 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Physics / General Physics / June 2007The Porat exception rule .
My exception rule sais that THE PHOTON IS GENERALLY SPEAKING AN EXCEPTION CASE !! so 1 it is an exception to the rule that 'no mass can move at c (it has mass (may be the smallest) and *still* move at c! 2 it is a special case that can move at the** constant velocity **of C and once you accept that exception rule most of the entanglements about those issues along the last century are settled copyright Y.Porat 25 -06-o7 ps sorry for the arrogance look .. (:-) yet it is more than time to be done by someone !! ------------------------- TIA Y.Porat -------------- > My exception rule sais that > > THE PHOTON IS GENERALLY SPEAKING > AN EXCEPTION CASE !! NO .. its not > so > 1 > > it is an exception to the rule that > 'no mass can move at c NO .. its not .. because it has no rest mass, and so there does not need to be an exception made for it > (it has mass (may be the smallest) > and *still* move at c! NO .. because that would require infinite energy > 2 > it is a special case that can move > at the** constant velocity **of C Because it has zero mass .. SR and Lorentz means that it is a constant speed in all frames of reference > and once you accept that exception rule There is no need for one > most of the entanglements about those issues > along the last century are settled There are no entanglements, or issues or confusion . You're inventing problems that aren't there and then changing the rules of physics to solve these non-existent problems > copyright Y.Porat 25 -06-o7 > > ps > sorry for the arrogance look .. (:-) > yet > it is more than time to be done by someone !! No .. you're not sorry at all. And you're not right either. > > My exception rule sais that > [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > No .. you're not sorry at all. And you're not right either. ---------- (:-) Thanks for the politeness .... Y.Porat -------------------- > My exception rule sais that > > THE PHOTON IS GENERALLY SPEAKING > AN EXCEPTION CASE !! [...] No. It isn't. Get an education and you will see why. > On Jun 24, 8:27 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:> My exception rule sais that > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Get an education and you will see why. ----------- Thanks to my greate educator (of 23 years) (:-) Y.Porat ---------------- Y.Porat : > My exception rule sais that > > THE PHOTON IS GENERALLY SPEAKING > AN EXCEPTION CASE !! if photon is a word then laser beam is statement and google is a beach to have your skin with coopertone > so > 1 [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > Y.Porat > -------------- > Y.Porat :> My exception rule sais that > [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > - Show quoted text - ---------- (:-) Y.P --------------- > My exception rule sais that The Porat Exception Rule says that Porat is exceptionally stupid. > THE PHOTON IS GENERALLY SPEAKING > AN EXCEPTION CASE !! [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > Y.Porat > -------------- > > My exception rule sais that > [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > - Show quoted text - -------------- that is a very soud physics argument you ar eindeed a great physician and human being Y.P ------------ >> > My exception rule sais that >> The Porat Exception Rule says that Porat is exceptionally stupid. > -------------- > that is a very soud physics argument > you ar eindeed a great physician > and human being Yeup .. based on observation :) > >> > My exception rule sais that > >> The Porat Exception Rule says that Porat is exceptionally stupid. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Yeup .. based on observation :) ----------- now Mr Feuerbacher waht about your Fertz invention ?? 2 who is according to you the copyrighter of what i called the 'The Porat exception rule ' ?? may be it was done 80 years ago?? or is its just a supid idea of mine ?? can you document your claimes Y.Porat ---------------- >> >> > My exception rule sais that >> >> The Porat Exception Rule says that Porat is exceptionally stupid. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > ----------- > now Mr Feuerbacher Who? > waht about your Fertz invention ?? What about it? > 2 > who is according to you the copyrighter > of what i called the > 'The Porat exception rule ' ?? > may be it was done 80 years ago?? > or is its just a supid idea of mine ?? Its a stupid idea > can you document your claimes What claims? > >> "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > - Show quoted text - --------- in short AFAYK as far as you know who is the copyrighter of the claim or postualte of the OP *(stupid and wrong idea) of this thread ??? TIA Y.Porat -------------- > > "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > who is the copyrighter of the > claim or postualte of the OP YOU are the "copyrighter". Or the "copy-wronger" :-)) > *(stupid and wrong idea) of this thread ??? