If Eric Geese ever gets a physics degree I will hand all of mine back.
Henri Wilson
be part of it....
HW.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
(another world-shattering announcement coming soon)
Sorcerer
"Henri Wilson" <HW@..> wrote in message
news:1r1ki29btinu12i0q...@4ax.com...
A degree never meant anything to an employer I ever met anyway.
Kids like Mother Goose think they can walk into a job and it'll
carry more weight than good references and a track record,
but his attitude will mean "no chance". He'll be flipping burgers
or Mom and Pop will support him.
Eric Gisse
Henri Wilson wrote:
> ..If physics ever gets that low, I will have no option.....I wouldn't want to
> be part of it....
What makes you think you are a part of physics now? Go ahead, Henri -
explain to me how physics has gained anything from your presense. I
asked you to explain how the Compton effect doesn't need SR to be
explained and how your theory can model Mercury's orbit around the sun
including its' non-newtonian precession effects, but you can't even do
that. If you cant do something that simple, how has physics improved
since you started "working" on it?
At any rate, I expect a stunning amount of backpedaling by you in about
2 years. By the way, what will you do if I also get a degree in
mathematics? Throw yourself off a tall building?
Dirk Van de moortel
"Henri Wilson" <HW@..> wrote in message news:1r1ki29btinu12i0q...@4ax.com...
You mean these degrees?
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/f0323a1286d5bbb9
| "What are you talking about. I just told you I have a full
| degree in physics and maths, including QM, relativity,
| thermodynamics, optics, nuclear, partial differential
| equations, laplace transforms, etc. I also have a completely
| separate science degree majoring in psych and genetics
| with a few other biological and physics subjects included.
| I spent eleven years at two of the best universities,
| overall. I was an experimental officer, in physics research
| in Australia's CSIRO and other institutions for over twenty
| years. I will send you a photo of my credentials if you like.
| They are up on the wall in front of me.
| I might not have been the best or most sober student but I
| passed well and got a good grasp of the basics."
Dirk Vdm
yen, ka-in
Eric Gisse wrote:
> Henri Wilson wrote:
> > ..If physics ever gets that low, I will have no option.....I wouldn't want to
> > be part of it....
>
> 2 years. By the way, what will you do if I also get a degree in
> mathematics?
If you do not do your homework, I suggest you go to bed to save
your parent's money.
Home work for Eric Gisse:
A rectangle sits in 3D space. The area vector of the rectangle is A,
and the legth vector of one side of the rectangle is L. Please find
the length vector of the other side of the rectangle?
Eric Gisse
Area isn't a vector, retard.
Eric Gisse
Oh man.
I still want to know how Henri got a degree in physics if he can't even
correctly state simple concepts in physics without fucking it up in at
least 3 ways.
I mean, damn. Even if he doesn't believe relativity he should be able
to correctly state it. It isn't that hard.
Barry
> Area isn't a vector, retard.
It's quite surprising, but:
http://thesaurus.maths.org/mmkb/entry.html?action=entryById&id=2109
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vector_area
http://mcraefamily.com/MathHelp/GeometryTriangleAreaVector2.htm
Barry
Jerry
It is certainly -possible- to define an "area vector" as a vector
whose magnitude is equal to the scalar area of a surface, and whose
direction is normal to that surface. It can even be demonstrated that
the components of this area vector follow correct transformation
rules under rotation, and thus the area vector is a true vector. The
area vector for a curved surface would be the resultant vector from
summing all the infinitesimal area vector elements, etc.
Nevertheless, the "area vector" is never given more than a brief
mention in vector analysis classes. Why? Because it is a decidedly
non-useful concept. Given an arbitrary area element, it is impossible
to assign a unique area vector to that element, because there are
two normals to any given surface, and there is no rule that can be
invoked to determine which normal is the "correct" normal along which
the area vector must be directed.
This ambiguity results in a distinct lack of utility. The concept of
the "area vector" is hence quite properly ignored, except by physics
newsgroup trolls.
Barry
> It is certainly -possible- to define an "area vector" as a vector
> whose magnitude is equal to the scalar area of a surface, and whose
> direction is normal to that surface....
The area vector is sometimes called a bivector and is an element in
Clifford algebra.
http://omega.albany.edu:8008/mat220dir/ga3d-dir/GA3d.html
> ... the "area vector" is never given more than a brief
> mention in vector analysis classes. Why? Because it is a decidedly
> non-useful concept...
