Where have you managed that? You've had to lie, put words in people's mouth and pretend people have apologised when noone has. If by 'mind ****ing me' you mean 'demonstrating to all and sundry you're a liar, a fraud and an idiot' then yes, you've done that. Must be upsetting to have to resort to deluding yourself and lying so transparently to everyone just so you don't have to admit you don't know any physics. Just like Reiku. Still waiting for you to answer the questions I asked you. Or are you going to continue ignoring them?
Kaneda could not have been more accurate about you. Indeed, haven't you got any old women to mug, or some poisen pen letters to write, or some school kids to shout at?
He, like all of you cranks, won't stand up to a challenge about his knowledge and none of you want to discuss my work. What's the matter, worried you won't understand it? I just got back from campus and I went to the library. The 4 books I came back with are titled "Lectures on Kahler geometry", "An Introduction to Symplectic Geometry", "Algebraic Topology" and "Mirror Symmetry and Algebraic Geometry". What were the last books you got from the library? Would you and Kaneda care to discuss with me the work I'm doing which caused me to get those books? Nothing but attempts at unsupported insults. If I annoy you so much, start posting actual physics which shows I'm wrong. What makes you think I mug old ladies? Because I don't entertain fools, like you, Mike and Kaneda, gladly? I'm actually extremely pleasant to old people in real life. I'll smile at them, open doors, give them help carrying things, that sort of thing. But how would you know any differently? Unless you're having to resort to unsupported vacuous insults because you cannot stand me correcting you. As I said to Mike, the fact you're having to make such claims about me doesn't do you any favours. What does it say about you that you have to come online and repeatedly lie to people, who you know see through your lies, in order to try to validate yourself? In 2 years I might still be a jerk but I'll have a PhD. In 2 years you'll still be a lying idiot and you'll not have anything to show for your physics. Same goes for Kaneda. In 10 years he'll probably still be whining online about how everyone in mainstream physics is wrong but what will he actually have done to change things? Nothing. Because he's afraid to try to publish his work because he knows he's got nothing to actually say other than "Wah, wah, everyone who understand stuff I don't is wrong!". I insult cranks. Kaneda insults anyone who follows the mainstream line. You insult anyone who corrects you. You have called me a **** stain and told me to go **** me self and said you want me to be killed by being hit by a car. I call you an idiot and a liar. So please don't come off like you're not someone who insults other posters! I insult and correct cranks who make it clear they think they have all the answers but won't respond to actual questions, like you and Kaneda. The implication I insult anyone who knows less than me is incorrect. I am paid by professors to teach people. I like teaching. I don't just sit at the front of a classroom and yell out "Put your hand down you idiot!" when someone puts their hand up to ask for help, I go to them and I try to help. I'm friendly, I'll run through things a few different ways, I'll joke with them, I'll tell them that if they are struggling still to email me or come around to my office and if they are excelling I give them more difficult material. And I have excellent feedback. The fact you don't want to learn doesn't mean I can't teach. So, wanna discuss the details of my work? Given you claim you're working on curvature etc in your national diploma ( Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ) I won't bother explaining any of the equations and terminology I use, be aware of that.
Yes, i think i know what you are saying now. It goes a bit like this doesn't it.. ...blah, blah, blah.
Talking about desperate, remember that time AN you said i lied about my brother who died? What an accurate mind you have on those two chuncky shoulders, you muppet.
''I'm friendly, I'll run through things a few different ways, '' Is that after you've stabbed them in their sides with a dirty needle?
Wow, got any other ones you want to 'take the moral high ground' with? So far I mug old ladies, shout at children, stab students with dirty needles (let me guess, I've got Hep or AIDS, am a needle drug user and hence the needles are mine?) and am generally a terrible person. Of course if we add in Mike's insults, I suffer from low self image, partly due to a rather runty body, all over. Got any other insults you want to try on me? Maybe I killed JFK? I'm the one who convinced Bush Iraq had WoMD? I causes the recent Madrid plane crash? Come on, if I'm a dirty needle user who stabs people with them, we might as well go the whole hog. I'm responsible for global warming? High oil prices are my fault? You're better at random insults than me, got any good ones? If you have nothing to hide you'd take me up on my challenge. Funny how, despite posting 3 times in quick succession you ignored all of that and went down the Kaneda route of just saying "It's all blah blah blah". If I'm wrong about my comments about you, why do you never prove me wrong?
Incorrect. Potential energy is energy not producing work. It is quite physical (i.e. real) just like the electromagnetic field is a physical field produced by electrically charged objects. Uh... not even close. Keep trying to rationalize your anthropomoprhic delusion.