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > - Show quoted text - > > > "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > > - Show quoted text - ----------- crook i ddint ask if it is right or wrong i ansked if *that above idiotic idea of mine* is precedented or not ? can we get a sane answer from you ? sane is not from a menthaly sick position.... lets see Professor (who ???) ps what is your day job ?? TIA Y.Porat ----------------- >> > > "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 67 lines] > *that above idiotic idea of mine* > is precedented or not ? That photons have mass, been thought of before. The E = hf implies photons has mass, been thought of before. E = gamma.m.c^2, been thought of before. Not sure which idiotic idea exactly that you mean > >> > > "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] > > - Show quoted text - ------------- it seems that you are slow in reading a text th eidiotic idea is tha the photon has its special rules that are different from the others youpresnt it as a regulr case obeying all the relativity laws i first of all claim that the photon has some rules only for itself ie for insatnce : it can have **invariant mass* and even so move at c got it ? and **invariant mass** that is the only mass that can be !! (no many kinds of mass) is all the above precedented ideas ?? and if yesmdocumetations please you proved youself as one that wile having some interest (especially abusive one ) you are very diligent in finding evidence from your university and maybe some coligues help you as well. TIA Y.Porat ---------------- > ------------- > it seems that you are slow in reading a text When your English is so poor, and the sentences so poorly constructed, its not surprising. > th eidiotic idea is > tha the photon has its special rules Yeup .. that's an idiotic idea .. an unnecessary complication of the fact the the photon behaves consitently with the rules as they are. [snip nonsense] > and **invariant mass** that is the only mass > that can be !! (no many kinds of mass) It depends on what you define theword mass to be. But there is only one proper mass / rest mass / invariant mass. The other apparent mass is dependant on the observer, just like the energy is. > is all the above precedented ideas ?? That photons have mass .. that precedented. That photons for some unknown and unncessary reason don't obey the laws of physics is just crackpottery .. who knows what crackpots like yourself might have come up with. There is no evidence nor theoretical basis for you absurd claims. Its not physics. > and if yesmdocumetations please > you proved youself as one that wile > having some interest (especially abusive one ) > you are very diligent in finding evidence > from your university > and maybe some coligues help you as well. What university? I don't have a university. Do you? > "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message > > . . Do you? ------------ lets ask again the disturbed crook that cant answer a straight forward question: is there a prescedence to my folowing claimes 1 there is just one kind of mass!! noo matter how you call it 2 the photon is a mass that can move at c 3 the gamma factor DOES NOT APPLY TO THE PHOTON!! now i dont ask if those claimes are stupid or not supose they are idiotic ideas my simplest question for reasobnable people toanswer are all the above claimes presedented each one separately ?? and 2 precedented--- *** as A SET OF CLAIMES !!??*** can be get a normal human being answer to those questions -- yes or no precedented ? and if precedented documentation please TIA Y.Porat ---------------- >> "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message >> > . . Do you? > > ------------ > lets ask again the disturbed crook > that cant answer a straight forward question: So we're not asking you, obviosuly > is there a prescedence to my > folowing claimes > 1 there is just one kind of mass!! > noo matter how you call it Yes .. eg Einstien used 'm' to mean proper / rest / invariant mass. If you mean that there are not things we can measure/calculate whose names include the word 'mass' in it (like 'relativisitic mass', then your statement is false. > 2 > the photon is a mass that can move at c Yes .. claimed and shown to be false > 3 > the gamma factor DOES NOT APPLY TO THE PHOTON!! If you mean that you cannot use E = gamma.m.c^2 to calculate the energy, Yes You're obsessed with being the first to post something in a newsgruop .. is your life so shallow and meaningless? > >> "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message > >> > . . Do you? [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > If you mean that there are not things we can measure/calculate whose names > include the word 'mass' in it (like 'relativisitic mass', waht is that 'like relativistic' of yourse ???!! little crook we already agreed thatthere is jsut ONE (REPEAT -- ONE) KIND OF MASS rememeber ?? so waht ar eyou mensioning something else and on that something else you reverse your answer then your > statement is false.so now you try to hold the string in both of its edges !! you hav eto deside casn the mass of