Another Nobel for the simple minded

Discussion in 'Chemistry' started by Bishadi, Oct 9, 2008.

1. SaxionBannedBanned

Messages:
264
How confident. How...boastful. But then i read this:

So maybe you can get confused like the rest of us, because that sentance made about as much sense as i did this moringing at 6:00am.

Lovely age -- perhaps start acting it?

3. AlphaNumericFully ionizedModerator

Messages:
6,697
It's a bad reflection on Bishadi rather than a good reflection on me.
We've developed pigs which glow in the dark.

http://thefourhorsemen.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/greenpigs1.jpg
When Bishadi stops making claims he cannot backup and stops posting BS.

Messages:
2,745
that it is the job of the philosopher to show the rest how little they really know

what plainly demonstrated........ ? Show it!

this is what stinks about such website; too much pride.

not enough thinking.

It is like if i fart the only item people will notice is the stink, not the chemistry behind it.

such that how it works is beyond simple minds

you value only what works for you...... it is why the scientific community is pretty much governed by business rather than what it started as; the pursuit of truth!

Resonant energy between lipids is how the phospholipid bilayers associate without peptide bond. (that's a nobel.......) do you comprehend it? NO!

Messages:
2,745
they already have the "pigs"... nobel was giving a couple days ago.... you son are an idiot

you may know what other people wrote not the comprehension of application

at the molecular level you do. for a cup of coffee, you are right...

And if you on a ship of knowledge passing through the sea; you will drown walking the Planck.....

100% .... Perhaps if you comprehended how the synaptic junctions exchanged resonant energy versus ionize mass, then you would comprehend why 'Heat' at the molecular level of biological exchanges is the ignorance of today's biology

WE are NOT electical systems of life moron. If so an MRI magnetc would tear a human apart.......... use your head KID.

My first paper was PNC (photon neuron conduction) written in 1982...before you were born!

and it probably pisses you off to find your pride has ruined your ability to comprehend beyond your education. 24 and already becoming obsolete.

ie.... if you are so bright then you must know what entanglement is? Measure the potential between mass entangled by em and find your gravity. (another nobel)

nor could you.....

the life of mass is the em upon the mass, and in all cases when existing in a less that good environment it perishes...

don't care if you are talking about a single cell or a country.... your scope is short of understanding

another basis to show the standard model is a joke; but you don't even recognize that

kid i was into deboglie while you were still an egg and your daddy was pounding into your mom

if light was massless, than E=mc2 would not work

try an experiment; weigh 1 million atoms of (x) mass, then weigh another mil, of Y mass; both at BEC cold.

Combine them; fire nothing but em into the combination.

re weigh the combined specimens; it will weigh more than the addition of the 2 separate (postulate) (and another nobel)

you are out of your league son and the biggest problem is your pride

Last edited: Oct 12, 2008
8. AlphaNumericFully ionizedModerator

Messages:
6,697
That the best you can do? Avoid answering using some terrible second meaning of a homophone of a word?
The electrical field we give off (which is measurable, hold the ends of a cathod rayt oscilloscope and watch it oscillate) is far too weak for even an MRI to have an effect.
You wrote an essay only you think is worth anything. It wasn't published was it.
The full equation is $E^{2}=(mc^{2})^{2}+(|p|c)^{2}$. If m=0, ie no rest mass, then you have E = |p|c, which precisely what relativity says. Look up any book on relativistic electrodynamics.
Why? Because you can make a bad pun in an attempt to avoid backing up your claim about understanding quantum theory? Why are you avoiding the question? Got something to hide?
You make a bad joke in an attempt to avoid backing up your claim about understanding quantum theory? Why are you avoiding the question? Got something to hide?
Can you describe this mathematically or are you just explaining what a previous, well known, experiment does? Giving a sub-Wikipedia level description of something doesn't mean you understand it.

And because the interaction of the light and the BEC is extremely complicated. The light is pretty much absorbed into the lattice of the system so it not longer exists in a well defined way. Hitting an electron with a photon destroys the photon but the electron's relativistic mass increases. Noone denies this. The point is an isolated photon is massless. You are simply trying to blur the lines by giving an experiment where the photon interacts with things which can have rest mass and who can absorb the photon's energy.

9. SaxionBannedBanned

Messages:
264
I know we have made pigs glow in the dark.

