 |
Newsgroups: sci.physics, sci.physics.electromag, sci.math, sci.chem
From: Timothy Sutter <a202...@lycos.com->
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 08:32:39 -0500
Local: Tues, Nov 6 2012 8:32 am
Subject: Re: Tim, does Google have a "locking mechanism" Re: your slip is showing...
> > if you just look at this thread;
the streamlined version, cuz aioe won't carry something so immense;
> > [thread i just posted excerpts from] > > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.chem/G_ts-y6KiBM/nz-IXX_Lr9UJ if you just look at this thread;
[thread i just posted excerpts from]
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.chem/G_ts-y6KiBM/nz-IXX_Lr9UJ
==
but this is how it was this morning, before anyone else gets to it...
as you will notice, -only- archi's psosts are flagged for abuse.
-only- archi is singled out and flagged...
all the rest are "sign in to reply"
=================================================================
spin in physics with monopoles existing Chapt13.4.01 Particle Physics Sep 14
=
Timothy Sutter Sign in to reply not flagged
Archimedes Plutonium wrote: there is no "electron dot cloud" > whole entire Universe is just one big atom > where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies there is a "probability density" which is oftentimes portrayed -as- a 'cloud' but that portrayal does -not- suggest that the hydrogen nucleus is surrounded by a myriad of myriad of electrons. -please- fix you .sig file. =
Sep 14
Sep 14
Sep 14
=
Timothy Sutter Sign in to reply
etc. =
Sep 14
=
Timothy Sutter Sign in to reply
- show quoted text -
Timothy Sutter Sign in to reply
Archimedes Plutonium wrote: =
> Timothy Sutter wrote: Timothy Sutter Sign in to reply
no animals will be hurt during Timothy Sutter Sign in to reply
> and you pretty much know where the little box is. or, like a bowling ball in a baseball stadium. =
Timothy Sutter Sign in to reply
"classical mechanics" simply does not work as the 'best explanation' =
Timothy Sutter Sign in to reply
> and, the large objects which make up galaxies and stars =
> and galaxie clusters are operating in a gravitational field > and the electronic interactions are negligible and the chemical > atomic forces are electronic and the gravitational effect is > negligible and you have yet to show me how gravitational > fields align in discrete energy levels and not > a continuous spectrum. Sep 15
=
Timothy Sutter Sign in to reply
Archimedes Plutonium wrote: =
> Timothy Sutter wrote: Timothy Sutter Sign in to reply
> you might like to look into molecular orbital theory =
> and consider how atomic orbitals show an overlap > when bonding occurs. Michael Moroney Sign in to reply
Timothy Sutter <a202...@lycos.com-> writes: My personal guess is that he encountered a diagram of the electron >Archimedes Plutonium wrote: >> whole entire Universe is just one big atom >> where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies probability density in a cheap high school chemistry book with primitive printing techniques, where they represented high probability with lots of dots close together and low density with few dots. Kind of like old B/W newspaper photos made of dots, except newspaper photos use bigger/smaller dots for dark/light and not more/fewer dots. (I have seen such chemistry books) He just took the diagram (way) too literally. =
David Bostwick Sign in to reply
Timothy Sutter <a202...@lycos.com-> wrote in Tim, give up. You will never persuade AP that he's wrong. Don Quixote =
Timothy Sutter Sign in to reply
> >Archimedes Plutonium wrote: <...> > >> whole entire Universe is just one big atom > >> where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies > Timothy Sutter writes: > >there is no "electron dot cloud" > >there is a "probability density" which > >is oftentimes portrayed -as- a 'cloud' > >but that portrayal does -not- suggest that > >the hydrogen nucleus is surrounded by a > >myriad of myriad of electrons. Michael Moroney wrote: > Good luck convincing Archie of that. He's been spewing that crap for > nearly 20 years. David Bostwick wrote: i had no intention of chasing it around forever... > Timothy Sutter wrote > Tim, give up. You will never persuade AP that he's wrong. > Don Quixote will defeat the windmill first. =
Brian Salter-Duke Sign in to reply
On Mon, 17 Sep 2012 09:13:05 -0500, David Bostwick <david.b...@chemistry.gatech.edu> wrote: Agreed, but as Pauli once remarked about someone else's ideas, AP is not > Timothy Sutter <a202...@lycos.com-> wrote in > news:5053E507.4EEF@lycos.com-: > Tim, give up. You will never persuade AP that he's wrong. Don Quixote EVEN wrong! -- =
Salmon Egg Sign in to reply
In article <GDN5s.1331$Wo3...@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com>, > Agreed, but as Pauli once remarked about someone else's ideas, AP is not I miss Uncle Al. > EVEN wrong! -- Sam Conservatives are against Darwinism but for natural selection. =
Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway Sign in to reply
"Salmon Egg" <Salm...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:SalmonEgg-7D4127.15455017092012@news60.forteinc.com...
In article <GDN5s.1331$Wo3...@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com>,
Brian Salter-Duke <b_d...@bigpond.com.au> wrote:
I miss Uncle Al.
> Agreed, but as Pauli once remarked about someone else's ideas, AP is not > EVEN wrong! -- Sam
==============================================
Feel better now?
hanson Sign in to reply
"Salmon Egg" <Salm...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: Why? > Brian Salter-Duke <b_d...@bigpond.com.au> wrote: Brian Salter-Duke wrote: Sam wrote: =
David Bostwick Sign in to reply
"hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote in news:k38pcv$a5d$1...@dont-email.me: =
Timothy Sutter Sign in to reply
http://tinyurl.com/carvone-twins | O O | (+)carvone (-) carvone ====================================================
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||