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

In article
,
"Painius" wrote:

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

Thank you, Honest! Well, at least the ol' boy's
a colorful mother, ain't he. Imagine him posing
as an astrophysics student with three years to go
till he gets his doctorate! Geezus!...

No need to imagine matey, cause its the truth. Of course you're talking
to HJ, who would need a lobotomy to raise himself UP to the level of a
retard...

pffft


Really I don't care what you believe. I have my viva in a week and thats
all I need to worry about - not a bunch of saucer heads well on their
way to another kook award.

Really, do any of you have any physics qualifications above sesame
street?


Alan Guth is astro. 101 fer crissakes! And the ol'
M. Goose tries to sell how natural it was to
mistake him for Brad Guth? Watta Hoot!

Considering the nature of your science is far closer to Brad then Alan,
it was a pretty easy mistake to make when discussing science with a
bunch of saucerheads. But please, feel free to think it makes you win
that one!


When you just say Guth it does leave a trifle ambiguity.

The name "Guth" associated with "inflation" does
not leave any room for ambiguity, trifling or
otherwise, Mother. You blew it big time!

We were on Usenet and I honestly didn't think of Alan. Mainly because I
tend to think more of Linde and his theories on it re Monopoles. But its
ok, I can live with making a simple mistake. It doesn't undermine
anything of the questions YOU can't answer.... ;-) Remind me again, do
you also believe electrons and protons don't exist like your shipmate
Bill?


Plus I suppose
you are right, I should have guessed it. So thats

1 to you (my inability to spot who you meant )

versus

10^32 to me (Your flowing space rubbish, hanging out with saucer heads,
espousing rubbish, having an issue with QM cause it doesn't gel with
your twisted mind)

You can have that one - well done. Now with only a few moments left, can
you pull out the 10^32 needed to equalize?

No need, Art... the one you lost is all it takes to
place you in the hearts and minds of all Gentle
Readers as a coffeeboi and the Mother of all
gooselings. You have this insatiable need to
blow your cover. Did someone in your family
hide you in a closet or something?

Oh thats right - I'm Art Deco now. Standard kookfare. Unable to even
comprehend that more then one person thinks they're an idiot.

I'm so sorry I disappointed you by not being perfect. I hope you have
your acceptance speech ready when you win the kook awards. Those seans
ain't gonna save you now!


He's just another censorious posier m.f. Of
course, i was really beginning to think ol' PTP
was the abo K-man in disguise! g

So perhaps you can do better then Bill Sheppard who ran off with his
tail between his legs when I pointed out your flowing space theory is BS
then?

Bill whupped yer incredible arse bigtime. Don't
you even *know* when yer butt's been kicked?

Really ;-) I guess in Earth Science Team lingo an inability to explain
anything about your theory, an inability to answer simple questions
about this supposed flowing space and an inability to even comprehend
the questions means I got MY arse kicked? Wow, denial - not just a river
in Egypt!


Oh yeah, i almost forgot... that's the ploy of all
you coffeebois. You act like it never happened.

It did happen. Its all in Google Groups for a start.

Your inability to determine the nature of the fluid's constituents, its
container, whether or not matter shields it, why masses are fluid sinks
and what happens to the fluid at the centre.

Your inability to explain why your theory now makes all masses
singularities.

Your inability to answer as to whether cosmic expansion means that not
only c but G would change over time, yielding to the removal of
constants in Maxwell's equations to be replaced with time-dependent
variables.

Your inability to discuss these variables and the nature of the changes
they would make to EM.

But please pretend it never happened - but it did. You're more Galaxy
Quest then Star Trek anyway!



Well, it's happened, Mother... AGAIN. You keep
stickin' around and bein' a huge smelly fart, and
will happen again and again, guaranteed. OR...

You can realize that this is a place where the edge
of the frontier is discussed, and discuss it like a
grownup instead of an infant with iq=11.