I was stating the way you created the sentance.

Besides, if this is just a bad reflection of Bishadi than yourself, why are you passing thoughts with him? Worse yet, why pass any thoughts at all, if they have no good intention?

10. Hercules RockefellerBeatings will continue until morale improves.Moderator

Messages:
2,720
Actually, no. That’s not the job of a philosopher at all; that’s the job of an opinionated jerk/troll. You do it very well.

Okay....

These are just a few of the statements that betray your lack of knowledge, expertise and experience in the biological areas that you’re attempting to lecture us on. AlphaNumeric's treatment of your attempts at physics show the same thing. You can’t see any of this, of course, but I know that all the readers with actual science knowledge and experience are having a good chuckle at your efforts to educate us.

11. CharonZRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
786
I would not say chuckle. More like in the direction of toothache.

12. OilIsMasteryBannedBanned

Messages:
3,288
Scientists are a little slower than the average person.

Messages:
2,745
but the goofballs arguing are not scientist as the first grounding ideology of a person of scientific intent is honesty.

then we have the best comment found on the whole thread

By Saxion

"Worse yet, why pass any thoughts at all, if they have no good intention?"

this is why me and the unevolving monkey's are having a tough time; they have no intention of actually thinking about what is being said; they just want to spout off.... like some evanglical preacher.... about to lose a job!

Like the Pope finding out there is no 'magical' forgiveness and Jesus ain't God.

I will say one thing for sure...... what a peanut gallery this site has.

the thread is about how foolish the Nobel community is (behind the times) and that there are better ways to build the markers... (nano)

then when a suggestion as to what the marker is for; to map and see how living structures actually work; a fool spouts off that as if they know exactly how it works...... then why the usage?

the ability of honesty and thinking is short when dealing with some of the so called educated

it is why i trust a child over a teacher/preacher any day of the week

they see the world with open eyes and give honest opinions

Messages:
2,745
if i said that setting angular momentum replacing 'l' (amplitude of wavelength) was the error of planck's work caused by adherance to the 2nd law of thermodynamics; would you comprhend that?

"In 1993, medical researchers from the St Jerome Hospital in Batavia performed an experiment on a bowl of Lime Jell-O. They discovered, by attaching the bowl to an EEG machine, that the motion of the set Jell-O has exactly the same waveforms as the human adult brain"

And why is that folk? Because the human brain is not an electrical system.

Never has been. And so perhaps using the Nobel winning markers, they "hope" to see how the brain works......

An example; take the simpliest electronic device you own and place a little magnet on it; what happens.

Well if the human body was an electrical system, especially the brain and memories are supposed to be binary imagine having it placed into a 2 ton electromagnet.

these are why some are not up to speed with quality thinking; they have a hard time seeing reality at face value. (being honest)

If life was based on electrical interractions then any magnet would be like kryptonite and impede the electrical signaling of any kind. This is reality and many just cannot comprehend or be honest to the level of putting their own knowledge on the line.

A magnet will draw a spec of dust or impose to a single electron in the biggest or the smallest circuit. There is no hiding the FACT that life is based on light, not electrical circuits.

Another Nobel for the simple minded!

Is what this thread is about...... all the other morons talking about things they really do not comprehend is from the ever present Peanut Gallery.

Here is an item to slap the fools around; how big is the Photon of a single wavelength of VHF or 300MHz?

Then if E=mc2 is correct then it means a photon must be moving to retain its value but that is found incorrect

Researchers have trapped a laser pulse inside a glass chamber --and released it again intact. Such command of light could lead to mind-boggling new technologies

When PNC was written in 82, the feed back (Cal Tech) was that the laws of physics do not allow the photon to be slowed; which since 86 that stupidity is being recognized as incorrect

that ONE item proves Einstein's work was close but no cigar.... perhaps.. he knew the model was not finished either and why he was still working until his death; half the world thinks he work is perfect but HE knew it was not and until people can grow up....... the circle jerk continues

15. AlphaNumericFully ionizedModerator

Messages:
6,697
If I asked you to develop a coherent theory/explaination of why current theory was wrong, showing the exact deviation from experiment, could you?

