sci.physics.particle Google Group

Periodic Table of Sub atomic Particles

doult...@shaw.ca (chemguy) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 23:12:53 UT

The sub-atomic particles may be represented as a series of square
matrices. The periods form concentric square rings around a core of
bosons.
Please see; [link]

Re: There is just one kind of mass!!

relativ...@rest.com (Inertial) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 22:32:18 UT

How do you expect anyone to discuss whether there is one kind of mass, when
you cannot even say what you mean by that?
Stop runnning away and act like an honest man with integrity instead.
Define what you mean by a "kind" of mass.
Is there more than one 'kind' of length? Is height a different 'kind'

Re: A simple Q. but not a simple A,,

cjcount...@yahoo.com (cjcountess) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 21:51:17 UT

In light of what Al just said, we can extend the ideas that obstruct
progress in physics, to people who obstruct progress.
Now I must admit that, if we were in a cold war, or pre-war stage,
"and perhaps we are" we might want to opstruct other countries
progress, especialy if one country is "Nazi Germany", and the other is

Re: A simple Q. but not a simple A,,

uncle...@hate.spam.net (Uncle Al) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 21:14:15 UT

[snip crap]
"Pacifist" is German for "lousy shot." Only a fool does not adopt the
enemy's rules of engagement.
> I also agree that there are a lot of preconceived notions in
physics
[snip mroe crap]
Stooopidity is not license for anything but enjoying derision.
[snip rest of crap]
idiot

Re: A simple Q. but not a simple A,,

cjcount...@yahoo.com (cjcountess) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 19:37:59 UT

I also remember someone telling me that cxc could not be as I
described because velocity's are added not multiplied. As an example I
was shown (sqrt(a^2+b^2). I wondered why not just, “a + b”, because
the very fact that you first square them as, a^2 and b^2, before you
divide that answer into its sqrt, makes it not purely vector addition,

Re: A simple Q. but not a simple A,,

cjcount...@yahoo.com (cjcountess) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 19:11:29 UT

I agree’ we should keep all debates civil.
I also agree that there are a lot of preconceived notions in physics
that inhibit its progression, and I addressed some myself, also
encountering opposition along the way.
See:
[link]

"Overview of the Einsteinhoax Website"

it...@verizon.net (Itnia) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 18:56:43 UT

"Overview of the Einsteinhoax Website"
(See also our sister website reticsessays.com)
The Einsteinhoax Website was setup to counter an intellectual "fast
shuffle" which used Dr. Einstein's Special Relativity (which is easily seen
to be a mathematical copy of the earlier Lorentz Transformations Aether

Re: There is just one kind of mass!!

y.y.po...@gmail.com (Y.Porat) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 15:09:24 UT

---------------------
next
Y.Porat
---------------------

Re: There is just one kind of mass!!

relativ...@rest.com (Inertial) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 11:39:28 UT

What .. you want someone else to answer for you? Or are you just incapable
of defining what 'one kind of mass' actually means?

Re: There is just one kind of mass!!

y.y.po...@gmail.com (Y.Porat) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 11:34:54 UT

-----------------------
next
-----------------------

Re: There is just one kind of mass!!

relativ...@rest.com (Inertial) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 10:08:15 UT

So .. you can't answer those questions. I thought not. Clearly you do not
want to be taken seriously.

Re: There is just one kind of mass!!

y.y.po...@gmail.com (Y.Porat) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 09:46:56 UT

-----------------
next .....
----------------------

Re: There is just one kind of mass!!

relativ...@rest.com (Inertial) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 08:06:46 UT

Here we go .. Porat flying off the handle for no reason yet again
Why .. I asked YOU the question.
What question? You posed a general question here, and specifically to both
him and me about whether there is one kind of mass .. you thread title is
about one kind of mass. By posting it in a public newsgroup you are asking

Re: There is just one kind of mass!!

y.y.po...@gmail.com (Y.Porat) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 07:48:21 UT

--------------------
imbecile parrot leech psychopath
wait until PD will answer!!
the question was specifically to him
so a civilized emotionally balanced human being
would wait patiently until the person who was asked
will answer
PD does not need your idiotic help
(if he will *not* answer it will be an answer as well !!

Re: A simple Q. but not a simple A,,

relativ...@rest.com (Inertial) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 05:17:02 UT

It doesn't define what it is .. just how to calculate it
Of course motion and momentum are different .. what is the problem with
that?
Nope
A rose by any other name
As long as you both understand what is meant by the word 'flea' its fine.
And the point is, the title you place on the group of laws has NO BEARING AT

sci.physics.particle Google Group

Periodic Table of Sub atomic Particles

Re: There is just *one* kind of mass!!

Re: A simple Q. but not a simple A,,

Re: A simple Q. but not a simple A,,

Re: A simple Q. but not a simple A,,

Re: A simple Q. but not a simple A,,

"Overview of the Einsteinhoax Website"

Re: There is just *one* kind of mass!!

Re: There is just *one* kind of mass!!

Re: There is just *one* kind of mass!!

Re: There is just *one* kind of mass!!

Re: There is just *one* kind of mass!!

Re: There is just *one* kind of mass!!

Re: There is just *one* kind of mass!!

Re: A simple Q. but not a simple A,,

Re: There is just one kind of mass!!

Re: There is just one kind of mass!!

Re: There is just one kind of mass!!

Re: There is just one kind of mass!!

Re: There is just one kind of mass!!

Re: There is just one kind of mass!!

Re: There is just one kind of mass!!

Re: There is just one kind of mass!!