For an example of its utility, you might read:
http://www.av8n.com/physics/pierre-answer.htm
Pertti Lounesto used to post here a lot, you might also wish to read his
book - Clifford Algebra and Spinors.
Barry
Jerry
Area vectors and bivectors are quite distinct concepts. A bivector is
the wedge product of two vectors, and has the geometric interpretation
of an oriented area, analogous to the way that vectors can be
considered as oriented line segments. As you point out, bivectors are
of immense utility in differential geometry. The area vector, on the
other hand, defined as a vector normal to a surface element with
magnitude equal to the area of said surface element, is really not at
all the same thing, and has nowhere the same utility or importance in
math as the bivector.
Eric Gisse
Barry wrote:
> Eric Gisse wrote:
>
> > Area isn't a vector, retard.
>
> It's quite surprising, but:
[...]
No, it isn't.
I already know how to define *a* vector area. I use it all the time
with vector calculus.
I also already know how to define the area of an object, of whom two
sides can be represented as vectors, in terms of the magnitude of the
cross product.
Read what he is asking me to do, and see why it is STUPID.
Barry
> I already know how to define *a* vector area. I use it all the time
> with vector calculus.
And yet Jerry wrote:
_________________
This ambiguity results in a distinct lack of utility. The concept of
the "area vector" is hence quite properly ignored, except by physics
newsgroup trolls.
_________________
> I also already know how to define the area of an object, of whom two
> sides can be represented as vectors, in terms of the magnitude of the
> cross product.
> Read what he is asking me to do, and see why it is STUPID.
I read it, he wrote:
___________________
A rectangle sits in 3D space. The area vector of the rectangle is A,
and the length vector of one side of the rectangle is L. Please find
the length vector of the other side of the rectangle?
____________________
It's not stupid, it's just a silly trick - like asking where we bury the
survivors.
But you didn't seem to be saying that the question was stupid.
What you said was:
_________________
Area isn't a vector, retard.
_________________
Barry
Eric Gisse
Barry wrote:
> Eric Gisse wrote:
>
>
> > I already know how to define *a* vector area. I use it all the time
> > with vector calculus.
>
>
> And yet Jerry wrote:
>
> _________________
> This ambiguity results in a distinct lack of utility. The concept of
> the "area vector" is hence quite properly ignored, except by physics
> newsgroup trolls.
> _________________
There is no disconnect between what I said and what Jerry said. So you
can open a vector calculus book and start learning because I'm not
explaining it again.
I suggest H. M. Schey's _div, grad, curl and all that_ for an excellent
introduction. Its' up to a fourth edition now so you can probably get
the 3rd edition for 5 bucks somewhere because it is a softcover book
and only about 150 pages.
>
>
>
>
> > I also already know how to define the area of an object, of whom two
> > sides can be represented as vectors, in terms of the magnitude of the
> > cross product.
>
>
> > Read what he is asking me to do, and see why it is STUPID.
>
>
>
> I read it, he wrote:
> ___________________
>
> A rectangle sits in 3D space. The area vector of the rectangle is A,
> and the length vector of one side of the rectangle is L. Please find
> the length vector of the other side of the rectangle?
> ____________________
>
> It's not stupid, it's just a silly trick - like asking where we bury the
> survivors.
No. It is stupid.
He has repeated the same "homework assignment" with the same idiotic
misconceptions about vectors and area nearly two dozen times in the
last four months. It isn't my fault he doesn't know enough about vector
analysis to formulate the problem in a proper fashion.
I already know the answer to what I believe he is asking, but until he
asks it in a proper way I'm going to laugh at him and call him a
retard.
>
>
> But you didn't seem to be saying that the question was stupid.
Yea, I'm obviously being coy when I call him a retard and his question
Barry
> Barry wrote:
>>It's not stupid, it's just a silly trick - like asking where we bury the
>>survivors.
> I already know the answer to what I believe he is asking, but until he
> asks it in a proper way I'm going to laugh at him and call him a
> retard.
The way you phrase that sentence suggests that you haven't yet seen his
"joke".
If I started with $A and spent it all except for $L, how much do I have
left?
Barry
Eric Gisse
Barry wrote:
> Eric Gisse wrote:
>
> > Barry wrote:
>
> >>It's not stupid, it's just a silly trick - like asking where we bury the
> >>survivors.
>
> > I already know the answer to what I believe he is asking, but until he
> > asks it in a proper way I'm going to laugh at him and call him a
> > retard.
>
> The way you phrase that sentence suggests that you haven't yet seen his
> "joke".
