and increasing
the temperature of a stellar core, fusion reactions involving iron will REMOVE
energy, and drop the temperature.



Core collapse and rebound: supernova
So what happens when a massive star has built up a large core of iron? As the
iron core is pressed in on itself, any reactions which take place don't release
energy -- they "suck away" energy, decreasing the temperature of the core.

€ decreasing temperature leads to lower gas pressure ....
€ which allows gravity to pull inwards ...
€ which increases the density ....
€ which increases rate of reactions ...
€ which further decreases temperature ....
€ etc.
In a fraction of a second, the iron-rich core of the star collapses, from a
sphere roughly the size of the Earth (radius 6000 km) to a ball of radius only
50 kilometers or so. As the core shrinks, the protons and electrons in it are
crushed together to form neutrons. Neutrons are peculiar particles: they resist
being pressed together closely (you can look up "neutron degeneracy pressure"
sometime if you like). The core collapse halts when the pressure of the
"neutron gas" reaches a critical level.
During the collapse, the reactions which turn protons and electrons into
neutrons also release neutrinos. The core collapse of a massive star can
produce a huge pulse of neutrinos, containing more energy in a single second
than the Sun will radiate in a million years!



--
Saucerheads - denying the blatantly obvious since 2000.

I'll never know another Painius like Painius on Thu, 01 Feb 2007 15:26:29
+0000 in AUK, they're so drad:
"The Demon Prince of Absurdity" wrote...
On Thu, 01 Feb 2007 08:02:23 +0000, Painius did the cha-cha, and
screamed:

Phineas you ignorant slut...

Uh-huh. You are /so/ easy.

*ding*

(tips huge cat-in-the-hat hat)

You don't really comprehend what the "ding" is about.

That's gotta be the most limp-dick lits i've ever seen!

Failure to comprehend TWOTK is also a kooksign in itself, Painful.

There's no failure here, Demon Prick of Ass.urdity, i fully comprehend
the lits as a flappin' floppin' in the breeze pee-pee.

Now you're just trying to challenge my Monkey-man for the title of
Usenet's Lamest K00k, aren't you.

And your failure to comprehend my comprehension puts you on a pedestal
that's shaped like a pee-pee. Slide down sloooooowly, Deepmon.

Well, forget it. No matter how hard you try, you're not lamer than the
PorchMonkey. You've never quite managed to spank yourself multiple times
in a single lame (in the database provided by your main owner, that is).
In a single post, perhaps, but not a single transcendently lame attempt at
insult. I suppose you've come close, though.

You cute li'l gooselings *really* need to get a life.

Your ownership by AD is total.

So... did you *work* for and *earn* this wealth of ass.urdity? or did you
just inherit it?

_po li'l rich ho_

Oh, look, I'm coming into another co-ownership. BTW:

Demon Prick of Ass.urdity

*ding* tips sombrer0

--
__________________________________________________ ______________________
Hail Eris! All hail Discordia!! Kallisti!!!
Lola Stonewall Riot

VOTE! Usenet Kook Awards, January 2007
MID: 70

2001 RADW Bitch of the Year, ADRIC Awards (by acclamation); mhm 29x21;
Tom Baker's #1 Fan; Flonk Leader #2 & #11 1/9; S.N.A.R.K.Y.: Synthetic
Networked Android Responsible for Killing and Yardwork; the Discordian
People's Most Powerful and Revered Being (without portfolio); Demon of
Mockery and Silliness, Demon Lord of Confusion, Demon Prince of
Absurdity; Cardinal Snarky of the Fannish Inquisition; Lola, called
Snarky, Queen of the Snarks of Ærisia; Queen of Rice; TransWench; Ship's
Chaos Demon, Bad Ship BetNoirian; The God of Odd Statements; Dr. L. C.
Snark, Professor of Philosophy, Critical Theory (Liberal Arts and
Contemporary Studies), Mockery, Silliness, Confusion, Absurdity, Chaos,
& General Mayhem, Centre For Xena Studies; The God-Fairy-Demon Snark;
The Black Goat With A Thousand Young; Pope Snarky Goodfella of the
undulating cable, JM, CK, POEE, KOTHASK, GGGHD, MWFA, HCNB, CPFG, CEM;
Superfaggot; Canadian Popular Front for the Whitetail Jihad; Wearer of
the Holy FAGGOT Hat; Sec'y, Int'l Homosexual Conspiracy; Treasurer,
Int'l Anarchist Conspiracy; Czar of all the Flonkers; Mastermind of the
SMOF; allegedly The Worst Kind Of Feminist; Chas. E. Pemberton; Pete
Stapleton; Joseph Bartlo; Koi-Lo; Henry Schmidt
ICQ: 135930147; popesnarkyatmeowdotorg
BITCH PRIDE!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quotable quotes:

