Double Slit Experiment

You have said I'm a Liberal arts major a couple of times now. Doesn't make it any more true that I most certainly am not. If you fail to see the point I was originally making then I can't help you escape your thoughts of me. Basically you missed the point and now you are struggling to turn things around on me when I have done nothing wrong. You continually insult me with your sarcasm so allow me to apply some of my own.

V/M/.66(6) = pi(r^2)/5.413*h=42

V/M/.66(6) - pi(r^2)/5.413*h=0

What's 42-42?

I have absolutely no idea what these values are. These values are meaningless mathematical expressions that do not make proper alignment of the pigeonhole principal by incorporating the 3*3*3 magic cube that sums to 42. This expression in no manner expresses any value of any scalar field hypothetical or realistic. There are not any variables taken from uncertainty, Einstein's equations, or from the Greeks who initially calculated π. Nor does this random field of numbers contain the devils number or the number that represents the meaning of life in a very popular novel "THAT" Alex G sleeps with under his pillow. You better start reading the "Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth". Otherwise just do like they did for the Cuban missile crisis and tuck your head between your legs and kiss your ass goodbye.
 
More like a sheep. You light a sheep on fire and it's sure to run to its master. Or has its master already seen me?
 
chaos1956 said:
You have said I'm a Liberal arts major a couple of times now. Doesn't make it any more true that I most certainly am not. If you fail to see the point I was originally making then I can't help you escape your thoughts of me. Basically you missed the point and now you are struggling to turn things around on me when I have done nothing wrong. You continually insult me with your sarcasm so allow me to apply some of my own.

V/M/.66(6) = pi(r^2)/5.413*h=42

V/M/.66(6) - pi(r^2)/5.413*h=0

What's 42-42?

I have absolutely no idea what these values are. These values are meaningless mathematical expressions that do not make proper alignment of the pigeonhole principal by incorporating the 3*3*3 magic cube that sums to 42. This expression in no manner expresses any value of any scalar field hypothetical or realistic. There are not any variables taken from uncertainty, Einstein's equations, or from the Greeks who initially calculated π. Nor does this random field of numbers contain the devils number or the number that represents the meaning of life in a very popular novel "THAT" Alex G sleeps with under his pillow. You better start reading the "Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth". Otherwise just do like they did for the Cuban missile crisis and tuck your head between your legs and kiss your ass goodbye.
Click to expand...

Was there supposed to be sarcasm there? I only saw meaningless garbage.
 
Key word being. "YOU" only see meaningless garbage. Which means you don't understand it. Seeing as you don't understand it, you are obviously the target of the sarcasm. Sometimes the target of sarcasm apparently isn't supposed to see the sarcasm even if it is spelled out plain as day in front of his face. Things apparently go over your head sometimes. Stick to your well known velocity and "fly, fly, fly" as I have said earlier. Or pick up on another thread. Or guess my major incorrectly again. I really don't care what "You" do as long as it makes you disappear. I'm obviously here for your master.
 
Well this thread is in the pseudoscience section, and that's obviously the right place for you post.

Just another wacko in a long line of internet cranks.
 
Interesting... as the ideas are currently upheld in the physics sections where I have told you repeatedly to travel. find another goat on fire or better yet save yourself the embarrassment and just give up now.
 
I read all the threads, and so far, I must say that you haven't shown any particular knowledge of physics in any post.
 
Then formulate a response to one. I'm completely unopposed. Your last post suggests that you only understand the "particular" side to physics. There is much more to it than that and it all happens at the same time. Still your not a chemist so it appears oxymoronic-al to ask you any questions about the "particular" elements. With that understanding in mind there is only an apparent disregard for "your" understanding of the photoelectric effect.
 
really? check the profile. Some people have been eyeing me already. I bet Alex G still can't place my major, although there is a specific cause effect relationship there as well. The main POINT I was trying to express is that Terry Giblin mainly learns in pictures, alphanumeric mainly understands numbers. If they have been going on with "duck season" "rabbit season" argument for FIVE YEARS, maybe we should stop feeding the troll the wrong way. Obviously he likes picture, so show him some of those and maybe one day he will actually "say" something worth reading.
 
Well if those pictures can't somehow incorporate complete mathematical deductions, then it's clear you can't learn everything about physics by taking that approach. In Terry's case, I'm still waiting to receive an explanation for how his picture explains things in a better way than mine.
 
