Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Physics Forum The law of conservation and transformation energy

Bill, that’s a good concise explanation of what happens, but it still leaves Paul’s question unanswered. Granted, the energy to move the electron comes from the incident photon, but if the emitted photon has the same energy, then the electron has been moved without expenditure of energy. Orac may be right, Paul may be trolling, but every unanswered question is a gift of troll-space. (Is that a working term, or have I just invented one?)

I think what you are thinking about is that none of the energy is lost to other things, such as friction or what have you. That's because this is a quantum effect, not a classical effect. All I can say to that is that the quantum world doesn't work the same way that the classical world does. The main thing is that all of the energy is accounted for.

As for trolls. Well, you will never satisfy them. They don't want to be satisfied. If you brought them into a physics lab and conducted an experiment right in front of them and carefully showed exactly how it worked they would still find fault with it. They don't want to hear what the correct interpretation is, they just want to start arguments for the pleasure of reading themselves in print, and causing other people to waste time in correcting their deliberate errors. And if they can get somebody to start a shouting match that is even better. That is where they really get their jollies.


Bill Gill

you must be talking about orac , bill

or are you and bill s agreeing and claiming that I am a troll in this forum.

we can carry this further and see what happens , frankly Im
sick and tired of this forum anyway , there is no discussion without all the interruptions and harassment and name calling.



the forum can be renamed to trollagogo because that would best describe the forum these days anyway.

the science bit it seems is only there to lure people in amongst the trolls for a measure of harassment.

Paul, I didn't call any body a troll. I just described how they work. If it sounds like I'm talking about you maybe you should look and see if you match the description.

Bill Gill

I never said that you did!

when you responded , you were responding to what Bill S wrote


am I not correct?

that is why I posed the question to you and Bill S below





thats why I questioned you and Bill S about it , for clarity
because I know Im not trolling.

HaHa I could respond to this ridiculous assertion even if I were subject to the laws in Western Australia where I no longer live I would have to be making a specfic insult to a specfic group being "ANTI-GOD" doe not really qualify.

So people insisting and posting theres is a god on a SCIENCE forum like our mate Socratus is different from me posting there is a god is it?

Anyhow since we seem to have got your "panties in a twist" and thats your words I will refrain from having any conversations with you because I do not wish to cause distress.

You may consider this the last conversation because I would hate to offend your sensibilities.

No , I do agree to that, also the quality of forum posters in this forum is pretty low.

this thread shows clearly what I mean.

go to the start of this thread and read each post 1 by 1
and mark on a seperate sheet of paper how many instances you find that show bad quality.

also total them up by the posters name.

you will also be in the list several times along with others such as the leader of bad quality orac.

Im not calling anyone any names , Im simply stating facts.

that can easily be validated , you want that to happen?

Oh yeah I am da bad boy of SAGG ... yeah.

I even threatened to make Bill S not exist in another thread top that you jive @#$% honkies.

Happy to wear the title ... now get over it and get on with your life.

I am completely happy to put you in the Preearth bucket and shall refrain from any discussion.

As I have said to Pre on a number of occasions, I am here to learn.

Please point out my transgressions. I think that would be a great learning experience.

I have looked around a bit and cannot find where you were trolling.

my accusation to you was for the most part erroneous.

I would like to point out that you and Bill extrapolated orac's trolling by agreeing with him or pointing out that he might be right when he was saying that I was trolling.

all the while saying nothing to the one who was actually being a
troll.

agreeing with someone in a discussion is like being an accomplice

ie.. you may not be the person who committed the crime , but you
certainly did not try to stop the crime.

but that's fine I understand how the wolf pack operates in these so called discussion forums.

the wolf pack circles the victim , nipping at the victim , tiring him down , then the alpha male moves in for the kill.

if the alpha male does not get the kill the remainder of the pack
continues to tire the victim down while the alpha male regains strength.

this is pretty much how the wolf pack on this forum operates

I can proudly say that I have been in this forum for many years
but I cannot say that I am proud to have been a participating member of this forum.

the reason I use the term proud is because the wolfpack has never claimed me as a kill.

the wolves on this forum are not as intelligent as I am , they are just consistent.


I will remain a member of this forum until I am banned
and I would like to let those members who are not active participating members know that if they would like to begin a discussion on a topic or join in on a current topic but they
fear the harassment from the wolfpack , this old badger will be keeping both eye's on the wolfpack.

For the most part? So you have some examples you can quote, as part of the learning process?



If you would care to look back through my posting history you will find I have pointed out to Orac instances where his posts were unhelpful. I have certainly been less inclined to do that to you. I think you will find I have called no one a troll.

You took my comment to the effect that “Orac may be right” completely out of context. Perhaps this was a mistake, rather than anything deliberate.



I doubt that you will be banned for the transgressions of other posters, so remaining on the forum is in your hands.

Perhaps you have not implicitly called anyone a troll
but the below sure has the appearance of an accusation.




I dont see how I took it out of context , my reasoning is below.





to me it looks like I did not take it out of context.
it was well within context.

Bill, that is good. But remember that you should keep an open mind, but not so open that your brains fall out. That means that you should require convincing proofs of any claims made by members of SAGG. The most convincing proofs are those that have been verified by members of the scientific community. Some extremely well verified ideas are the various conservation laws. Those include energy and angular momentum. When you get down to lower levels there are a number of laws in the quantum domain which are also thoroughly verified. The main thing is that any time somebody makes a claim that they can show these laws to be wrong you should start with the assumption that the claimant is wrong. You should require that they demonstrate positively that their claim is correct. Many times they will write up a lot of stuff that doesn't show how the scientists are wrong, they just ask a lot of questions without bothering to show that their claims are correct. So be very wary of any body making claims that don't agree with the extremely well validated laws of physics. They are almost undoubtedly wrong.

By the way many times these claimants will provide a word picture of an experiment that will topple the known laws of physics. But they will never perform the experiment. That is a pretty good sign that they are wrong, but it isn't really required. For them to show they are right they MUST provide experimental proof of their claim.

Bill Gill

Bill S

heres something I found that was really odd to me.

I could not find the word troll in most all of these pages!
even though they show up in a google search using the search forums search box at the top left.

type in troll bill s

and look at all the results.

Im not saying that you said anyone was a troll but look at the
descriptions of all the older pages , then look at any page and try to find the word troll

http://www.google.com/cse?cx=partner-pub...&gsc.page=2

sry it was a browser error , it only finds a word if you retype it in each time.

I am assured that evening primrose oil has a calming effect and is helpful in the treatment of over sensitivity.

If a poster were trolling and in the course of so doing asked a question; then, if another poster responded without answering that question, that action would provide an opportunity for further trolling.

Would you agree with this?



Would it not seem a little paranoid to fail to recognise that this statement actually supports your position.

Bill S

was the oil recomendation mine or Bill's

forgive me , but it's hard to tell who your addressing your comment to.

Absolutely! However, as one who has a habit of questioning everything in the hope of understanding it better, I like to know why poeple who make such claims think as they do.

If a poster were trolling and in the course of so doing asked a question; then, if another poster responded without answering that question, that action would provide an opportunity for further trolling.

Would you agree with this?



Would it not seem a little paranoid to fail to recognise that this statement actually supports your position.