"So the American government lied to the Native Americans for many, many
years, and then President Clinton lied about a relationship, and
everyone was surprised! A little naive, I feel!"
-- Eddie Izzard

"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd
have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but
for good people to do bad things, it takes religion."
-- Steven Weinberg, Nobel Laureate

"i have no need for sex; i'd rather tease you, honeybuns." -- Teh Mop
Jockey doesn't know the meaning of "TMI". MID:


"Gabrielle?! Monkey-man, you bring her back! You know, you two are
beginning to irritate me with these obsessions of yours!
Fish don't just catch themselves!" -- Xena, "Fins, Femmes, &
Gems" (64/318)

Teh Czar ov Awl Teh Flonkers wrote:
I'll never know another Painius like Painius on Thu, 01 Feb 2007 15:26:29
+0000 in AUK, they're so drad:
"The Demon Prince of Absurdity" wrote...
On Thu, 01 Feb 2007 08:02:23 +0000, Painius did the cha-cha, and
screamed:
Phineas you ignorant slut...
Uh-huh. You are /so/ easy.
*ding*

(tips huge cat-in-the-hat hat)

You don't really comprehend what the "ding" is about.

That's gotta be the most limp-dick lits i've ever seen!
Failure to comprehend TWOTK is also a kooksign in itself, Painful.
There's no failure here, Demon Prick of Ass.urdity, i fully comprehend
the lits as a flappin' floppin' in the breeze pee-pee.

Now you're just trying to challenge my Monkey-man for the title of
Usenet's Lamest K00k, aren't you.

Nah, You're the Lamest kook on Usenet. You're also the biggest B1tch on
Usenet. I think people are starting to see you for the kook that you are
and not the kookologist that you try and shield yourself with. Thinking
that that lame little label with prevent people from taking it to you
and flaming you back.

You're so f*cking lame with your 203 nyms that you use during flame wars
to try and give the illusion that you are a skilled flamer and
unbeatable flamer. How pathetic? B1tch I destroyed you easily. No effort
expended and I humiliated you quite thoroughly and publicly.

You're just a limp d1ck lame as$ clown that so wants to give off the
illusion that he's popular. That he's cool. When in reality he's nothing
but a lame as$ fool that can't flame for $hit and needs fake names to
try and build support for all of his weak as$ efforts.

Does that sound like you, *ying* collective associate. I got your number
and I will continue to take it right at ya. Going toe to toe and *never*
*ever* backing down.

If possible I'd flame your punk as$ into perpetuity. I hope Painus
chooses *not* to back down either. I hope he continues to c0ckslap you
like the $0.10 whore that you truly are.

B1tch, let me be the latest people to tell you this. You are f*cking
over. Over. DOne. Finito!!

And your failure to comprehend my comprehension puts you on a pedestal
that's shaped like a pee-pee. Slide down sloooooowly, Deepmon.

Well, forget it. No matter how hard you try, you're not lamer than the
PorchMonkey. You've never quite managed to spank yourself multiple times
in a single lame (in the database provided by your main owner, that is).
In a single post, perhaps, but not a single transcendently lame attempt at
insult. I suppose you've come close, though.


No matter how hard you try you are still my *owned* little b1tch. And it
looks to me like Painus as about to cause you a lot of *pain* in your
as$. You somehow manage to get lamer by the post. Have you ever said
anything even remotely interesting... Scrap that... How about something
remotely funny... .Scratch that too.... How about something that was
profoundly retard and utter jibberish? I didn't think so.

Nice attempt to use me as some common bonding element for you and
Painus. Nice touch saying "that he's not as lame as ....". You manage to
insult him but in a backhanded kind of way. In essense, you kind of give
him an opportunity to backdown. Painus... If you're out there don't take
it. This b1tch is like a house of cards and I'm the gust of wind that is
making him $hit his pants.

The b1tch is so transparent that it is not even funny. He's trying to
make you think that you need his approval or his good opinion of you to
exist in this group (or others). He is just a little geek with low self
esteem issues that tries to build his self confidence by deriding
others. The *ying* collective associate is nothing but a limp d1ck
fagg0t. My advice is to keep abusing the as$wipe.

