 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Physics / Relativity / October 2006Noam Chomsky
I found this quote by Noam Chomsky, that's quite thought provoking: ______________ If you go back to the Bible, there's a category of people who were called prophets, a translation of an obscure word, they were intellectuals, they were what we would call dissident intellectuals.. ...Were they treated well? They were prisoned and driven into the dessert and so on, they were the fringe. The people who were treated well were the ones who centuries later, like in the gospel, were called false prophets. So it goes through history. ______________ Barry |I found this quote by Noam Chomsky, that's quite thought provoking: | [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] | | Barry What happens to them if you don't go back to the Bible? There's a category of people who are called shitheads, a translation of an obscure word, they were fuckwits, they were what we would call abject morons. ...Were they treated well? They were lauded and driven into the eating dessert and so on, they were the aristocracy. The people who were treated well were the ones who centuries later, like in the god's magic spell, were called kings. So it goes even now. Stick your bible-thumping bullshit up your arse, it has f.ck all to do with relativity. > > |I found this quote by Noam Chomsky, that's quite thought provoking: > > ... The people who were treated well were the ones who centuries later... ... were > > called false prophets. So it goes through history. > Stick your bible-thumping bullshit up your arse, it has f.ck all to do > with relativity. I don't think that Chomsky could be considered a Bible thumper. Strangely enough, he was actually talking about state terrorism. I thought that it was all very relevant to relativity. Religion, politics, science... ... when it comes dowen to it, they're all just games we play Barry | > > |I found this quote by Noam Chomsky, that's quite thought provoking: | [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] | | Barry Ok... Please accept my apology if you are not the thumper. Sorry. As far as Chomsky is concerned, state terrorism is something I'm being subjected to at this moment. I am repeatedly bombarded with veiled threats that if I do not purchase a license to watch British television I will be fined £1000. I find this offensive. The bastards are suggesting I'm a moron. Why should I watch a kid's puppet show at 6:00 am when children should be preparing for school, or a horse race or soccer match on a Saturday afternoon? The other alternatives are too horrendous to mention in polite company, but since this a science newsgroup... there is incessant snooker, "pop music" wailing and the BBC symphony orchestra that is available for free on radio to pay for. Should it become a court case (hopefully) I shall wear a veil based on my non-religious beliefs. I don't give a sh.t if they do have a database with every home in Britain on record, I shall resist renowned British author Eric Arthur Blair's (George Orwell) "1984" imposed by Tony Fuckin' Blair until I die, and go down fighting all the way. Androcles >| > > |I found this quote by Noam Chomsky, that's quite thought provoking: >| [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] >(George Orwell) "1984" imposed by Tony Fuckin' Blair until I die, >and go down fighting all the way. So the chances are we'll soon have the pleasure of your silence for a couple off weeks while you undergo a course in attitudinal rearrangement at one of her majesty's correction centres? >Androcles HW. www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm Einsteinian relativity is the biggest joke played on mankind since the 'god' hoax. | >| > > |I found this quote by Noam Chomsky, that's quite thought provoking: | >| [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] | off weeks while you undergo a course in attitudinal rearrangement at one of her | majesty's correction centres? f.ck off. If I had a TV Her Majesty would deport me to Oz lest I caused a riot watching TV in prison by changing stations to the History Channel, it's still her fuckin' country to do as she likes with. I just wish she'd send all of our wogs there to be with the wabos. BTW, abolish Sunday for your six-day week, Monday is pension day. Androcles > | On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 04:42:15 GMT, "Androcles" > <Headmaster@hogwarts.physics_d> [quoted text clipped - 57 lines] > BTW, abolish Sunday for your six-day week, Monday is pension day. > Androcles ZM, Chomsky is a voice of realism and Barry possibly meant it that way. I live in Oz. We do not need to pay for two government and four commercial channels but have to endure advertising on TV and get fined if we do not vote in elections. Otherwise it is a great country. Pensions here are excellent. Peter Riedt Androcles wrote: > | On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 04:42:15 GMT, "Androcles" > <Headmaster@hogwarts.physics_d> [quoted text clipped - 64 lines] > BTW, abolish Sunday for your six-day week, Monday is pension day. > Androcles ZM, Chomsky is a voice of realism and Barry possibly meant it that way. I live in Oz. We do not need to pay for two government and four commercial channels but have to endure advertising on TV and get fined if we do not vote in elections. Otherwise it is a great country. Pensions here are excellent. Peter Riedt It's ok, Peter, I've apologised to Barry and Henri knows I like to jerk his chain ever since he tried to duplicate my 23-year-old program and failed, the senile old abo. http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Copernicus/LightCurveVariations.htm >Androcles wrote: >> "Henri Wilson" <HW@..