The only edge you lot are at is the edge of insanity, whereas some of
you are seemingly blind to the fact you're running the wrong way towards
it.


happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
This space reserved for Jeff Relf's 5-dimensional metric.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
In article ,
(Bill Sheppard) wrote:

Yo Pudface. Hey duck, listen up. Nobody's "run off", tail between legs
or otherwise. The discussion on the cause of gravity was CLOSED at its
pinnacle, the point at which your summation was delivered:

"mass tells space how to curve and space tells mass how to move"

.as the CAUSE of gravity. Uttered as a religious litany, and with as
much comprehension. That was the point at which to walk away with a
simple "thank you".. and in contrast, appreciate the spectacle of nature
all the more as it *demonstrates itself* in its bounty of effects, the
behavior of gravity in particular. Again, discussion is closed.


You ran off as you failed to answer any of my questions as regarding the
composition of this fluid.


You haven't told us anything about the composition of the space-time
that is being curved in GR.

Double-A


You couldn't answer as to when and where it
was transparent/opaque to matter either...

Yet again you claim it demonstrates itself - yet you can't come up with
a single defining factor - after aberration was proved out of the
picture you gave up!

--
This space reserved for Jeff Relf's 5-dimensional metric.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
In article
,
"Painius" wrote:

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

Thank you, Honest! Well, at least the ol' boy's
a colorful mother, ain't he. Imagine him posing
as an astrophysics student with three years to go
till he gets his doctorate! Geezus!...

No need to imagine matey, cause its the truth. Of course you're talking
to HJ, who would need a lobotomy to raise himself UP to the level of a
retard...

pffft


Really I don't care what you believe. I have my viva in a week and thats
all I need to worry about - not a bunch of saucer heads well on their
way to another kook award.

Really, do any of you have any physics qualifications above sesame
street?


Alan Guth is astro. 101 fer crissakes! And the ol'
M. Goose tries to sell how natural it was to
mistake him for Brad Guth? Watta Hoot!

Considering the nature of your science is far closer to Brad then Alan,
it was a pretty easy mistake to make when discussing science with a
bunch of saucerheads. But please, feel free to think it makes you win
that one!


Why ARE you discussing science with "a bunch of saucerheads"?

Double-A



When you just say Guth it does leave a trifle ambiguity.

The name "Guth" associated with "inflation" does
not leave any room for ambiguity, trifling or
otherwise, Mother. You blew it big time!

We were on Usenet and I honestly didn't think of Alan. Mainly because I
tend to think more of Linde and his theories on it re Monopoles. But its
ok, I can live with making a simple mistake. It doesn't undermine
anything of the questions YOU can't answer.... ;-) Remind me again, do
you also believe electrons and protons don't exist like your shipmate
Bill?


Plus I suppose
you are right, I should have guessed it. So thats

1 to you (my inability to spot who you meant )

versus

10^32 to me (Your flowing space rubbish, hanging out with saucer heads,
espousing rubbish, having an issue with QM cause it doesn't gel with
your twisted mind)

You can have that one - well done. Now with only a few moments left, can
you pull out the 10^32 needed to equalize?

No need, Art... the one you lost is all it takes to
place you in the hearts and minds of all Gentle
Readers as a coffeeboi and the Mother of all
gooselings. You have this insatiable need to
blow your cover. Did someone in your family
hide you in a closet or something?

Oh thats right - I'm Art Deco now. Standard kookfare. Unable to even
comprehend that more then one person thinks they're an idiot.

I'm so sorry I disappointed you by not being perfect. I hope you have
your acceptance speech ready when you win the kook awards. Those seans
ain't gonna save you now!


He's just another censorious posier m.f. Of
course, i was really beginning to think ol' PTP
was the abo K-man in disguise! g

So perhaps you can do better then Bill Sheppard who ran off with his
tail between his legs when I pointed out your flowing space theory is BS
then?