I've been known to be a little thick. Show me this "joke".
Before you do, keep in mind the following:
1) Area is not a vector. I don't fucking care how many concepts from
vector calculus you pilfer - none of them apply here.
2) I already know how to find the area of the rectangle that is formed
by two vectors. Since I mentioned this before, and because he asked his
stupid question again, it is not the answer he wants.
Sorcerer
"Jerry" <Cephalobu...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1160449231....@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
| Nevertheless, the "area vector" is never given more than a brief
| mention in vector analysis classes. Why? Because it is a decidedly
| non-useful concept.
The cuckoo malformation is a decidedly non-useful concept, Tom and Jerry.
That doesn't prevent you ranting about it.
The area vector, on the other side, happens to be a very useful concept to
animators everywhere. See Google SketchUp.
Jerry
> "Jerry" <Cephalobu...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:1160449231....@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> | Nevertheless, the "area vector" is never given more than a brief
> | mention in vector analysis classes. Why? Because it is a decidedly
> | non-useful concept.
>
> The cuckoo malformation is a decidedly non-useful concept, Tom and Jerry.
For once, you have it right. Tom here. It's been so long since I've
checked in on sci.physics.relativity, I forgot my username/password,
so I borrowed "Jerry's" account. Didn't want to sign her "name", of
course...
How are you managing these days? Still fighting the good fight against
what you consider idiocy and blindness on the part of the physics
establishment?
More importantly, how are you managing without your daughter? Did
she leave children?
A long time ago, I learned that physics isn't the important thing.
Love is. (Yes, that is a plagiarized sentiment. But true.) I was
wondering if you've ever realized the same thing.
Minor Crank
Barry
> I've been known to be a little thick. Show me this "joke".
In a rectangle, the length of a side *opposite* to a side of length L is
also L.
Barry
Sorcerer
| Sorcerer wrote:
| > "Jerry" <Cephalobu...@comcast.net> wrote in message
| > news:1160449231....@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
| >
| > | Nevertheless, the "area vector" is never given more than a brief
| > | mention in vector analysis classes. Why? Because it is a decidedly
| > | non-useful concept.
| >
| > The cuckoo malformation is a decidedly non-useful concept, Tom and
Jerry.
|
| For once, you have it right. Tom here. It's been so long since I've
| checked in on sci.physics.relativity, I forgot my username/password,
| so I borrowed "Jerry's" account. Didn't want to sign her "name", of
| course...
|
| How are you managing these days? Still fighting the good fight against
| what you consider idiocy and blindness on the part of the physics
| establishment?
Yes and no. I have no delusion that the establishment will continue
in idiocy for eternity and as it has done throughout history, but one
or two bright people have commended me for my efforts.
| More importantly, how are you managing without your daughter? Did
| she leave children?
Yes, she did. She is survived by Rachael age 13 in December and Ben
aged 9.
I was never dependent upon my daughter and so I "manage" as well
(or as poorly) as I always did, but I certainly miss her. The hard part
was knowing she would die and being unable to do anything. All
I could do was remodel her home and make her life as pleasant as
possible, venting my frustration on the pathetic mentality of so-called
"scientists" that waste their lives on the work of a huckster and
pathological lying psychopath whose only interest was self-glorification.
I sympathized with anyone that finds themselves in a similar position.
The really last laugh we had together was the idiot that delivered
her wheelchair and a lecture on how to unfold it, culminating with
"this is the cushion, the tag goes to the back". Somehow we both
kept a straight face and nodded in agreement, looking at each other
in astonishment. After all, we might have put the square cushion
the wrong way round or sideways and it would have been a disaster.
I'll probably rework this, it was done rather hurriedly and emotionally:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Wendy/Wendy.htm
Perhaps I should have studied medicine, but I can't change the past.
| A long time ago, I learned that physics isn't the important thing.
| Love is. (Yes, that is a plagiarized sentiment. But true.) I was
| wondering if you've ever realized the same thing.
|
| Minor Crank
Emotion has its place on the back burner, always there simmering.
Understanding human nature is part of understanding Nature.
Life's a bitch and then you die but few Neanderthals are interested
in seeing that as a problem to be solved, relying on mysticism
to solve it for them. We are machines that self-replicate. Our id,
ego, soul, call it whatever, is what we really are, and when we can
copy ourselves from one machine to another as we do with
computer programs and images we'll have found the elixir of life.
I had no use for my daughter's dead body, I burnt it before it stank.