Hell, coherent sentences would be good.
Citation?
Pointlike. Don't you know any quantum theory?
Open a book on relativity before making claims about things you don't understand. But what would I know, it's not like I research supersymmetric gravity theories involving relativity or that tonight I'm marking a course called 'Relativity and motion', and get paid for it by professors.
Proof you don't know even the simplest physics. It's been known for decades that light can be slowed. That's why water makes things look funny, light moves about 0.7c in it. Einstein's work involved LIGHT IN A VACUUM you dumb fuck.

Still haven't bothered to look up any relativity. Your parents must be so proud of you, being a retard.

Messages:
2,745

at 1 meter wavelength (like a big beach ball sized point)

see what i mean; you really have no idea what evidence science provides because rather than comprehend the evidence, you believe what you are told to believe.

ie.... each 'f' of em has a different wave length.... (size of your photon)

from the wee little gamma to the huge radio; each affect an 'area' inverse to the energy state.

see the difference of your complacent knowledge and reality?

so then you know that relativity is incorrect..... meaning 'c' is a close guestimate

as well to see the light from the stars behind the sun during the eclipse was not from space bending .......... everyone has seen a mirage

Vacuum? No such thing as an absolute vacuum

meaning there is no point in existence that does not have a field between points in time....

proof: that is why BEC cannot reach absolute zero

TO even begin to solve problems that are consistent with the micro and macro you first need to be honest with what data is out there that contradicts relativity

and even as Einstein recognized entanglement, no where in physics is the missing potential between mass addressed in relativity

ie....When you comprehend entanglement then perhaps you 'might' understand what gravity is.......

or let me guess, to you gravity is a particle too? (pointlike) and casimir and van der waal are just magicians measuring stuff that is unimportant

Hope there are youngsters reading this and see just how aweful some instructors are when you step on their toes; when you test their integrity!

Most will fib through their teeth and then start using foul language all because the knowledge available today far exceeds what the 'community' accepts and is taught...

Case in point read the thread; them markers being used are to 'hopefully' reveal how living structures associate in organized living things. And to read from this fool who claims to know and teach physics, most are too stubborn to check themselves; they actually think they know it all.

for the little people;

first ......... energy itself is em (light) upon mass.

Second...... no electron is ever isolated unless em caused it.

and third ..... be honest above what any idiots ever try and tell you as fact.

Trust yourself over the complacent acceptance of the idiots.

You will know what i mean within a few months.

There is someone who cares more about the truth than being accepted.

17. rpennerFully WiredStaff Member

Messages:
4,833

This paraphrase of "Jello trivia" comes from no cited source.
Evan Morris. From Altoids to Zima: The Surprising Stories Behind 125 Brand Names (2004) cites:
http://www.jellomuseum.com/index.html and http://www.jellogallery.org/jellohistory3.html which gives no attributation for the following:
The key feature is the Jello must be in motion for the experiment to pass, since the feature the doctor looks for is complex and periodic.

So Bishadi's report is a natural bit of exaggeration with the long history of this internet meme.

For the Upton demonstration, some sources say 1976 (based on press coverage like March 6, 1976 New York Times) and some 1969 for Dr. Upton's experiment.

The 1976 results could not be found in the abstracts of the two articles published that year according to PubMed. Nor does Dr. Upton keep an online presence as far as I can tell.

Messages:
2,745
thanx

at least someone was not tooo lazy

that subject could be a thread and classroom experiment all by itself for even the little people

my point was to share that the living brain is not electrical nor exchanges energy at the synapse in an electrical form

what would be neat is to take a dead persons brain and put is on the same table next to that bowl of jello and run the EEG on both...

some little person in the back room can yell "it's alive!"

we can call the little one a 'Young Frankenstein'

19. AlphaNumericFully ionizedModerator

Messages:
6,697
My degree from Cambridge says otherwise.
I'm not doing your dirty work for you.
No, wavelength is different from size. A point moving up and down once a second while moving at 1 metre a second horizontally will trace out a wave form which has a wavelength of 1 metre. In QED a photon is a point.
QED is experimentally verified in everything it predicts on a classical level, including the length of photons. I am not incorrect. Otherwise, how do radios work? Their wavelength is larger than the diameter of the Earth!
Nope. Relativity predicts in a vacuum the speed of light is a constant. We can alter the speed of light when light is not moving through vacuum!.

You put your foot in it.
Light bending around the Sun isn't slowing it down. It's altering its path. It was the first evidence FOR relativity, not against it!