Bill whupped yer incredible arse bigtime. Don't
you even *know* when yer butt's been kicked?

Really ;-) I guess in Earth Science Team lingo an inability to explain
anything about your theory, an inability to answer simple questions
about this supposed flowing space and an inability to even comprehend
the questions means I got MY arse kicked? Wow, denial - not just a river
in Egypt!


Oh yeah, i almost forgot... that's the ploy of all
you coffeebois. You act like it never happened.

It did happen. Its all in Google Groups for a start.

Your inability to determine the nature of the fluid's constituents, its
container, whether or not matter shields it, why masses are fluid sinks
and what happens to the fluid at the centre.

Your inability to explain why your theory now makes all masses
singularities.

Your inability to answer as to whether cosmic expansion means that not
only c but G would change over time, yielding to the removal of
constants in Maxwell's equations to be replaced with time-dependent
variables.

Your inability to discuss these variables and the nature of the changes
they would make to EM.

But please pretend it never happened - but it did. You're more Galaxy
Quest then Star Trek anyway!



Well, it's happened, Mother... AGAIN. You keep
stickin' around and bein' a huge smelly fart, and
will happen again and again, guaranteed. OR...

You can realize that this is a place where the edge
of the frontier is discussed, and discuss it like a
grownup instead of an infant with iq=11.

The only edge you lot are at is the edge of insanity, whereas some of
you are seemingly blind to the fact you're running the wrong way towards
it.


happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
This space reserved for Jeff Relf's 5-dimensional metric.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Double-A" wrote in message
ups.com...

Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
In article
,
"Painius" wrote:

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

Thank you, Honest! Well, at least the ol' boy's
a colorful mother, ain't he. Imagine him posing
as an astrophysics student with three years to go
till he gets his doctorate! Geezus!...

No need to imagine matey, cause its the truth. Of course you're
talking
to HJ, who would need a lobotomy to raise himself UP to the level of
a
retard...

pffft


Really I don't care what you believe. I have my viva in a week and thats
all I need to worry about - not a bunch of saucer heads well on their
way to another kook award.

Really, do any of you have any physics qualifications above sesame
street?


Alan Guth is astro. 101 fer crissakes! And the ol'
M. Goose tries to sell how natural it was to
mistake him for Brad Guth? Watta Hoot!

Considering the nature of your science is far closer to Brad then Alan,
it was a pretty easy mistake to make when discussing science with a
bunch of saucerheads. But please, feel free to think it makes you win
that one!


Why ARE you discussing science with "a bunch of saucerheads"?

Double-A

That's what Deco-Ducks do!

HJ

In article . com,
"Double-A" wrote:

You haven't told us anything about the composition of the space-time
that is being curved in GR.

The answers are there if you wish to read for yourself in many journals
AA. MTW talks a lot about the rigidity of space in one of the chapters.

Why not do some actual reading about proper science?

I haven't yet found a single one about flowing space.

--
Saucerhead lingo #137

"(we) whupped yer incredible arse bigtime" = "we were asked a lot of
unanswerable questions we decided to avoid answering and kept repeating the
same old discredited nonsense".

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
In article . com,
"Double-A" wrote:

You haven't told us anything about the composition of the space-time
that is being curved in GR.

The answers are there if you wish to read for yourself in many journals
AA. MTW talks a lot about the rigidity of space in one of the chapters.

Why not do some actual reading about proper science?



Ah come on! If you knew the nature of space in the theory you are
advocating, you could explain it to us. So why put the onus on people
here if they don't know the exact nature of the space they think is
flowing?



I haven't yet found a single one about flowing space.



I have found that a lot of people have thougnt of it.

Double-A

Double-A wrote:
Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:
In article . com,
"Double-A" wrote:

You haven't told us anything about the composition of the space-time
that is being curved in GR.
The answers are there if you wish to read for yourself in many journals
AA. MTW talks a lot about the rigidity of space in one of the chapters.