Why not? She bought me a new car and all I had to do was go to her show:roflmao: I was < impressed with his explanation of particles going through the slit, but you would have to admit the main idea is more communicable than Mr Gibblin is trying to make of it...
 
What are you trying to find again? my major was it? I wrote a riddle about that to see if you can rhyme.

oh lookie here.
Electrostatic-discharge.jpg


Does this background help you understand the duality better Terry?
of course the picture is expose over time.
 
chaos1956 said:
What are you trying to find again? my major was it?
Click to expand...

The post I quoted from was referencing searching for your intelligence.

I really don't care what your major was, I know what it wasn't.
 
So I make some sarcastic jokes at your expense only After you insult me. Then not only do you give up on the initial thing you attempted to define, but also change the subject to include cognitive tasks. Maybe the absence of your cognitive ability is the main reason we are currently having this discussion over "intelligence" in reference to my major. Say something smart or don't say anything at all when you speak to me. Insults won't get you far my friend.
 
chaos1956 said:
Until you know man you will never fully understand physics. "knowledge" is your friend, but when it comes to man you have no "imagination", no encouragement, no "faith" in your fellow man. You are the supreme being of understanding in this universe you have made for yourself. Ranting about your achievements does little to aid your case against Giblin.
Click to expand...
I don't need to present a 'case' against Terry, its immediately clear to anyone he's a few sandwiches short of a picnic and has nothing of scientific worth to present.

And how are you in a position to know how to do science? I have plenty of faith in people around me to produce work, that's how science developed, collaboration. Unlike Terry when I present my work to those in the know, like journals, they see the merit in it. Unlike Terry I don't have to delude myself about my scientific ability, I have other people evaluate it and tell me the good and bad parts and I learn from that.

And I think its funny you have a go at me for 'ranting about my achievements'. Terry claims to have Nobel prize worthy work which is, according to him, the biggest greatest scientific breakthrough ever. I'm a little more down to Earth, I think my work have scientific merit but I don't think I'll ever produce anything even close to 'award winning'. Some people will find my work useful and/or interesting and that's good enough for me.

chaos1956 said:
The main POINT I was trying to express is that Terry Giblin mainly learns in pictures, alphanumeric mainly understands numbers.
Click to expand...
My my, you have me all figured out. Terry deludes himself into thinking he's learnt about a subject because he's seen a picture from Google image search.

Pictures are an extremely useful thing to augment learning with but you can't go very far on just pictures. Anyone whose do any viable research which has passed peer review will know that details are essential. Terry posts a picture and claims he's 'solved' the double slit experiment.

chaos1956 said:
If they have been going on with "duck season" "rabbit season" argument for FIVE YEARS, maybe we should stop feeding the troll the wrong way. Obviously he likes picture, so show him some of those and maybe one day he will actually "say" something worth reading.
Click to expand...
Terry has this delusion that I've somehow been running some kind of smear campaign against him since we first crossed paths. He can't face up to the fact the reason no one accepts the scientific merit of his 'ideas' is that they have no scientific merit. Terry isn't worth running a smear campaign against, its clear to anyone whose even half competent at science he isn't. He can't face up to his short comings and he wants someone to blame.

chaos1956 said:
"YOU" only see meaningless garbage. Which means you don't understand it
Click to expand...
What an excellent way of going about deluding yourself. Everyone Terry has presented his 'work' to has thought it nonsense, but he can't face the fact its because it has no scientific merit. That kind of defence is what some religious people tell themselves, "They reject the Bible because they don't understand it". Its possible to understand something and still think its crap. In the case of Terry his work isn't even coherent, so its on an extra level of nonsense!

chaos1956 said:
I was < impressed with his explanation of particles going through the slit
Click to expand...
Then you're naive, likely because you don't know the details of the relevant physics. Terry hasn't managed to convince those of us who have done the relevant physics that he understands it. Its the typical crank approach, trying to swindle people who don't know its BS that their work is viable.

chaos1956 said:
I really don't care what "You" do as long as it makes you disappear. I'm obviously here for your master.
Click to expand...
Is that a reference to me? Its possible for people to agree on things without a leader-follower hierarchy. I'm more vocal about my views of hacks but that doesn't make me a 'leader'.

And CptBork, Terry won't reply because he's been permabanned. If you want the details PM me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top