the phopton move at c or not if not than i am the first one to claim it (in asddition topthe only one kind of mass) did Einstein for insatnce though tthat th ephoton has mass AND it can move at c ?? or someone else ? if yes please document it !! --------- > > 2 > > the photon is a mass that can move at c > > Yes .. claimed and shown to be false idiot crook i asked if in among all the other claimes i mensioned someone claimed that **IT IT RIGHT* **that he photon can have mass **and* move at c ] i ddin task if it is right or wrong got it idiot ?? i sked waht was the claim of the one that sied it **not what you say got it crook idiot and master obfuscations and eavtions ?? (what is your physics education and education in general that youcant rwad and understand waht you read or cheating about what youread ??) > > 3 > > the gamma factor DOES NOT APPLY TO THE PHOTON!! > > If you mean that you cannot use E = gamma.m.c^2 to calculate the energy, Yes i mean did anyone claimed that you cant use ***any formual or factor that makes the photon mass to be zero?? i dont ask about your beleives that you dont stop migling them into my questios!! iow dont mingle your understanding withmy understandings and only then answer if al my idotc ideas are pcedcedented each one separately AND allof them as a 'set of claimes ' was that set of claimes precedented or not if yes pleae document it or else it is an iresponsible hand waving motivated bypeersonal anymousity !! ie 'no mater waht Porat will say i am determined to dsiturb him ' if that is not the case and you are an objestive and decent scientist just show it by **documentations** TIA Y.Porat ----------------- >> >> "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> > . . Do you? [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > waht is that > 'like relativistic' of yourse ???!! Don't you know what "relativistic mass" (also called "inertial mass") > little crook Oh dear > we already agreed thatthere is jsut > ONE (REPEAT -- ONE) KIND OF MASS > rememeber ?? But there are other things defined that has mass in their name. So that would mean there are other kinds of mass. However, they are not intrinsic properties of the matter, but are observer dependant [snip poor rat ranting again] > casn the mass of the phopton move at c or not No .. it can't > if not than i am the first one > to claim it No .. you're not > (in asddition topthe > only one kind of mass) > did Einstein for insatnce > though tthat th ephoton has mass AND > it can move at c ?? No .. Einstein wasn't that stupid. But there have been other people possibly as stupid as you who have thought the same as you. They are equally wrong > or someone else ? > if yes please document it !! I've showed you example before where the argument the photons have mass is refuted, which means someone must have proposed it in order for it to be refuted. > --------- >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > i asked if in among all the other claimes i mensioned > someone claimed that **IT IT RIGHT* Of course others have claimed it right .. and they it has been shown to be wrong. > **that he photon can have mass **and* move at c ] It can't > i ddin task if it is right or wrong That you don't care whether what you say is right or wrong, only the you said it first, is just being childish. [snip even more poor rat ranting and raving] >> > 3 >> > the gamma factor DOES NOT APPLY TO THE PHOTON!! [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > ***any formual or factor that makes the photon mass > to be zero?? Those who erroneously claim that photons have mass would obviously say you cannot use a mass of zero. [snip still more childish poor rat ranting and raving] > >> "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 103 lines] > > - Show quoted text - ---------- it seems tha tyou are a blocked head lets tery again:: i dont ansk you if my claimes are right or wrong and i dont ask you waht you think about it i only ask if MY CLAIMES WHTEVER RIGHT OR WRONG ARE PRECEDENTS AS SINGLE CLAIM AND 2 AS A CLUSTER OF CLAIMES!! olease answer my simplwe question without smathguness and please document your aswer moreover did anyone before me coined the physics rule NO MASS NO REAL PHYSICS' !!! snd again i dont ask you if it i s right or wrong i ask you IS IT PRECEDENTED ? OR NOT PRECEDENTED ? can we get from you a simple answer that is documented and not just hand waivings as acientistand a honest person should do ?? TIA Y.Porat ------------------ > > "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 114 lines] > i dont ansk you if my claimes are right or wrong > and i dont ask you waht you think about it Right or wrong is the concern of science. It is not a surprise that it is no concern of yours. > i only ask if > MY CLAIMES WHTEVER RIGHT OR WRONG > ARE PRECEDENTS > AS SINGLE CLAIM > AND 2 > AS A CLUSTER OF CLAIMES!! Who f.cking cares? > olease answer my simplwe question > without smathguness [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > NO MASS NO REAL PHYSICS' !!! Yes. John a.shole did it in 1975. Michael Shithead