Why not do some actual reading about proper science?



Ah come on! If you knew the nature of space in the theory you are
advocating, you could explain it to us. So why put the onus on people
here if they don't know the exact nature of the space they think is
flowing?

Why? because they can't explain several simplistic issues their theory hits
straight away!!! If they want to provide a theory, then get ready for
scientific debate. What you guys have suffered from me is PEANUTS compared to
any viva meeting....!


1) If gravity is a result of the inward push of some fluid space onto a mass,
then for a start the question is - does this fluid shield space or not? If
matter is not porous to this material then you have explained gravity (to a
point) but then you have provided the ability to shield from gravity... as in,
does a hollow matter sphere contain your fluid space or not!

If you say the push of the fluid on matter is such that it causes gravity, then
matter should be opaque to it. I can then say - what happens if I build a
hollow sphere of matter. Is this sphere now empty of space?

If it is transparent to the fluid, then there is no force on matter.

Then there is the issue that this cannot provide an inverse square law for
which there is plenty of observational evidence. How does a fluid provide an
inverse square gravity force? Is it the pressure of the fluid?

2) Fluid space would also imply a density right? Well you either have to deny
cosmic expansion via hubble flow (and come across a HUGE swathe of issues that
would need to be answered - supernovae and cepheids spring to mind) or you
would have to explain how come this fluid stays the same - otherwise G, c
change over time DRASTICALLY.

If space expands via Hubble flow, and space is your fluid - then your fluid
expands. How come your fluid can expand without changing internal pressure and
density?

What does this mean - as I said it means that all of a sudden you've taken two
constants and turned them into time-dependent variables. Now all of a sudden
its no longer gravity that is broken, but electromagnetism too! What are you
going to replace Maxwell with?

A time varying G and c to the extent your theory would predict. opens up so
many cans of worms I wouldn't know where to begin. If the density is related to
the volume of space (as it should be) and gravity is the result of this fluid,
then did the early universe have a much higher gravity? How the hell did matter
form stars and galaxies?

3) What are the constituent particles of the fluid? Spacetime is the arena in
which all events happen. Your question basically becomes what is inside a box
that is filled with a vacuum. Your theory sudden hits upon Mach as well!

4) Every paper I have found on this subtly ignores the issue of what happens at
the centre of mass to the fluid, pointing out that there theory seems to
predict a singularity at the centre of every mass, not just black holes!

5) It seems you also claim particles are merely vortices in the flow of space
time.... well there are so many absurdities there I don't know where to
start.... Not one person can somehow relate this vortex to the wave-particle
duality that is seen in nature?


As I said, Spacetime is the arena in which events happen. Interestingly enough
you can't really argue this, because if you claim your flowing space is the
arena in which events happen, then you've added another level of complexity
because now your fluid needs a container.

At some stage there is what you could call the container issue. GR explains
full well what is going on here... GR calls everything around us the spacetime
- a merging of the old concepts of space and time into a "fabric", once that is
EXTREMELY rigid, as seen by the sheer amount of mass needed to bend it.

Where QM and relativity have issues on the scale of the very small re the
nature of spacetime (Brian Green in "The Fabric of the Cosmos" talks about this
if you'd like to read it for yourself) is that the fabric of spacetime becomes
increasing chaotic at smaller scales.. so how does a fluid flow incorporate QM
based events in this case?


It's curvature is explained by flatland one dimension down. When your
saucerhead friends throw a wobbler over this and insist gravity is caused by
fluid, I have asked for proof - one single verifiable observational event that
lays claim to this.

I was first told gravitational aberration and pointed to Carlip's paper which
explains how gravitomagnetism is part and parcel of GR. It was called a fudge,
but when I asked Bill to explain exactly how it was a fudge - there was silence
on the issue and aberration was slowly dropped from the argument.

I was berated for allegedly taking my position on faith, but EVERY time I have
asked for one single observational issue I was told "It just IS" which is
FAITH!!! There is no proof.