Watch as I continue to mind rape you. Muppet. First I'll tell you I'm going to mind rape you. Tool. Then I'll mind rape you. Gimp. Then I'll tell you how you have been mind raped. Alphie. and, WHAT QUESTIONS are you talking about? I've fully and honestly answered every question you have ever put before me. And you know it. You can't show one post where I avoided your point. You on the other hand fly off subject at the drop of a hat and then try to confuse the point with all your irrelevant equations... whatever. You didn't accept my explanations before, you won't now.
Do I really have to come out and actually say not to take everything I post literally? Note that this is in Pseudoscience. Now leave me to my insanity. Its comfy in here. :jason:
Your inability to have a scientific discussion in a rational and coherent manner doesn't mean you 'mind rape' me. It means you make a fool of yourself by exposing your ignorance in both asking a stupid question and failing to understand the answer. 1. I asked you where you'd mind ****ed me before. No reply. 2. You were asked where either Ben or I denied that photons could be emitted and absorbed by electrons. You couldn't provide. 3. You claimed that you've finished science, scientists can go home. I asked you to provide an analytic solution to the equations of QCD. You ignored me. You have been caught lying before and I'm sure you'll continue to lie in the future. http://sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1975432&postcount=25 You haven't replied to that one. You think asking you to back up your claim you've solved all of science by asking a science question is 'flying off the handle' and irrelevant? When someone says "I've got the answers to every question" it's generally a good idea to check. You failed.
Not nice is it, when people throw insults of no substantiated evidence? This is what i have to put up from you.
Frankly I don't care what you say. My point is that nothing you said has any kind of evidence because it's completely independent of the physics I post here. You claim to be educated in physics. That's relavent to this forum. But it's a lie. You claim to be researching quantum field theory. Relevant to this forum. It's a lie. You claim to be doing high level GR in your 1st year national diploma. Relevant. But another lie. So what I say is substantiated. Point me to a single post of yours where you show working understanding of the topics you talk about.
It is unsubstantiated. Your post right here is yet another shining example. For starters, who said i was in my first year? I certainly never did. Yet another fantastic claim pulled out of the aether.
Wait, so you''re not in your 1st year doing maths and physics and so you have done maths,so why you are 'rusty'?! How does that work then? See, this is my point. Your comments are inconsistent. If you had just answered questions directly and simply when I asked we'd not be in this situation quite so much. For instance, which national diploma are you studying for, can you please give it's syllabus from say a government or examining board website. That doesn't retort anything else I said. What year you're in is largely irrelevant, because you would still not even be close to the level of education needed to talk about some of the equations you try to post. And you keep getting those wrong too! What is the name of the textbook used in lessons or recommended as reading material? The University of Dundee requires A Levels or a national diploma in physics to get onto their course. And then a few years into that you start doing the kind of things you tried to convince me you are studying in GR. Hence why I say it's a substantiated statement that you're a liar. Your college isn't a university, by your own admission. You are studying for a ND. NDs are 'A Level equivalents', they get you into university. Yet you claim you're being taught stuff which is not covered to late in a degree. So if you're not in your 1st year but are studying maths, how come you said you're rusty at algebra. Haven't you been doing any algebra for your maths course?
My math course just started. I only explained that to you about a few days ago. Unless you have come down with dementia since then...?
How have you been doing curvature and geodesics, which involve things like the covariant derivative \(\nabla_{a}\omega_{b} = \partial_{a}\omega_{b} + \Gamma_{ab}^{c}\omega_{c}\) without doing any maths? You NEED maths to be able to do general relativity. How can you be rusty at expanding out (a+b)(c+d) when something like \(R_{abcd}V^{d} \equiv [\nabla_{a},\nabla_{b}]V_{c}\) requires you to expand out such brackets? You cannot do differential geometry without doing maths. Differential geometry IS maths. And it takes 2 or 3 years at top universities to get to that level of mathematical understanding before you can do that kind of physics. Yet MORE inconsistency in your claims. And you ignored my questions. Got something to hide? If you don't like being called a liar, go through step by step how to work out the expression for the curvature in terms of the connection.
As usual, dodging the question. I back you into a corner and you don't want to play any more. You whine (and start new threads) about how I'm so mean for calling you a liar but when pressed you cannot provide a single iota of evidence or justification that you are studying what you claim to be. Then you try and take the high ground by saying you're 'bored' of me. :bawl: I'm sure you'll continue complaining about me calling you a liar and a fraud but you'll also continue to be unable to actually answer my questions. If you're doing curvature and the equations you PM'd me at stuff you're covering, writing the curvature in terms of the connection is nothing but a short homework exercise. So why can't you just spend 4 minutes doing it? It'd go miles to putting some evidence behind your claims you study it. You spend more time whining about how I'm calling you a liar and I shouldn't than you'd spend just answering a few questions. So why aren't you?
