Possibility of star formation around black holes

[Beaconator]

Nope you both loose.

the answer is "What is" Iron!

Havent you people watched jeopardy before?

 

[paddoboy]

Nope you both loose.

the answer is "What is" Iron!

Havent you people watched jeopardy before?

You've lost me....But then again, I don't watch Jeopardy.......

 

[dumbest man on earth]

I was trying to point out to the Poster that "theories" and "facts" are two completely different things.

Since "theories" are not "facts", they should not be used as a "fact" when arguing against another "theory".

The word "fact" does not appear in the post you were quoting. You should not put in quotes things that are not quotes. That's putting words in peoples mouths they didn't say.

R_W, you seem to misunderstand my use of " "'s.

I use the quote feature of this Forum when quoting Posters actual Posts or "words" - hence the "Blue Backgrounded Quoted area" in Posts.

I use "Quotation Marks" in the "Air Quotes" sense when "Irony" is involved - As explained in the following :

Irony

Another common use of quotation marks is to indicate or call attention to ironic or apologetic words:
He shared his "wisdom" with me.
The lunch lady plopped a glob of "food" onto my tray.
She attempted to use her "strength" to lift the weight.

To avoid the potential for confusion between ironic quotes and direct quotations, some style guides specify single quotation marks for this usage, and double quotation marks for verbatim speech. Quotes indicating irony, or other special use, are sometimes called scare, sneer, shock, distance, or horror quotes. They are sometimes gestured in oral speech using air quotes.

- the ^^above quoted^^ is from : http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation_mark

R_W, I was in no way attempting, nor intending :

putting words in peoples mouths they didn't say.

 

[paddoboy]

Google "theory VS proof" and every science site will confirm what paddoboy stated

Thanks origin, I'm sure he does know that......

 

[paddoboy]

Huh? The part where a magic star turns electromagnetic radiation into elements?

Yeah, it certainly aint real plausible is it.....
As someone earlier suggested, Beaconator seems to be full of ideas, but no evidence or method to support said ideas.

 

[Russ_Watters]

1. Get a better translator

No, that's definitely not it. Translators don't use slang/shorthand such as "tho" in post 131. What this is is simply word salad. Technobabble. Beaconator is just throwing together sciencey-sounding words and hoping that together they will have meaning. Saying "radiation which contains a nearly full spectrum from gamma to black body" (as if gamma isn't on the black body spectrum) while asking in another thread for explanations of how Hawking radiation works shows that this is just a bunch of crap thrown at a wall.

 

[Russ_Watters]

R_W, you seem to misunderstand my use of " "'s.

I use the quote feature of this Forum when quoting Posters actual Posts or "words" - hence the "Blue Backgrounded Quoted area" in Posts.

I use "Quotation Marks" in the "Air Quotes" sense when "Irony" is involved - As explained in the following :

- the ^^above quoted^^ is from : http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation_mark

R_W, I was in no way attempting, nor intending :

Clearly you don't understand irony either, but that is a separate matter from your putting words in other peoples' mouths. Take away the quotes and you are still making a claim about something said that wasn't:

Since theories are not facts, they should not be used as a fact when arguing against another theory. [quotes removed to remove bad attempt at irony]

Clearly, you are saying that paddoboy used a theory as if it were a fact. He didn't. Moreover, you are also wrong about theory being able to be used when arguing against another theory. You're wrong squared (cubed if we put back in the wrong irony).

 

[paddoboy]

Clearly you don't understand irony either, but that is a separate matter from your putting words in other peoples' mouths. Take away the quotes and you are still making a claim about something said that wasn't.

Agreed, I'm an Aussie, and we do speak write and read the Queens English quite well I suggest [and with a better accent than most ] ......but The style of his posts in general, are utterly confusing at times.

 

[dumbest man on earth]

Clearly you don't understand irony either, but that is a separate matter from your putting words in other peoples' mouths. Take away the quotes and you are still making a claim about something said that wasn't:

Clearly, you are saying that paddoboy used a theory as if it were a fact. He didn't. Moreover, you are also wrong about theory being able to be used when arguing against another theory. You're wrong squared (cubed if we put back in the wrong irony).

Clearly?!

 

[Russ_Watters]

Clearly?!

Clearly, you are trolling.

 

[Beaconator]

No, that's definitely not it. Translators don't use slang/shorthand such as "tho" in post 131. What this is is simply word salad. Technobabble. Beaconator is just throwing together sciencey-sounding words and hoping that together they will have meaning. Saying "radiation which contains a nearly full spectrum from gamma to black body" (as if gamma isn't on the black body spectrum) while asking in another thread for explanations of how Hawking radiation works shows that this is just a bunch of crap thrown at a wall.

Non sequiter?