Perhaps then AA, as you have decided you want to stick yourself in the firing
line - you can answer the question that NONE of your friends dare even tackle.

Its quite telling you suddenly seem to think I have an issue answering this
question (which is more metaphysics then physics, in a way) when I have at
least 10 outstanding questions with you idiots. So please start repaying back
the balance..

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name ONE single observational event that you can point to and lay claim to as a
possible piece of evidence for flowing space?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I can tell where you're going here, and you are going to once again somehow
insist this definition is flawed because of the idea of curvature in a higher
dimension aren't you?

So please - go ahead and stun the world exactly how this is the case. Your
arguments are now going to go somewhere along the lines of the alleged absudity
of it? Because Haldane's words spring to mind for a start.





I haven't yet found a single one about flowing space.



I have found that a lot of people have thougnt of it.

Double-A


Thought about it perhaps, but no one has given me a piece of directly
interesting information that I can chew over. It seems mostly MD's come up with
the theory of it for some reason, and physicists discarded it a while ago.

--
Saucerhead lingo #137

"(we) whupped yer incredible arse bigtime" = "we were asked a lot of
unanswerable questions we decided to avoid answering and kept repeating the
same old discredited nonsense".

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

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

Thank you, Honest! Well, at least the ol' boy's
a colorful mother, ain't he. Imagine him posing
as an astrophysics student with three years to go
till he gets his doctorate! Geezus!...

No need to imagine matey, cause its the truth. Of course you're talking
to HJ, who would need a lobotomy to raise himself UP to the level of a
retard...

pffft

Really I don't care what you believe.

All evidence to the contrary, Mother.

I have my viva in a week and thats
all I need to worry about - not a bunch of saucer heads well on their
way to another kook award.

Then allow me to parrot AA... why are you so avid
about discussing all this with us? [tinu] Unless of
course you *are* Mother Goose scraping the bottom
of the kook barrel in a desperate quest for recipients
for all your "prestigious" awards? How do you find
the time away from your studies? Keep up with us if
you can, but your degree is 30 years away instead of
just 3 if you do.

Really, do any of you have any physics qualifications above sesame
street?

We can parrot the web as well as you can, fersure!

Alan Guth is astro. 101 fer crissakes! And the ol'
M. Goose tries to sell how natural it was to
mistake him for Brad Guth? Watta Hoot!

Considering the nature of your science is far closer to Brad then Alan,
it was a pretty easy mistake to make when discussing science with a
bunch of saucerheads. But please, feel free to think it makes you win
that one!

That's the silliest thing you've said yet, Deco. [tind]

Anyone who is at the stage of astronomy growth
to which you say you are wouldn't have given it
a second thought. The name "Alan" would have
JUMPED into their minds at the first mention of
the name "Guth" and "inflation". You have
stepped into a truly bottomless pit here, honker.
You've already admitted your goof, so move on.

When you just say Guth it does leave a trifle ambiguity.

The name "Guth" associated with "inflation" does
not leave any room for ambiguity, trifling or
otherwise, Mother. You blew it big time!

We were on Usenet and I honestly didn't think of Alan. Mainly because I
tend to think more of Linde and his theories on it re Monopoles. But its
ok, I can live with making a simple mistake. It doesn't undermine
anything of the questions YOU can't answer.... ;-) Remind me again, do
you also believe electrons and protons don't exist like your shipmate
Bill?

Now you're reaching, Mother. I have tried to
answer your questions where time has permitted.
I would like to have more time for UseNet, as i
did long ago after a disabling accident. But i am
fully recovered and must spend most of my time
at my job.

It does not matter what i believe. The only thing
that ought to matter is reality. And while science
has a "fair" handle on particle reality, there is a
long road ahead of us toward a firm understanding
of quantum mechanics.

