WMAP worthless?

I suppose if you cannot win a debate honestly you can have a vain try at ridicule and add in some lies. As electrons are fundamental particles, they cannot be destroyed (though some cranks believe they can in black holes). I said they effectively "no longer exist" as far as current coming out of a wire is concerned since the electrons at the starting point in the wire no longer matter. I appreciate this is very hard for someone like you to understand, but do try.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

kaneda---

I was simply reminding you that this thread was here---I know I forget the threads that I respond to, on occasion. Either way, it seems that you are finished talking about WMAP. This is ok, because it seems that you don't know the experiment that well, nor do you know the article which you linked to in the original post.

So, if you're ready to resume the "debate" (it seems a bit ironic to call it that, because we both know that neither one of us will be convinced by the other's arguments), let me know. If you'd like to make up poor alternative names for AN and I, please do so.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

OMG, you are so witty. Wow, you must have to spend all day sitting at home thinking up things which sound like or are related to 'Alpha' and 'Numeric' and which can be read as an insult.

Of course, thinking up a witty name to call me is infinitely preferable to actually opening a book, learning some physics and putting your maths/physics where your mouth is. No, it's much better to post links to experiments/theories you don't understand, call everyone a sock puppet or 'OmegaNumeric' and then leave for a few days.

Wow, what an excellent example of a debater you are. I bet all your friends hold you up as a shining example of someone with wit and intelligence.

*cough*

Still too scared to take me up on my permanent and open invitation to discuss my work with me then? Can you be of any use here? Given I'm asking questions about things noone else knows the answer to and I'm providing discussion on material which are considered open questions in specific areas of theoretical physics and maths, perhaps you'd like to ask me a few questions in relation to such things to show I don't know anything about the discussion topic, thus proving to everyone you're correct in saying I'm nothing but a parrot?

Or will you continue to lie and pretend I haven't offered to talk about my work with you?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I tend to see the message on forums and not the people who have posted the message. Consequently I have sometimes been very rude to people who I have come to think of as friends and been complimentary to some I think are assholes. That said it occured to me that kaneda had some of the characteristics of Cangas - as well as a euphonically similar first syllable. Am I hallucinating?

 

Nope, what's really hard for me to understand is how any adult dummy like you can think that electrons are "absorbed and "readmitted"" (actually, the word should be "re-emitted" but you're still wrong) and not understand the simple principle of what's called electron drift. That's the way electric current really works - electrons are NOT photons!

 

No, you're not hallucinating, Oph. But in truth, for all of Cangas' shortcommings, he's not NEARLY as ignorant as kaneda. I suspect that even Cangas knows the difference between electrons and photons.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I have used that alias on you a few times over the last few months and you have just noticed it. You are really quick on the uptake. Not.

You appear to be wandering in the mind.

Nasty cough you've got there. You should take something for it, like a sense of humour.

I had a look at the thread and it talked of six dimensions. Perhaps you would like to produce evidence of six dimensions and prove that you are not babbling incoherently? I do not encourage people in their delusions so have not joined in.

Of course you are a parrot. You've never had an original thought in your life. As soon as I go onto speculation, you cannot quote from text books any more so start babbling. You're at your best when you are quoting the work of others.

You are lying when you said I pretend that you haven't offered to talk about your work with me. You have clearly done so ad nauseum but it sounds nearly as interesting as watching cricket and almost as relevant. The reason I should care about six dimensional maths is....?

 

OK, self confessed genius. How do electrons travel through a wire without being absorbed and re-emitted by atoms?

Who said electrons are photons? I would think that even you would know the difference between the two without having to check the wikipedia.

Your trouble is lots of ROM but zero RAM, so just another parrot.

 

Yes. You are showing the traits of a loony so definite hallucinations.

 

BenTheMan. I see Rpenner is here too. Who's minding the shop at physorg? Has it declined?

 

Who said it was the first time I'd noticed it? Given the entire section of my post was sarcasm, it wouldn't matter how many times I've seen it before.

Besides, doesn't that just demonstrate your posts are 'same old, same old'. Nothing new, no physics, avoiding direct questions, a few recycled plays on my name. Stirring stuff.

Can't retort anything I said then? Why do you just recycle old insults and not actually learn any physics?

And we're back to "If I've not seen it, it's worthless to consider it in physics".

How many times have I mentioned time dilation, antimatter and the third particle family of the SM to you now? All things predicted before they were seen. But your logic is the physicists who predicted them wasted their time.

So you're not willing to enter a discussion which involves speculation about material relating to my work?

Basically, you have defined the rules of 'your game' to be :

1. AlphaNumeric's area of work is worthless
2. I will not discuss anything which I deem worthless
1 & 2 therefore imply that I will not discuss AlphaNumeric's work
3. I will continue to complain how AlphaNumeric and I have not discussed his work and blame him.

If you knew anything about Lie algebras, joining that thread would rapidly lead you to the conclusion I'm talking about things which people haven't taught me but I've come up with. I'm asking about things which are still unsolved problems in mathematics.

It's Catch 22. You won't discuss something you deem pointless and you deem my work pointless and yet complain we haven't discussed my work.

Tell me, short of me completely leaving theoretical physics and becoming a *shudder* experimental physicist, how would I be able to do something in physics which you'd classify 'original and valid'? Because anything I do publish in the area of theoretical physics you automatically consider pointless and so doesn't show you're wrong.

You find my work boring because you don't understand it. And you don't want to try to understand it. You can't even understand physics which is spoon fed to you, never mind research level material you cannot even find in books or papers. And so you avoid discussing it. If you are right and I'm wrong, what have you got to hide? Prove to everyone you can put me in my place.

I keep trying to start such a discussion and despite you claiming you show everyone here to be wrong and you right, you avoid accepting my repeated invitations. :shrug: Like playground bullies, when someone stands up to you, it turns out you're a wimp after all.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

oke:

 

How should I know? I haven't been there in months.

But I do see that you've stopped talking about WMAP. So it goes. Have fun in Narnia

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Well you're me and I'm a mod on PhysOrg. Didn't you know that, Kaneda said it so it's true.

 

AlphaNumeric. Another post full of whining. They bore me, like I suspect they bore others on this board.