Soon more and more people will see him for what he really is. A pathetic
trisexual loser.
You cute li'l gooselings *really* need to get a life.
Your ownership by AD is total.
So... did you *work* for and *earn* this wealth of ass.urdity? or did you
just inherit it?

_po li'l rich ho_

Oh, look, I'm coming into another co-ownership. BTW:

Nah, I think I have to share ownership of your with Painus. His foot is
in your as$ and correct me if I'm wrong.... I think he's wiggling his
toes with those uncut toenails. Man... Your rectum must be full of
scratches... with all that wiggling.

Let me guess your next punk as$ move. YOu've have a series of your
equally lame nyms suddenly appear and instantly lend support and
credence to whatever view you happen to be advocating. Whether it's you
delusional belief that you're gonna *own* Painus. Or your even more
demented belief that you *own* me. B1tch, get a clue. Buy a vowel. Do
something.. cause your whatever you have been doing in the past seems to
be failing you bigtime here.

Demon Prick of Ass.urdity

*ding* tips sombrer0

Eat a d1ck, b1tch!!!

Art Deco pinched out a steaming pile
:

Painius wrote:

"Art Deco" wrote in message...
...
The Secretary of HomIntern ó wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 15:37:03 +0000, Painius k'lamed:
"Art Deco" wrote...
Double-A wrote:
On Jan 25, 5:25 pm, Art Deco wrote:
Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
"Painius" wrote:

But you won't do this 'cause it's not your style! No,
*your* style
is to tear into things you think you have no power to
understand.
You are always underestimating yourself. If you stay
"here" much
longer, you'll find that we just will not let you continue
getting
away with this.

There is nothing to understand. You have nothing that makes
any
quantitative predictions - you merely take a particular issue
in
physics, utter some word salad and claim it "explains the
issue".

Never have I seen anything even resembling science from the
saucerheads,
because I suspect they either lack the ability to make
predictions
that are testable, or know that any attempt to put meat on
the bones
will expose the weakness of your position.

But please, I DO so look forward to you "not letting me get
away
with
this".There is a fairly well-known psychology paper that is a
particularly
apt description of the saucerheads' condition:

J. Kruger, D. Dunning, "Unskilled and Unaware of It: How
Difficulties
in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated
Self-Assessments," J. Personality & Soc. Psych. 77 (6) 1121-
1134,
1999.

Abstract:
"People tend to hold overly favorable views of their abilities
in
many
social and intellectual domains. The authors suggest that this
overestimation occurs, in part, because people who are
unskilled in
these domains suffer a dual burden: Not only do these people
reach
erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their
incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize
it.
Across 4 studies, the authors found that participants scoring
in the
bottom quartile on tests of humor, grammar, and logic grossly
overestimated their test performance and ability. Although
their test
scores put them in the 12th percentile, they estimated
themselves to
be in the 62nd. Several analyses linked this miscalibration to
deficits in metacognitive skill, or the capacity to
distinguish
accuracy from error. Paradoxically, improving the skills of
participants, and thus increasing their metacognitive
competence,
helped them recogize the limitations of the abilities."

Note, however, with regard to the final sentence, that the
saucerheads
have demonstrated that attempting to help them improve their
skills
is
a fruitless endeavor.- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -

Seems you're suffering from this condition yourself, Art, since
you
mistakenly think you are competent enough to set yourself up as
a judge
of other people's competences on Usenet.

Your attempted diversion with a massive IKYABWAI failed.

Oh NO, Mother, AA succeeded with flying colors. What exactly
*are* your
credentials for giving out all those cute li'l awards? Do you
think
that
having lots and lots of gooselings 'n sockpuppets gives you the
right to

Any evidence that I have "lots and lots" of sockpuppets, painsnuh?

Note: no evidence, the saucerhead claim fails.

And as for the other bit of lame there, if you had even the barest
thread of clue you might realize that your obsessive delusion that
I am
somehow the leader of AUK is silly. But again, one tends to forget
that the elite pseudoscience lamers see the world through
saucerhead-colored glasses.

Note: no response.

be judge and jury over anybody you please?

Poor painsnuh, he desperately wants to give his kook awards back.