It is her I miss and still love.
Some day a laser guided by a robotic arm will slice a brain and
map every neuron, every synapse, building a mathematical model.
Transistors will be constructed and connected to that description
and the soul will be eternal. That's why physics is important,
we can be gods if we only try. Alas, we prefer to slaughter and death
come soon enough. Man is a dumb animal, not a god.
Androcles.
Randy Poe
However, the question asked for the "other side", not
the "opposite side". To me, the most natural interpretation
of "other side" for a rectangle is one of the perpendicular
sides.
A less natural interpretation would be "any one of the
other three sides".
And the least natural interpretation would be "the opposite
side".
- Randy
Dirk Van de moortel
"Eric Gisse" <jow...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1160446519....@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
He never sent a photo of those credentials.
Besides, the credentials he would have, would show
the name "Ralph Rabbidge" anyway ;-)
Dirk Vdm
harry
"Jerry" <Cephalobu...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1160449231....@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
In this case the trolling (if it really was), certainly was spot on: the
name-calling bounced back on the caller.
Harald
harry
"Sorcerer" <Headm...@hogwarts.physics_b> wrote in message
news:U2OWg.107767$aP3....@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
> "Jerry" <Cephalobu...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:1160485168.5...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> | Sorcerer wrote:
> | > "Jerry" <Cephalobu...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> | > news:1160449231....@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> | >
> | > | Nevertheless, the "area vector" is never given more than a brief
> | > | mention in vector analysis classes. Why? Because it is a decidedly
> | > | non-useful concept.
> | >
> | > The cuckoo malformation is a decidedly non-useful concept, Tom and
> Jerry.
> |
> | For once, you have it right. Tom here. It's been so long since I've
> | checked in on sci.physics.relativity, I forgot my username/password,
> | so I borrowed "Jerry's" account. Didn't want to sign her "name", of
> | course...
> |
> | How are you managing these days? Still fighting the good fight against
> | what you consider idiocy and blindness on the part of the physics
> | establishment?
>
> Yes and no. I have no delusion that the establishment will continue
> in idiocy for eternity and as it has done throughout history, but one
> or two bright people have commended me for my efforts.
More people would command you for your efforts if you were civil and would
admit the possibility that you could be fundamentally mistaken on some
points.
> | More importantly, how are you managing without your daughter? Did
> | she leave children?
>
>
> Yes, she did. She is survived by Rachael age 13 in December and Ben
> aged 9.
> I was never dependent upon my daughter and so I "manage" as well
> (or as poorly) as I always did, but I certainly miss her. The hard part
> was knowing she would die and being unable to do anything. All
> I could do was remodel her home and make her life as pleasant as
> possible, venting my frustration on the pathetic mentality of so-called
> "scientists" that waste their lives on the work of a huckster and
> pathological lying psychopath whose only interest was self-glorification.
> I sympathized with anyone that finds themselves in a similar position.
At least now we can understand the cause of your bad temper on this NG.
Harald
harry
"Eric Gisse" <jow...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1160446519....@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>
You have a point there. Maybe a bad memory?
Sorcerer
"harry" <harald.vanlin...@epfl.ch> wrote in message
news:116049...@sicinfo3.epfl.ch...
1) I have no intention of being civil to arseholes like you.
2) I do make mistakes and admit them, you do not.
3) Nobody commands me. I said "commend".
|
| > | More importantly, how are you managing without your daughter? Did
| > | she leave children?
| >
| >
| > Yes, she did. She is survived by Rachael age 13 in December and Ben
| > aged 9.
| > I was never dependent upon my daughter and so I "manage" as well
| > (or as poorly) as I always did, but I certainly miss her. The hard part
| > was knowing she would die and being unable to do anything. All
| > I could do was remodel her home and make her life as pleasant as
| > possible, venting my frustration on the pathetic mentality of so-called
| > "scientists" that waste their lives on the work of a huckster and
| > pathological lying psychopath whose only interest was
self-glorification.
| > I sympathized with anyone that finds themselves in a similar position.
|
| At least now we can understand the cause of your bad temper on this NG.
Good. I can understand your stupidity, it is inherent. What you do
not understand is that you are gullible. Take an IQ test and be honest
with yourself, "Haradl", you can't even spell your own name. You
go along with the flock, sputtering "Lorentz Transform" as if it
meant something. It doesn't, it is drivel, unadulterated bullshit.
Androcles
Golden Boar
If you asked someone to jump into a swimming pool and swim to the other
side and back, then they would swim to the opposite side and back.