> wrote in message >> f.ck off. If I had a TV Her Majesty would deport me to Oz lest I caused a >> riot watching TV in prison by changing stations to the History Channel, [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >program and failed, the senile old abo. > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Copernicus/LightCurveVariations.htm You have improved it a little....still nowhere near as good as mine, although you somehow get the curves right. You have even woken up to the fact the distance and pitch are complimentary. Changing period (all else constant) simply changes the orbital velocities. What are all those spikes though? My program produces perfectly smooth curves without any filter. I think you have a problem with your integer types...and 30000 points is sufficient unless you are working way beyond the critical distance ...but that never happens because of light speed unification. HW. www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm Einsteinian relativity is the biggest joke played on mankind since the 'god' hoax. | >Androcles wrote: | >> "Henri Wilson" <HW@..> wrote in message [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] | >jerk his chain ever since he tried to duplicate my 23-year-old | >program and failed, the senile old abo. http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Copernicus/LightCurveVariations.htm | You have improved it a little. Bullshit, I haven't touched it in 13 years, it was written in Visual C Rev 1.0 based on a 1987 DOS version. That "23" above is a Glenlivet typo. ...still nowhere near as good as mine, although | you somehow get the curves right. You have even woken up to the fact the | distance and pitch are complimentary. Oh, *I've* woken up. I see. The penny has finally dropped, has it? Wave - particle duality: http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/rephoton.gif For every photon there is an equal and opposite rephoton. | Changing period (all else constant) | simply changes the orbital velocities. Of course it does. | What are all those spikes though? Something you'll never understand, you are too f.cking dumb. http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Algol/ClassicCurve.JPG I've circled them in the real data. My program produces perfectly smooth curves | without any filter. I think you have a problem with your integer types... Keep guessing. All the time you see only what you expect to see you'll find canals on Mars as Lowell did. Happy canal finding. and | 30000 points is sufficient unless you are working way beyond the critical | distance ...but that never happens because of light speed unification. Yawn.... V1493 Aql. I've reproduced it, you can't. http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Copernicus/period.gif Not my fault Brit Astro http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Copernicus/image021.jpg didn't stretch their window to fit Akihito's curve (or mine) http://www.theastronomer.org/images/v1493aql_lightcurve.gif For someone that doesn't understand scaling you have to be the dumbest physicist around. >| On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 04:20:19 GMT, "Androcles" ><Headmaster@hogwarts.physics_d> [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] >Bullshit, I haven't touched it in 13 years, it was written in Visual C Rev >1.0 based on a 1987 DOS version. That "23" above is a Glenlivet typo. >...still nowhere near as good as mine, although >| you somehow get the curves right. You have even woken up to the fact the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/rephoton.gif >For every photon there is an equal and opposite rephoton. What the f.ck is that? >| Changing period (all else constant) >| simply changes the orbital velocities. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Algol/ClassicCurve.JPG >I've circled them in the real data. They don't exist. Your program has bugs.... >My program produces perfectly smooth >curves [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >I've reproduced it, you can't. > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Copernicus/period.gif I can produce that easily. >Not my fault Brit Astro > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >For someone that doesn't understand scaling you have to be the dumbest >physicist around. Thee isn't enough detail in that curve to tell us anything. I can produce it in a number of different ways. HW. www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm Einsteinian relativity is the biggest joke played on mankind since the 'god' hoax. | >| On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 04:20:19 GMT, "Androcles" | ><Headmaster@hogwarts.physics_d> [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] | | What the f.ck is that? Never heard of a two slit experiment, huh? Typical wabo, claims to be a physicist and has never modelled anything. | >| Changing period (all else constant) | >| simply changes the orbital velocities. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] | | They don't exist. Your program has bugs.... <yawn> Match these light curves with your program. http://planet.iap.fr/PublicCurves/OB05390p.gif http://www.agnld.uni-potsdam.de/~shw/8_Projects/2_Cyg_X-1/pic/Light.jpg http://www.aerith.net/misao/report/variable/MisV1339/light_curve.jpg | >My program produces perfectly smooth | >curves [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] | | I can produce that easily. But you haven't, you f.cking liar. | >Not my fault Brit Astro | > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] | Thee isn't enough detail in that curve to tell us anything. I can produce it in | a number of different ways. You are the dumbest physicist around. <shrug> >| On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 08:29:01 GMT, "Androcles" >| >| distance and pitch are complimentary. >| > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Never heard of a two slit experiment, huh? Typical wabo, claims >to be a physicist and has never modelled anything. A single photon has a 'cross-section. Its influence spreads much wider than the two slits. >| >Something you'll never understand, you are too f.cking dumb. >| > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Algol/ClassicCurve.JPG [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > http://planet.iap.fr/PublicCurves/OB05390p.gif I've matched the background 'gravitational lensing' curve using the BaTh. It is suposed to be unique to Einstein's theory. Hahahahah! The little blip on the side could be anything. > http://www.agnld.uni-potsdam.de/~shw/8_Projects/2_Cyg_X-1/pic/Light.jpg noise. > http://www.aerith.net/misao/report/variable/MisV1339/light_curve.jpg That's an easy one..... >| >Yawn.... V1493 Aql. >| >I've reproduced it, you can't. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >| >But you haven't, you f.cking liar. I gave you about four different ways to produce it. >| Thee isn't enough detail in that curve to tell us anything. I can produce >it in >| a number of different ways. > >You are the dumbest physicist around. <shrug> That's why I proved Einstein wrong with one simple experiment. Andersen has vanished again. That's usually means he is beaten. HW. www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm Einsteinian relativity is the biggest joke played on mankind since the 'god' hoax. | >| On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 08:29:01 GMT, "Androcles" | [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] | | A single photon has a 'cross-section. Crap. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antenna_array A phased array is an example of N-slit diffraction. It may also be viewed as the coherent addition of N line sources. Since each individual antenna acts as a slit, emitting radio waves, their diffraction pattern can be calculated by adding the phase shift ? to the fringing term. Rotating parabolic antennae are past their sell-by date, like you. A photon spreads from two point sources. As each source radiates in all directions, the resultant is two equal photons in opposite directions or there'd be no photons. Androcles's third law: For every photon there is an equal and opposite rephoton. | >| >Something you'll never understand, you are too f.cking dumb. | >| > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Algol/ClassicCurve.JPG [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] | suposed to be unique to Einstein's theory. Hahahahah! | The little blip on the side could be anything. You asked what the spikes were and said they were not real. Not my fault that you don't have enough resolution. | > http://www.agnld.uni-potsdam.de/~shw/8_Projects/2_Cyg_X-1/pic/Light.jpg | | noise. You asked what the spikes were and said they were not real. Not my fault that you don't have enough resolution. | > http://www.aerith.net/misao/report/variable/MisV1339/light_curve.jpg | | That's an easy one..... You asked what the spikes were and said they were not real. You also said no verticals. Any guy who denies empirical data is a fuckwit. But as I said, nothing you'll ever understand. Happy canal hunting. | >| >Yawn.... V1493 Aql. | >| >I've reproduced it, you can't. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] | | I gave you about four different ways to produce it. None of which show the quiescence we see today. You are a f.cking waste of time. | >| Thee isn't enough detail in that curve to tell us anything. I can produce | >it in [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] | | Andersen has vanished again. That's usually means he is beaten. He doesn't claim to be a physicist. Math is what beat him, he's embarrassed himself claiming voltage (E-field) and gaussage (B-field) are in phase. http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AC/AC.htm Programming is what has you beaten, too. My spikes MOVE, therefore no bug. You'll never understand, though, so like Einstein you make up theories. You couldn't program an orgy in a brothel, wabo. Happy canal hunting. >| On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 22:08:18 GMT, "Androcles" ><Headmaster@hogwarts.physics_d> >| wrote: >| >Never heard of a two slit experiment, huh? Typical wabo, claims >| >to be a physicist and has never modelled anything. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >as a slit, emitting radio waves, their diffraction pattern can be calculated >by adding the phase shift ? to the fringing term. >Rotating parabolic antennae are past their sell-by date, like you. > >A photon spreads from two point sources. > As each source radiates in all directions, the resultant is two equal >photons in opposite directions or there'd be no photons. I don't see the logic behind that. >Androcles's third law: >For every photon there is an equal and opposite rephoton. It wouldn't get very far. >| >| >Something you'll never understand, you are too f.cking dumb. >| >| > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Algol/ClassicCurve.JPG [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >You asked what the spikes were and said they were not real. >Not my fault that you don't have enough resolution. They are a computer error. >| > http://www.agnld.uni-potsdam.de/~shw/8_Projects/2_Cyg_X-1/pic/Light.jpg >| >| noise. > >You asked what the spikes were and said they were not real. >Not my fault that you don't have enough resolution. I have printed out all the numbers around a critical turning point on the curves. Spikes only occur at one or two points on an ellipse. >| > http://www.aerith.net/misao/report/variable/MisV1339/light_curve.jpg >| [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >said no verticals. Any guy who denies empirical data is a fuckwit. >But as I said, nothing you'll ever understand. Happy canal hunting. You don't know what you are talking about. >| I gave you about four different ways to produce it. > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >Programming is what has you beaten, too. >My spikes MOVE, therefore no bug. You can only get a spike where the wavefront becomes vertical...ie., where a lot of fast light catches a lot of slow light. That normally only happens at one point around the orbit. Near the critical distance, there can be two such points....and we get a double peak. >You'll never understand, though, so like Einstein you make up theories. > You couldn't program an orgy in a brothel, wabo. >Happy canal hunting. Oh, the jealousy again.... HW. www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm The difference between a preacher and a used car salesman is that the latter's product doesn't fall apart till AFTER the sale. | >| On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 22:08:18 GMT, "Androcles" | ><Headmaster@hogwarts.physics_d> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] | | I don't see the logic behind that. Go to an optician, get some professional advice to help you see. If he wants to be paid he won't tell you that you are past your sell-by date. You've snipped the URL to the gif I created, that's your f.cking problem. Inapproprate snipping is discourteous and f.cking stupid. | >Androcles's third law: | >For every photon there is an equal and opposite rephoton. | | It wouldn't get very far. Most rephotons never do, they head into the source. Howitzer reactions don't get very far either, although the shell might go 15 miles. Rephotons do tend to cause gravity, though. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superfluid Water climbs trees. Once I'd figured out what gravity is the rest is easy. Ritz thought it was connected with electromagnetics but he didn't know the mechanism. The key is the rephoton. That's way beyond any physicist, of course. | >| >| >Something you'll never understand, you are too f.cking dumb. | >| >| > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Algol/ClassicCurve.JPG [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] | | They are a computer error. Computers don't make errors, wabos do. http://www.agnld.uni-potsdam.de/~shw/8_Projects/2_Cyg_X-1/pic/Light.jpg | >| noise. | > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] | I have printed out all the numbers around a critical turning point on the | curves. Spikes only occur at one or two points on an ellipse. Your error. I use 10,000,000 points but it takes 5 minutes to run. Your program is way to slow for more than 100,000 points tops and wouldn't have enough RAM anyway. | >| > http://www.aerith.net/misao/report/variable/MisV1339/light_curve.jpg | >| [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] | | You don't know what you are talking about. Of course. Only shitheads know how to talk about theories, engineers cut the blabber and make things work. | >| I gave you about four different ways to produce it. | > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] | one point around the orbit. Near the critical distance, there can be two such | points....and we get a double peak. Can't happen, you told me. Unifuckation makes worbits edge on and all light curves have to be smooth, right, fuckwit wabo? How come your mother didn't name you Albert Einstein Wilson when she saw how self-contradictory you are? | >You'll never understand, though, so like Einstein you make up theories. | > You couldn't program an orgy in a brothel, wabo. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] | | The difference between a preacher and a used car salesman is that the latter's product doesn't fall apart till AFTER the sale. The difference between a physicist and an engineering team is building castles in the air versus building Concorde. >| On Mon, 30 Oct 2006 05:18:51 GMT, "Androcles" ><Headmaster@hogwarts.physics_d> [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] >You've snipped the URL to the gif I created, that's your f.cking problem. >Inapproprate snipping is discourteous and f.cking stupid. >| HW. >| www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >The difference between a physicist and an engineering team is >building castles in the air versus building Concorde. f.cking silly old pommie engineer.... HW. www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm The difference between a preacher and a used car salesman is that the latter's product doesn't fall apart till AFTER the sale. | >| On Mon, 30 Oct 2006 05:18:51 GMT, "Androcles" | ><Headmaster@hogwarts.physics_d> [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] | | f.cking silly old pommie engineer.... Standard jealous shithead response from a childish wabo. Go to an optician, get help to see. [snip] > The difference between a physicist and an engineering team is > building castles in the air versus building Concorde. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6792008580615381670 Dirk Vdm | [snip] What is this? Some kind of quote of some post? An introduction to the sh.t you produce later on? sh.t that you expect someone will bother reading? Androcles The imbecile trying to cover his arse after he's been told the sh.t he refers to is Einstein's sh.t. 1) What is this? 2) Some kind of quote of some post? Clarification: Something you want us to believe you invented? Something you found somewhere? Something you want to tell us? Something you want to tell us something about? Something you forgot to delete when you started? 3) An introduction to the sh.t you produce later on? 4) sh.t that you expect someone will bother reading? Clarification: The 'sh.t' in question 4 is a reprise of the 'sh.t' in question 3. This is what we call a 'style figure'. Didn't they teach you to write English in Belgium? How old are you? http://tinyurl.com/h2wy7 "The man is a malicious troll" - Dork Van de merde. ROFLMAO! > > |I found this quote by Noam Chomsky, that's quite thought provoking: > > ... The people who were treated well were the ones who centuries later... ... were > > called false prophets. So it goes through history. > Stick your bible-thumping bullshit up your arse, it has f.ck all to do > with relativity. I don't think that Chomsky could be considered a Bible thumper. Strangely enough, he was actually talking about state terrorism. I thought that it was all very relevant to relativity. Religion, politics, science... ... when it comes down to it, they're all just games we play Barry > I found this quote by Noam Chomsky, that's quite thought provoking: > > ______________ > If you go back to the Bible, there's a category of people who were > called prophets, a translation of an obscure word, they were > intellectuals, they were what we would call dissident intellectuals. Well, they weren't what we would intellectuals of any kind. They were what we would call scribes. Chomsky would call them intellectuals, since they were the closest thing Palestine had to the Greek cranks like the Pythagoreans. . > ...Were they treated well? They were prisoned and driven into the > dessert and so on, they were the fringe. The people who were treated > well were the ones who centuries later, like in the gospel, were > called false prophets. So it goes through history. That's the way history has go for Professor idiots working for M.I.T. Since it wasn't until Leif Erickson came by, that you idiots had anything close to what could be called a Job for Job. > Barry > > I found this quote by Noam Chomsky, > That's the way history has go for Professor idiots > working for M.I.T. How did you figure out that I was at M.I.T? Barry >> > I found this quote by Noam Chomsky, > >> That's the way history has go for Professor idiots working for >> M.I.T. > > How did you figure out that I was at M.I.T? Perhaps he was talking about Chomsky. Darned insulting way to talk about the man but he was, after all, at MIT (or is that "is"? I lose track of who's still where.) Until your last post I don't know that anybody here knew you were at MIT.  SignatureNospam becomes physicsinsights to fix the email >>> > I found this quote by Noam Chomsky, >> >>> That's the way history has go for Professor idiots working for >>> M.I.T. >> >> How did you figure out that I was at M.I.T? This was an attempt at humour. > Perhaps he was talking about Chomsky. Darned insulting way to talk about > the man but he was, after all, at MIT (or is that "is"? I lose track of > who's still where.) > > Until your last post I don't know that anybody here knew you were at MIT. He isn't. But perhaps this was such an attempt as well? If so, :-) Dirk Vdm > > > I found this quote by Noam Chomsky, > > > That's the way history has go for Professor idiots > > working for M.I.T. > > How did you figure out that I was at M.I.T? I didn't, I pre-condiotioned that you were posting from Internet. The Searleans are the people who figure things out about the Intenet. > Barry |
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.