Plus I suppose
you are right, I should have guessed it. So thats

1 to you (my inability to spot who you meant )

versus

10^32 to me (Your flowing space rubbish, hanging out with saucer heads,
espousing rubbish, having an issue with QM cause it doesn't gel with
your twisted mind)

You can have that one - well done. Now with only a few moments left,
can
you pull out the 10^32 needed to equalize?

No need, Art... the one you lost is all it takes to
place you in the hearts and minds of all Gentle
Readers as a coffeeboi and the Mother of all
gooselings. You have this insatiable need to
blow your cover. Did someone in your family
hide you in a closet or something?

Oh thats right - I'm Art Deco now. Standard kookfare. Unable to even
comprehend that more then one person thinks they're an idiot.

You should be proud! Art Deco is a very well-
known idiot. And lots of people think so, too.

But that doesn't make you a kook, Mother...
what makes you a kook is your kookchasing!
Only a kook would chase a kook. The rest of
us have much better things to do with the
short period of time we are allotted.

I'm so sorry I disappointed you by not being perfect. I hope you have
your acceptance speech ready when you win the kook awards. Those seans
ain't gonna save you now!

Your not being perfect is far from a
disappointment, Mother Goose. In fact, you're
not really disappointing me at all. You are
truly and steadfastly being what everybody
expects of you. And you're good at it, too!

He's just another censorious posier m.f. Of
course, i was really beginning to think ol' PTP
was the abo K-man in disguise! g

So perhaps you can do better then Bill Sheppard who ran off with his
tail between his legs when I pointed out your flowing space theory is
BS
then?

Bill whupped yer incredible arse bigtime. Don't
you even *know* when yer butt's been kicked?

Really ;-) I guess in Earth Science Team lingo an inability to explain
anything about your theory, an inability to answer simple questions
about this supposed flowing space and an inability to even comprehend
the questions means I got MY arse kicked? Wow, denial - not just a river
in Egypt!

Yes, you seem to be in a high-level of denial.
Explanations have been around for over a decade.
Just Google and see. Simple questions have been
answered, and your inability to understand the
simplest of responses is noted. I wouldn't brag
about it if i were you. I'd do some more research.

This idea of flowing space has been around a long
time, Mother. In point of fact, Albert Einstein
introduced the idea and practically dared posterity
to uncover it!

Oh yeah, i almost forgot... that's the ploy of all
you coffeebois. You act like it never happened.

It did happen. Its all in Google Groups for a start.

Your inability to determine the nature of the fluid's constituents, its
container, whether or not matter shields it, why masses are fluid sinks
and what happens to the fluid at the centre.

This (my inability) has not been demonstrated
as i have discussed none of this with you, you
honker. Keep this up and i shall find better
things to do. You're beginnin' to bore me,
Puddleduck.

When i return, i shall let you in on my take on
your questions, and yes, in some ways, my
ideas differ from Gordon Wolter's and oc's.

Your inability to explain why your theory now makes all masses
singularities.

Another rabbit out of yer hat, Mother.

Your inability to answer as to whether cosmic expansion means that not
only c but G would change over time, yielding to the removal of
constants in Maxwell's equations to be replaced with time-dependent
variables.

Why would G change over time?

Your inability to discuss these variables and the nature of the changes
they would make to EM.

Again, not demonstrated. You need to learn
how to spell "assume".

But please pretend it never happened - but it did. You're more Galaxy
Quest then Star Trek anyway!

Tim Allen was hilarious in that one! And
Sigourney Weaver was and is the greatest!

And if really know me you did, more like
Yoda i am you'd say.

Well, it's happened, Mother... AGAIN. You keep
stickin' around and bein' a huge smelly fart, and
will happen again and again, guaranteed. OR...

You can realize that this is a place where the edge
of the frontier is discussed, and discuss it like a
grownup instead of an infant with iq=11.

The only edge you lot are at is the edge of insanity, whereas some of
you are seemingly blind to the fact you're running the wrong way towards
it.