You seem unaware of how science is formulated.
One of the results of thermodynamics is that any system cannot be taken to absolute zero in a finite number of 'processes'.
I keep asking you if you want to discuss the general concept of Yang Mills theory, which covers both photons, weak bosons and gluons, but you refuse.
I believe that gravity will eventually be understood as a quantised force. Casimir forces are the result of virtual particle production, I can go into the details if you want. Van Der Waal's forces are due to residual electromagnetic effects in atoms. I suppose it's the EM version of meson exchange in nuclei.
The other 3 forces would disagree.
Weak interactions in colliders would disagree.
I bet in 6 months you'll still be whining about how you have all the answers and 'proof' is just around the corner. Cranks like you always do.

Messages:
2,745
toilet paper

you don't read; someone else is not useless like you and posted the meme on the thread already...

you like everything you have posted you are useless as you don't do research; you mirror what everyone else has already done

if you are talking to submarines otherwise, they are not quite that big

geeze you are stubborn

point being is that a reciever within the envelop can capture the collective unit; such that the point needs to be directional at the small wavelength

ever hear of microwaves? ever notice the antenna are pointed to a direction (line of sight)

no light can convey unless between points

which shares an absolute vacuum is impossible

and why i shared a mirrage

sure isn't from gravity 'bending space' as special rel, suggested and why that evidence was mentioned.

because i understand the work and you don't

it is.......... entangled energy (light) between mass

not playing video games.... it was a potential measured between reflecting plates with no addition energy added.

the potential increase is from the energy entangling the plates and the potential increases with time (entanglement)

see the gecko feet.

the energy is exchanged back and forth increasing the potential between the mass.

yang mills was combining the weak to electromagnetic forces..... (see what i mean, you really do not comprehend what you speak)

Last edited: Oct 14, 2008
21. Hercules RockefellerBeatings will continue until morale improves.Moderator

Messages:
2,720

Classic! Bishadi has the universal crackpot’s playbook and he’s running it step by step.

Messages:
2,745
His the integrity stinks; best use the degree that left him so ignorant.

Following an institution as absolute; is religious in nature.

In both examples; if ones honesty is to be waived to remain accepted, then burn the buildings down.

23. rpennerFully WiredStaff Member

Messages:
4,833
Let us set aside, briefly, the topic of laziness. Why did you not provide the Jello experiment citation since your claims rested crucially on an ungarbled report? Why did you not provide a citation or a link to the 1982 presentation at CalTech? If it was revolutionary, then you are losing the eternal prestige and gratitude you deserve because not all of us were at CalTech for that presentation, nor can we find citations of it in the literature. It's almost exactly the same as if you did nothing revolutionary at all! Fix this!

I'm sorry -- someone must have edited out the part of the discussion thread that introduced the relevance of achondroplasia and/or dysplasias.

And back on the topic of laziness. The essential part of the article indicates that the natural electric charges of Jello (be it lime or otherwise) can induce changing voltages in electrodes when the Jello is in motion. Due to the elastic and dispersive mechanical qualities of Jello, these motions exhibit characteristic strong quasi-periodicity (wiggle) which results in quasi-periodic signal which is the dominant feature of the EEG of a live person. For both still cadavers and still inverted bowls of lime Jello, the documented model predicts no EEG activity at all. The anecdotal report does not definitively establish that the EEG of shaken Jello and humans are indistinguishable, let alone "identical" but suggests only that they bear similarities. Strongly shaken cadavers are another question.

Legally and ethically, it is much simpler and reasonable to obtain the EEGs of the healthy and alive, and in the context of the 1976 demonstration, environmental conditions might bias an EEG test of brain death and lead to unnecessary extra expense when in fact the patient is dead. A similar thing happened to me in the emergency room when I suffered a coughing fit at the time an automated blood pressure cuff took a reading and an completely unnecessary nitroglycerin patch was applied. Thud!

So within your sphere of knowledge, which you proudly proclaim, you export no references, observations or citations, and when hand-fed information from outside your sphere of knowledge, you fail to parse that information and get snippy at other people who are in the same boat as you. Is this a question of laziness or ability?
That's not the role of the hunchback (which is distinct from dwarfs who tend more to lordosis and scoliosis) in the movies. For someone obsessed with little people, you are just making nonsense claims here.