did in 1983, and Mary Moron posted it in 1994. Satisfied? > snd again > i dont ask you if it i s right or wrong > i ask you > > IS IT PRECEDENTED ? > OR NOT PRECEDENTED ? Is it precedented or unprecedented? YES > can we get from you > a simple answer that is documented > and not just hand waivings > as acientistand a honest person should do ?? I don't know - can we? > TIA > Y.Porat The rats are leaving the sinking ship..... > ------------------- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - > > "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 149 lines] > > - Show quoted text - ----------- and the answer of Jekyle is ?? TIA Y.Porat ------------------- >> it seems tha tyou are a blocked head And its very clear you're a pathetic and obsessed little toad. Its completely pointless whether or not you are the first to come up with the crap you have posted. You don't even care if what you say is right. I'm not going to indulge your childish little "I was first to say it" game. If you care about what you say, do the research, file copyrights and patents, submit papers to journals etc. > >> it seems tha tyou are a blocked head > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > If you care about what you say, do the research, file copyrights and > patents, submit papers to journals etc. ------------ Nazi pigshit crook i asked the above questions as a honesty check for you and you obviously failed in tnhat test every one can realize that the answer to my above question is: there is no precedence to my new claimes even if you try hard to prove the opposite and a Nazi pigg sh.t like you knows the ttruth yet THE FRERTZ INVENTOR FEUERBACHER will bever give Porat any credit becaus ehe is a Nazi sh.t and a pupit of Josef Geobeless!! your plcase at trhe garbage of the history of science and as the superftertz inventor is guarantied now !!... now you can never cheat every body for ever so go f.ck youself with all theNazies here like Varney Gisse youself etc dirthy pigg inmecil and a **bump parasite** that cant find a day job anf rightly so as all the other sh.ts here . now you proved youself as a commited personal enemy and a parrot lier sh.t human being and you wil be treated as such !! Y.P ---------------- [snip whining] > dirthy pigg inmecil and a **bump parasite** > that cant find a day job anf rightly so > as all the other sh.ts here . Like you? Go outside. Call your grandkids. Watch some porn. Just leave USENET alone. [snip whining] >> >> it seems tha tyou are a blocked head >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > ------------ > Nazi pigshit crook Hahaha .. so pathetically predictable > i asked the above questions > as a honesty check for you > and you obviously failed in tnhat test Oh, no ... I passed with flying colors. I don't think I could be more honest (or correct) than with what I replied. [snip more worthless drivel from the deranged and deluded rat] Typical poor rat response .. such a sad and pathetic little old man. > >> "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > - Show quoted text - ---------- youproved yousef a Josef Goebelss pupil a disturbed pigg sh.t you foprget thatwe a re not alone here and while you evede anobvious question every one can se it you can cheat everybody forever and you certainly proved youself an unconditional personal enemy and i will treat you as you dserve obviously a personal enemt cannot be a partner for dsicussion a personal enemy has to be faught aginst and you wil get it little Nazi Feuerbacher THE GREAT 'SUPERFERTZ' INVENTOR A THAT CANT GET A DAY JOB Y.P ----------------- >> >> "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > A THAT CANT GET A DAY JOB > Y.P Oh .. just shut the f.ck up you pathetic excuse for a human being .. take your delusions and ridiculous insults somewhere else. You are not welcome amongst the ranks of thinking people. You're nothing but a waste of time. Go take a shower. Y.Porat wrote in message <1182867839.609525.187800@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>... >you are very diligent in finding evidence >from your university >and maybe some coligues help you as well. Glad to hear it's going well. I'm actually giving the Queens a sneak peak today since they're in the same building. I'm only showing the 2 of them. The one is very nice and she is quite eager to see the stuff. mk5000 "I'm sowing the seeds I take for granted This thorn in my side This thorn in my side is from the tree This thorn in my side is from the tree I've planted"--bleeding me, metallica [...] This fruitloop is utterly convinced that photons have mass. Year after year, its one idiotic "proof" to the next. The arguments range from dimensional analysis to "the photons must have mass because the particle data group results have constantly smaller error bars". > [...] > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > range from dimensional analysis to "the photons must have mass because > the particle data group results have constantly smaller error bars". ---------- we already know that yo are a 23 disturbed imbecil that cant