You appear to have a very low opinion of the process of
speculation and
its importance to the science of astronomy. So before we can
kowtow to
your esteemed low opinion, we must know just what it is in your
background
that gives you the right to be such a stark-raving pahtooteynine
demondick?

For your perusal, Teh Way of Teh K00k, in my .sig. Everyone is
guilty of
one or two of these flaws, maybe even three or four; k00ks have
many of
them.

painsnuh is in the final stages of terminal denial, he won't
understand.

Phineas you ignorant slut...

This was stupid and tired right after the second time you lamed it.

Oh,yeah, i'm in denial alright. I'm in the final
stages of denying even the remotest credibility
anywhere at, near or around the other two
newsgroups xposted to.

Clueless.

You're just plain fulla

****,

Mother Gaboose!

Does frootbag support your laming abilities via email?

See...looky at all these sites promoting Solar Power I found

You could just put them in your sigfile and help the world become a
better place Carl:
http://www.solarelectricpower.org/
http://www.ases.org/
http://www.chicagosolarpartnership.com/

FYI
HTH
HAND

"Phineas T Puddleduck" Qwacked the
following with a lisp:

Real scientists don't need no steenkin units ;-)

Since you think you are a "real" scientist, is that why you had your "unit"
removed like Kadaicha Man?

"Phineas T Puddleduck" GAY duck screamed
hysterically:

meds running dry?

How are your meds? Taking plenty of female hormones for that upcoming
sex-change, GAY Duckie?

"Art Deco" wrote in message...
...
Painius wrote:
"Art Deco" wrote in message...
...
Painius wrote:
"Phineas T Puddleduck" wrote...
in message
news In article
,
"Painius" wrote:

Fell short of explanations, John. Like e.g., what
exactly is it about space-time that stretches, curves
and expands at an accelerated rate of velocity, John?

What exactly is it about spacetime that flows?

Good question, Phineas! According to Einstein,
space-time is a "relativistic field". By saying
that space-time is a field, Einstein is indicating
a field of energy. Notice he did not specify what
form this energy takes. This he left to science.

And by calling the field of space-time "relativistic",
Einstein is relating the energy field to his Theory
of General Relativity and giving it MOTION! Note
that he did not elaborate upon what form the
motion of the field of space-time takes. This he
left to science.

By relating the moving space-time to GR, Albert
Einstein is giving us a very strong hint that this
"field in motion" CAUSES gravity. And we note
that he never actually came out and said this.

So we speculate and say that if this moving field
*does* cause gravity, then it must be flowing
into matter, pushing matter together. We sit and
wonder what *kind* or *type* or *form* this
energy must take in order to be so powerful as to
cause matter to condense together, or to keep
large orbs of matter in stable orbits around larger
orbs. Can you see it, Phineas?

Can you see that if Einstein was correct, then the
sheer, unbridled power of flowing space makes
nuclear power look like a child's lit sparkler?

And like what actually *causes* gravity, John? Like
i said, don't feel too badly about the many, many
times i've asked you about these things, and you
just ignored the questions or you gave redundant
responses like...

"Space-time is curving!!!" "Space-time is curving!!!"
"Space-time is curving!!!" "Space-time is curving!!!"

...or, you lamed me to avoid having to answer me.

It's okay, really, because nobody expects the void
to contain any real answers, scientific or otherwise.

Found any gravitons yet, John? any pixies?

But yet those pixies are infinitely more believable then your fairy
stories

Are they? Virtually *every* particle that has been
theorised has been "discovered", Phineas. Every
single one except the graviton. Even the elusive
neutrinos are believed to have been found. But
not that cute little grav-pixie, nope, not a trace.
And science has been looking for the graviton for
a long, long time. Is it so kooky to explore other
possibilities?

I'm still waiting for you to explain how energy, electric field
strength, magnetic field strength, and mass density are all measured
with the same units, painsnuh.

Phineas you ignorant slut...

Is this your idea of uniting the forces? To find a
way for them to all be measured using the same
units of measure?

Actually, that's not so uninteresting... hmm...

Nope, sorry, you're still a sto0pid ho, Mother Goose.

The fact that you consider this issue trivial is just another
indication of your abject ignorance of basic science.


The fact that you believe that i consider this issue
trivial is just another indication of your abject
ignorance of what issues i do and do not consider
trivial.

Go goose a moose, Mother Goose.

--
The best things in life are 'here' and 'now'!

Indelibly yours,
Paine
http://www.savethechildren.org/
http://www.painellsworth.net