Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Physics Forum Mass & Velocity

So here we are with many postings discuss 8 divided by 0 on a science forum with a religious nutter troll.

Personally this sums up SAGG which has become STUPIDITY A GO GO.

To any new forum vistors leave now because this forum is not worth your time because it is inhabited by religious nutters who the moderators are too GUTLESS to bring under control.

Moderators you have once again been found to be totally wanting it would take 5 seconds to bring this sort of bullshit under control ... it simply requires you to moderate.

I personally will leave you all to it but moderators when you ponder the lack of discussions on the forum look at yourselves because sane rational people will not wade thru repeated mountains of bullshit to try and have a discussion.

Thus the religious nutter will eventually win and the forums will die which is what he wants because science ate his GOD.

Ummmm if you notice there have been what 20 posts trying to do it your way .... not really working hey and can you get a more stupid argument?

My way starting a "flame war" attacking his pathetic effigy GOD was at least getting a degree of control in the place of the useless moderators. It works because he wants to derail science discussion but having his GOD attacked is not a desirable outcome.

Lets see how many posts it takes to get the most stupid argument silenced doing it your way :-)

Orac, you may not have read or understood my whole comment. I don't expect to stop Paul from posting silly science. What I hope to do is to keep people from thinking that he actually knows something. And a flame war isn't going to do that, it just makes you look kind of stupid too.

Bill Gill

You really mean that anytime the "G" word is used, that the person using it (in your opinion) is a religious nutter and doesn't accept science without it, (like a true scientist would even tho science can't qualify or deny the reality of God).
God forbid should anyone even mention the "G" word to a real scientist.




But could a scientist ever really look stupid...? Say it ain't so..



Ah sooo.. The manipulation of the forum moderators is the plan. Similar to the way you did when you threatened to leave the forum and got them (and a few others that felt sorry for you and begged your forgiveness) to delete the entire thread to get to the individual you had the gripe with.... Tricksy this Orac is.. yes?

careful there bill , you might just be have to show people
some type of intelligence in order to accomplish anything
close to your goal.

that kind of throws the off switch on your hope , because
so far you haven't displayed any intelligence.

unless you have something you have been saving up for
your grand finale.

orca , if I were you , thankfully Im not.

I would never present any type of evidence in a discussion
forum , I would only rant and rave about religion.

especially when the person has presented evidence that
proves that you are a complete idiot.

as I have done time and time again.

TT

I think that orat and bill gill are only trying to get us
banned from this forum , so we should really let these
anti religion fanatics have the dammed forum.

there's really no way to have a discussion about science
with them here anyway , if they run into a stumbling block
in any discussion their only outlet is to criticise religion.

more and more I find that with oren and his ranting and raving like the mad man that he probably really is there is no point in
wasting time and effort on such crap.

so we should just let these blind lead themselves and
the remainder of the forum readers to blindness.

lets start our own science forum and have some fun
with these brainless types!

http://www.ubbcentral.com/

It is a price I was willing to play to be actually able to discuss topics, sorry I suffer trolling badly and I am not familiar with sites that don't control them.

I have no real issue with anyones views and I am definitely not seeking to have anyone banned. All I am asking is the normal political norms to be moderated.

It would take 5 seconds of moderation to get the forums working properly whether Paul stays or goes is not the point of it.

The problem is Paul is trolling and even constructing ridiculous arguments like 8/0=8 above, he has done this repeatedly. Everyone does their best to ignore him but he just gets more and more stupid in his answers until he gets a bite.

When he starts his own threads like his "call for division" thread he can't get anyone to join in so what he is doing is interrupting into active threads to deliberately try and derail them.

TT, for someone who is supposedly the Spiritual good bloke you like to paint me into some villian with a wicked and devious plan. Can I say bluntly and precisely that I have no plan or agenda on anything other than to attempt to get the forum working like a normal forum and that requires normal moderation levels and standards. If you try to infer anything beyond that you are lying and misrepresenting me. I objected to a thread on the holocaust because it was extremely offensive as well as illegal in many countries we draw similar lines on pornography, drug use and many other such issues. You have presented your view on what you think I did and I have no problem if that is what you want to believe, so be it.