Yup. I'm impressed, Phineas. That's most
insightful. And thanks to Scott and David,
Barry and Zinni, Owen and Odysseus and a
host of others who represent science and
sanity in a.a, we often come back from the
edge to tell all the "alt." that we have seen.

oops! almost forgot...

[tinw]

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
TIME! it flies... you navigate.

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

In article
,
"Painius" wrote:


Now you're reaching, Mother. I have tried to
answer your questions where time has permitted.
I would like to have more time for UseNet, as i
did long ago after a disabling accident. But i am
fully recovered and must spend most of my time
at my job.

It does not matter what i believe. The only thing
that ought to matter is reality. And while science
has a "fair" handle on particle reality, there is a
long road ahead of us toward a firm understanding
of quantum mechanics.


But claiming flowing space answers more questions is not the case.



Bill whupped yer incredible arse bigtime. Don't
you even *know* when yer butt's been kicked?

Really ;-) I guess in Earth Science Team lingo an inability to explain
anything about your theory, an inability to answer simple questions
about this supposed flowing space and an inability to even comprehend
the questions means I got MY arse kicked? Wow, denial - not just a river
in Egypt!

Yes, you seem to be in a high-level of denial.
Explanations have been around for over a decade.
Just Google and see. Simple questions have been
answered, and your inability to understand the
simplest of responses is noted. I wouldn't brag
about it if i were you. I'd do some more research.


Funny that its been me asking the questions and you refusing to answer
them. I've read your explanations and they are sorely lacking. Perhaps
read the post I made to AA and answer the questions you are running away
from.


This idea of flowing space has been around a long
time, Mother. In point of fact, Albert Einstein
introduced the idea and practically dared posterity
to uncover it!

Oh yeah, i almost forgot... that's the ploy of all
you coffeebois. You act like it never happened.

It did happen. Its all in Google Groups for a start.

Your inability to determine the nature of the fluid's constituents, its
container, whether or not matter shields it, why masses are fluid sinks
and what happens to the fluid at the centre.

This (my inability) has not been demonstrated
as i have discussed none of this with you, you
honker. Keep this up and i shall find better
things to do. You're beginnin' to bore me,
Puddleduck.

Ah so you're going to run away without being able to answer as well!


When i return, i shall let you in on my take on
your questions, and yes, in some ways, my
ideas differ from Gordon Wolter's and oc's.

Your inability to explain why your theory now makes all masses
singularities.

Another rabbit out of yer hat, Mother.

Your inability to answer as to whether cosmic expansion means that not
only c but G would change over time, yielding to the removal of
constants in Maxwell's equations to be replaced with time-dependent
variables.

Why would G change over time?


If gravity is related to flowing space and space expands? Come now, this
should be simple for you Profound EST's!


Your inability to discuss these variables and the nature of the changes
they would make to EM.

Again, not demonstrated. You need to learn
how to spell "assume".

Lack of discussion noted.



But please pretend it never happened - but it did. You're more Galaxy
Quest then Star Trek anyway!

Tim Allen was hilarious in that one! And
Sigourney Weaver was and is the greatest!

And if really know me you did, more like
Yoda i am you'd say.

Perhaps.

it.

Yup. I'm impressed, Phineas. That's most
insightful. And thanks to Scott and David,
Barry and Zinni, Owen and Odysseus and a
host of others who represent science and
sanity in a.a, we often come back from the
edge to tell all the "alt." that we have seen.


Nothing.

--
Saucerhead lingo #137

"(we) whupped yer incredible arse bigtime" = "we were asked a lot of
unanswerable questions we decided to avoid answering and kept repeating the
same old discredited nonsense".

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

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

Now you're reaching, Mother. I have tried to
answer your questions where time has permitted.
I would like to have more time for UseNet, as i
did long ago after a disabling accident. But i am
fully recovered and must spend most of my time
at my job.