Ive intended most things work well when considering the assimilation of my idea. We have gone through a seemingly countless number of theories, suffered a little from the occasion non viable plausibility, and landed squarely on 'something'.

Which qualifies as research... not fact, not theory, not observation, but research. And bills are paid higher in research.

We have expectations, fact checking, expectations of fact checking, proposed solutions, discussion of non viable solutions, followed by more fact checking, then a long pause of expectations, a proposed experiment, followed by more fact checking... then we played a game of jeopardy.

Sounds like good research to me.

Spectral analysis is an aspect of frequency. Frequency is a part of a photons angular momentum. Stars need lots of different angles to produce a circle from a square.

 

[paddoboy]

Non sequiter?

Ive intended most things work well when considering the assimilation of my idea. We have gone through a seemingly countless number of theories, suffered a little from the occasion non viable plausibility, and landed squarely on 'something'.

Which qualifies as research... not fact, not theory, not observation, but research. And bills are paid higher in research.

That's nice...Best of luck: After you have experimental and/or observational evidence, [or any evidence falsifying the uncumbent model] you may then approach peer review process.

 

[origin]

I am the only element incapable of fusion still involved with the process of fusion.

Nope you both loose.
the answer is "What is" Iron!

Ironically you are wrong on your guess of iron. You have some rather major misunderstandings of what is going on with fusion.

When two light elements such as hydrogen fuse to form helium there is a net release of energy. When 2 elements such as iron or heavier fuse there is a net absorption of energy. That does not mean that the fusion of iron does not occur, it only means that the system will decrease in energy when heavy elements fuse.

If elements heavier than iron were "incapable of fusion" then where in the world do you think the very heavy elements like uranium came from?

 

[Russ_Watters]

Non sequiter?

Ive intended most things work well when considering the assimilation of my idea. We have gone through a seemingly countless number of theories, suffered a little from the occasion non viable plausibility, and landed squarely on 'something'.

Which qualifies as research... not fact, not theory, not observation, but research. And bills are paid higher in research.

We have expectations, fact checking, expectations of fact checking, proposed solutions, discussion of non viable solutions, followed by more fact checking, then a long pause of expectations, a proposed experiment, followed by more fact checking... then we played a game of jeopardy.

Sounds like good research to me.

Spectral analysis is an aspect of frequency. Frequency is a part of a photons angular momentum. Stars need lots of different angles to produce a circle from a square.

Good demonstration of "word salad" (lots of words unnecessarily thrown together, saying nothing). Thanks for that.

I'm actually starting to wonder if we're dealing with a word salad generator bot. Anyone know how spam emails that use a lot of words to say nothing in order to trick spam filters and conceal links are generated?

 

[exchemist]

Good demonstration of "word salad" (lots of words unnecessarily thrown together, saying nothing). Thanks for that.

I'm actually starting to wonder if we're dealing with a word salad generator bot. Anyone know how spam emails that use a lot of words to say nothing in order to trick spam filters and conceal links are generated?

…at the very least, an entity that knows neither the spelling nor the meaning of a "non sequitur"…..

 

[origin]

Good demonstration of "word salad" (lots of words unnecessarily thrown together, saying nothing). Thanks for that.

I'm actually starting to wonder if we're dealing with a word salad generator bot. Anyone know how spam emails that use a lot of words to say nothing in order to trick spam filters and conceal links are generated?

Agreed. This is my favorite: "Frequency is a part of a photons angular momentum. Stars need lots of different angles to produce a circle from a square."

I actually kind of hope that is just from a random word generator and not someone being serious.

 

[Beaconator]

Ironically you are wrong on your guess of iron. You have some rather major misunderstandings of what is going on with fusion.

When two light elements such as hydrogen fuse to form helium there is a net release of energy. When 2 elements such as iron or heavier fuse there is a net absorption of energy. That does not mean that the fusion of iron does not occur, it only means that the system will decrease in energy when heavy elements fuse.

If elements heavier than iron were "incapable of fusion" then where in the world do you think the very heavy elements like uranium came from?

Fusion of iron is in a supernova. The explosion of a star is not a star. Previous restraints held me to stellar fusion.

 

[paddoboy]

. The explosion of a star is not a star.

:bugeye: ???? :bugeye: ????? :bugeye?????

 

[Beaconator]

…at the very least, an entity that knows neither the spelling nor the meaning of a "non sequitur"…..

Latin origin meaning. Does not follow.

I mean the person I'm talking to is incapable of following my premise, therefore his conclusion does not follow the premise. The conclusion could be true or false, but is irrelevant considering the premise.

 

[origin]

Fusion of iron is in a supernova.

This is a no-no in the pseudoscience world! You have accidentally admitted you were wrong when you said iron is incapable of fusion!

I for one am very dissapointed in you!