Paul, you lost this argument along time ago when you let out the background of your trolling was about fundementalist religion you believe in. You can choose to stop trolling and join in normal civilised discussion or continue trolling with rather predictable results. I do not hate you or your GOD and I have no wish to have you banned, all I ask is ceasing of the continual ridiculous troll arguments in threads not of your making. If you want to make your own troll thread I have no real issue, you have done so in the last 2 weeks and I and most others have ignored them.

you say that you want to have a discussion about things , you
then post things , and when someone tries to discuss those things
with you you start flaming religion.

I have shown that the above formula is designed to support
a theory , can you comment on that , or show how its not designed
to support a theory.

I am willing to put your claims that you want to be able to have
a discussion to the test , are you?

lets see if you are capable of a discussion that is free and clear
of things that are off topic.

Gentle readers, again we have Paul denying that things that have been tested and proven to be real are real. His inability to follow a logical argument is once more shown to triumph over reality. In this case it can easily be shown that the above equation can be mathematically reduced to the classic E=mC^2. For the SR case it gives exactly the same value.

In one way Paul is correct, the formula is designed to support a theory. The fact that the theory has been shown to be absolutely correct doesn't seem to interfere with Paul's assumption that he is always right, even when he's wrong. So take Paul's ranting in your stride and ignore him.

Bill Gill

Rede, sorry I wrongly assigned your quote. I blame this, and the fact that I was obviously not clear in my posts about 8/0, on posting while doing a couple of other things at the same time.

It was my intention to explain what I really meant, but, on second thoughts, I believe it's time to get out of this thread.

thank you.



I thought it was a theory?
so now its a law vs a theory then , correct?



E = mc^2/sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)

perhaps you should work a problem out using the above formula
to check that.

in the above formula this part (1 - v^2/c^2) will result
in a negative number , or using the speed of light as the velocity causes the formula to fail.

because 1-1 = 0

and you cannot divide by zero.

Well, gentle readers, there goes Paul again. He refuses to notice the fact that I pointed out that division by zero gives an unusable answer, and therefore nothing that has a non-zero rest mass can travel at the speed of light. This is one of the things that has been a major point of Special Relativity every since it was introduced by Einstein. Therefore he has set up an impossible situation and tries to claim that it invalidates SR. Of course since the scientific theory of Special Relativity has been validated numerous times by careful scientific experiments and observations his complaints are totally off base. But that is his way, he just refuses to admit that he doesn't know everything and won't make an effort to learn what actual science teaches.

Bill Gill

Impossible !!

Gentile and Not so Gentile Readers , again Bill is claiming that the theory is now a law!!

He claims that I have set up a impossible situation !

I did not write the formula !

have you ever seen a formula that you had to be cautious
of the numbers you plugged into it?

as far as any proof goes , I seriously doubt that any is
valid , I base that on the formula and its design and its designers.



I really do wish they would release the amount of energy they detected , as they didn't measure the time.

anyway , that is the latest and greatest from the cern - gran sasso experiment !


loads of proof there in "seemed to" that certainly etches it in stone.

it also prove's that nothing can travel faster than light !

because they measured the energy , not the speed.

however , I would like to calculate it myself.

but I dont have the energy in / energy out data.

also:

And all what you have written above is perfectly acceptable to science which is a first for you.

I have on occassions stretched peoples thinking on here asking them to show evidence that Energy is real.

What science doesn't allow is the next step you sometimes take which is to create some physics which clearly doesn't hold in another easily identifiable situation or by extended your claim out logically step by step and you hit a snag.

I did that with you on laser cooling where step by step I walked you out thru your claim and you end up at a wall in your case you were making the atoms gained mass but you ended up against the wall that is atomic weight.

Science requires a theory to be consistant with ALL KNOWN EXPERIMENTS and this is the step your physics failed.

So I congratulate you for constructing a logical argument you are a long way short of proving anything but you have made a start in the same way as my challenge to prove to me energy is real challenge is open to all.

I encourage all my students to do this challenge everything and look closely at what the claims are based on and convince yourself there are no other possibilities.