learn anything new no need to prove it again and again 2 you are not able sensibly and honsetly because you are a Josef boebelss pupil my question was about documentations that all my above claimes each one separately and all of them as a set of claimes was precedented now since you are a disturbed crazy irrational personal enemy of mine you will never answer it and that is weaht i showed since ..... the other readers are whacing and unlke Goebeless who though so not all of them are idiotsand certinly not forever ... Y.P ---------------- > we already know that yo are a 23 > disturbed imbecil > that cant learn anything new > no need to prove it again and again And we all know you're a senile old fool who's obsessed with being the first to post something to a newsgroup and whose life has been such a monumental failure that he has to invent nonsense statements just to make sure he's the first to say it. What a wonderful legacy you'll leave behind .. it could be like spoonerism .. a poratism where one posts nonsense to the newsgroups simply so as to claim he is the first to do it. Then we'll be laughing at the name 'porat' for decades after you've gone. > > > > "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 62 lines] > crook > i ddint ask if it is right or wrong Too bad. > i ansked if > *that above idiotic idea of mine* > is precedented or not ? Yes, stupid ideas have always been thought of by some other idiot first. > can we get a sane answer from you ? Yes, which is more than one could get from you. > sane is not from a menthaly sick position.... > lets see Professor (who ???) > ps > what is your day job ?? professor > TIA > Y.Porat Why, poor rat? > ------------------ Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 95 lines] > > - Show quoted text - --------- speak physics Nazi pig sh.t psychoath ganster Varney every one can see you are a psych you dont have toprove it again. and a bump parasite as well taht contribited nothing in his life except homosexuality Y.P ---------- ---------- Y.Porat wrote in message <1182908737.765991.198150@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>...> >--------- >speak physics Nazi pig sh.t >psychoath ganster Varney >every one can see you are a psych >you dont have toprove it again. ok, I this is it. I lost my glasses somewhere along the way, probably fell out with the cell phone Well, at least, the glasses are almost a year old now, and I can tell I badly need a new set anyway but i can't see he is a psych mk5000 "You got to breath (it down) breath Coming up for air (breath breath) Comin up for…"--minus human, metallica > > > > > > "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 104 lines] > taht contribited nothing in his life > except homosexuality I am not gay, but YOU are stupid. > Y.P > ---------- > ----------- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - > --------- > speak physics Nazi pig sh.t [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > except homosexuality > Y.P Another completely physics free post of nonsense insults (like 'bump parasite') from the poor rat. > > > > > "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 83 lines] > professor > ------------- professor of what 2 where ?? --------------- TIA fron poor rat (:-) --------------- [...] > professor of what > 2 > where ?? Why should he answer your questions when you won't even bother to write the request in a complete sentence? > --------------- > > TIA fron poor rat (:-) > --------------- > > > > > > "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 85 lines] > > professor of what chemistry > 2 > where ?? Harvard (just kidding) > --------------- > > TIA fron poor rat (:-) > ---------------- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 103 lines] > > - Show quoted text - ----------- of course you are kidding so ?? if you dont answer it means you are cheating because no Professor should be ashamed wiht his Job or university and you have all the reasons to (unless you are not a psycho....) Y.Porat --------------- > > > > > > > > "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 111 lines] > because no Professor should be ashamed > wiht his Job or university No, I'm obviously not ashamed. If I were YOU, then I would be ashamed. You and your Nazi friend Crack Potter are two peas in the same stalker pod. Stalk somebody else, someone who is homosexual, since that seems to be a very big fantasy of yours. You'll probably like it, you sick old senile bastard. > and you have all the reasons to > (unless you are not a psycho....) [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > - Show quoted text - The_Man wrote in message <1182868212.038086.209110@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>... >> can we get a sane answer from you ? > >Yes, which is more than one could get from you. Not much to report. Give me something to laugh about--catch me up on the latest story mk5000 "To free the you That's running through Deep inside you know seeds I plant will grow"--devil's dance, metallica |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.