It does not matter what i believe. The only thing
that ought to matter is reality. And while science
has a "fair" handle on particle reality, there is a
long road ahead of us toward a firm understanding
of quantum mechanics.

But claiming flowing space answers more questions is not the case.

Apparently not that you want to even try to
understand.

Bill whupped yer incredible arse bigtime. Don't
you even *know* when yer butt's been kicked?

Really ;-) I guess in Earth Science Team lingo an inability to explain
anything about your theory, an inability to answer simple questions
about this supposed flowing space and an inability to even comprehend
the questions means I got MY arse kicked? Wow, denial - not just a
river
in Egypt!

Yes, you seem to be in a high-level of denial.
Explanations have been around for over a decade.
Just Google and see. Simple questions have been
answered, and your inability to understand the
simplest of responses is noted. I wouldn't brag
about it if i were you. I'd do some more research.

Funny that its been me asking the questions and you refusing to answer
them. I've read your explanations and they are sorely lacking. Perhaps
read the post I made to AA and answer the questions you are running away
from.

Well, that's it. You've goaded me into ignoring
you. As always, your dead-obvious attempt to
gather fodder for your silly awards barrel is too
transparent.

This idea of flowing space has been around a long
time, Mother. In point of fact, Albert Einstein
introduced the idea and practically dared posterity
to uncover it!

Lack of response noted.

Oh yeah, i almost forgot... that's the ploy of all
you coffeebois. You act like it never happened.

It did happen. Its all in Google Groups for a start.

Your inability to determine the nature of the fluid's constituents, its
container, whether or not matter shields it, why masses are fluid sinks
and what happens to the fluid at the centre.

This (my inability) has not been demonstrated
as i have discussed none of this with you, you
honker. Keep this up and i shall find better
things to do. You're beginnin' to bore me,
Puddleduck.

Ah so you're going to run away without being able to answer as well!

If you can give me one good reason why i should
pay any more attention to your coffeeboi ****, then
perhaps i'll reconsider, but i doubt it. Explaining
anything to you is like talking into a cup and string,
with a jackass a mile away holding the other cup.

When i return, i shall let you in on my take on
your questions, and yes, in some ways, my
ideas differ from Gordon Wolter's and oc's.

Your inability to explain why your theory now makes all masses
singularities.

Another rabbit out of yer hat, Mother.

Your inability to answer as to whether cosmic expansion means that not
only c but G would change over time, yielding to the removal of
constants in Maxwell's equations to be replaced with time-dependent
variables.

Why would G change over time?

If gravity is related to flowing space and space expands? Come now, this
should be simple for you Profound EST's!

The only thing that seems to have expanded is
the void space between yer ears, Mother.

Your inability to discuss these variables and the nature of the changes
they would make to EM.

Again, not demonstrated. You need to learn
how to spell "assume".

Lack of discussion noted.

Why should we discuss things with a known
kookstone kopp? It just goes in one of your
ears and out the other. Then when things get
a little ruff, you're off to la-la land, and some
other ignorant gooseling comes in and tries to
ruffle a few feathers. The game's over for me,
Deco. You're a peanut-fart in the wind.

But please pretend it never happened - but it did. You're more Galaxy
Quest then Star Trek anyway!

Tim Allen was hilarious in that one! And
Sigourney Weaver was and is the greatest!

And if really know me you did, more like
Yoda i am you'd say.

Perhaps.

it.

Yup. I'm impressed, Phineas. That's most
insightful. And thanks to Scott and David,
Barry and Zinni, Owen and Odysseus and a
host of others who represent science and
sanity in a.a, we often come back from the
edge to tell all the "alt." that we have seen.

Nothing.

Certainly nothing you're even remotely interested
in trying to comprehend. Give yourself the...

A.U.K. Typical Outcome Award:
The ALAS! I FAILED AGAIN Medal for the most
tries and the least successes.

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