Welcome to science Paul.

No I never said the plan was wicked or devious... I might say obvious tho.

Hitler had standards, so did Ghandi. However there seemed to be a different foundation of beliefs governing those standards.
Somebody call the whaaaaambulance... I think there seems to be an outbreak of misrepresentation, based on some rather broad strokes of the interpretive paintbrush here. I'm sure you're innocent on all accounts and are the one true voice of authoritative reasoning when determining character and worth from the content within this forum.

Then I don't see any reason to change your mind about what I think now. Just do away with the problem you have with my comments, and we can both have our free will to experience life as it unfolds.
No problem.

I wouldn't say that , oric

that would be just a little egotistical on your part.
you seem to be gloating , as if you had won a prize.

I don't know where you have walked me through anything until I
ran into a wall , as I recall it was you who left the discussion after I began to question you.

but its late , so I will try and freshen up on the
laser discussion tomorrow.

I am amazed that you didnt flame religion , that is a start
and one of your frequent mistakes in a discussion.

Bill is right , it only makes you look bad when you resort to
ranting and raving about an off topic subject right out of the blue , as if it will sway opinion in your favor.

so keep up the good work , you have a long way to go now
before the gentile readers will be able to re-establish
any amount of faith in what you say , because of the flaming tactics , but time will tell if you are serious about having
any serious discussions about science topics or if you are more interested in flaming off topic subjects.

Why do you make it all about me Paul it's all about science?

I am a very bad person according to TT's standards which I freely admit.

I personally don't want to connect with anyone on here I am interested in sensible and sane discussions on science preferably without insulting each other but thats optional.

I am pretty sure I would disagree with almost everyone on the forum, let me draw up a table of how I see it.

Bill S. ... I disagree with his infinity view of universe
Bill Gill ... I would disagree with his solid universe
TT ... He just is a contrarian who writes walls of text to me
Rev K ... World is all about GOD but I want to know how it works
Paul ... Needs science to make sense to his GOD view of the world.


What I will say bluntly is if you engage in trolling just to mess up discsusions I will engage you in a flame war over your religion and if that means looking silly and like a nutter so be it, I never claim to be a sane and reasonable person.

I am not sure why you think I care what others think of me, I assure you more that a few students would have various descriptions for me and probably not many flattering.

My passions are science and human rights and a very distant down that list would be worrying about my appearance to others which you should have worked out by now.

It is fascinating the West's preoccupation with self image, I was bought up under a communist system where there is only the collective, self worth and self image is a bad thing so it is sort of hillarious trying to watch you use self image against me. I am sorry but that really is a disease of the Western world it won't work on communist background people, which is why I think I cause you so many issues :-)

Now we are done with all this bullshit can we get on with science.

you mention science in the last word in your first sentence.
then its all about you , until the last word of your last sentence.



I agree that everything between your first and last sentence was bullshit , but I suppose you felt a need to explain your "self".

what I do find troubling is that you left a communist nation
and are now living in a free society , yet you seem to be
clinging to the communist mind set.

you need to release the collective as you are no longer a part of it.

in a free society the things that you could associate with collective tendencies would be things like religion , belief systems , a collective pride in country , however you have a
right to choose , you are not forced nor should you be punished
for believing in any thing.


having a right to choose is the foundation of a free society.

you want to deny people the right to this foundation.

you say that human rights is one of your major interest
but you have a plan to intentionally attack their right to
have a belief in a belief system.

science is not a belief system although it is becoming one.
before long one will have a right to not choose science in
school , simply because science has become a belief system.

if you don't like someone's opinion on a science topic then
you seriously need to refrain from attacking their belief system
and attack them with science ( facts ), not with flaming their belief system.

if there are no fact's to back up your opinion then you have no ground to stand on , and that's that

at that point you should honorably admit that you were wrong.
or at least that you cannot be proven right.

Maybe that is something we could discuss. I'm not sure just what you mean by my solid universe. I realize that we don't necessarily agree on everything, particularly whether General Relativity is a part of Quantum Mechanics. But I'm not sure how that equates to a solid universe.

Bill Gill