Dirk Van de moortel
"Sorcerer" <Headm...@hogwarts.physics_b> wrote in message news:6ZPWg.122337$wg.7...@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
Admitting mistakes on Boolean algebra:
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/XORWildStab.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/Gibberish.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/XOROnceMore.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/XORrevisited.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/XORContinued.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/XORpersistence.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/LooksBoolean.html
Admitting mistakes on square roots:
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/GoodTeachers.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/TwoTurds.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/STILL.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/CanSpecify.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/Nearly.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/Quadratic.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/GrowUp.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/Tautology.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/Material.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/GIVEN.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/PythagoRescue.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/SqrtRev.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/NegSqrt.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/Humour.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/SqrtAnswers.html
Admitting mistakes on partial differential equations:
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/PartialDiff.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/PartialDiff2.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/PartialDiff3.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/PartialDiff4.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/NotFxy.html
Dirk Vdm
harry
"Sorcerer" <Headm...@hogwarts.physics_b> wrote in message
That is very convincing ;-)
> 2) I do make mistakes and admit them, you do not.
I do that regularly. I must have missed the times that you did.
> 3) Nobody commands me. I said "commend".
Oops, sorry that was a typo of mine!
> |
> | > | More importantly, how are you managing without your daughter? Did
> | > | she leave children?
> | >
> | >
> | > Yes, she did. She is survived by Rachael age 13 in December and Ben
> | > aged 9.
> | > I was never dependent upon my daughter and so I "manage" as well
> | > (or as poorly) as I always did, but I certainly miss her. The hard
> part
> | > was knowing she would die and being unable to do anything. All
> | > I could do was remodel her home and make her life as pleasant as
> | > possible, venting my frustration on the pathetic mentality of
> so-called
> | > "scientists" that waste their lives on the work of a huckster and
> | > pathological lying psychopath whose only interest was
> self-glorification.
> | > I sympathized with anyone that finds themselves in a similar position.
> |
> | At least now we can understand the cause of your bad temper on this NG.
>
> Good. I can understand your stupidity, it is inherent. What you do
> not understand is that you are gullible. Take an IQ test and be honest
> with yourself, "Haradl", you can't even spell your own name. You
> go along with the flock, sputtering "Lorentz Transform" as if it
> meant something. It doesn't, it is drivel, unadulterated bullshit.
"Lorentz transform" had more meaning for the one who first named it so than
for the following generations of students who have the illusion that they
study physics but actually learn little more than math.
I have taken IQ tests regulary, and in the beginning I was extremely
satisfied with myself. Probably you also noticed that when you are over 30,
the score slowly goes down...
Haradl (yeah that happens sometimes with quick typing!)
Sorcerer
Your stupid grin isn't.
|
| > 2) I do make mistakes and admit them, you do not.
|
| I do that regularly. I must have missed the times that you did.
Find one.
|
| > 3) Nobody commands me. I said "commend".
|
| Oops, sorry that was a typo of mine!
Ok, accepted.
|
| > |
| > | > | More importantly, how are you managing without your daughter? Did
| > | > | she leave children?
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > Yes, she did. She is survived by Rachael age 13 in December and Ben
| > | > aged 9.
| > | > I was never dependent upon my daughter and so I "manage" as well
| > | > (or as poorly) as I always did, but I certainly miss her. The hard
| > part
| > | > was knowing she would die and being unable to do anything. All
| > | > I could do was remodel her home and make her life as pleasant as
| > | > possible, venting my frustration on the pathetic mentality of
| > so-called
| > | > "scientists" that waste their lives on the work of a huckster and
| > | > pathological lying psychopath whose only interest was
| > self-glorification.
| > | > I sympathized with anyone that finds themselves in a similar
position.
| > |
| > | At least now we can understand the cause of your bad temper on this
NG.
| >
| > Good. I can understand your stupidity, it is inherent. What you do
| > not understand is that you are gullible. Take an IQ test and be honest
| > with yourself, "Haradl", you can't even spell your own name. You
| > go along with the flock, sputtering "Lorentz Transform" as if it
| > meant something. It doesn't, it is drivel, unadulterated bullshit.
|
| "Lorentz transform" had more meaning
It has NO meaning. Admit your error.
Androcles
Randy Poe
Golden Boar wrote:
> Randy Poe wrote:
> > Barry wrote:
> > > Eric Gisse wrote:
> > >
> > > > I've been known to be a little thick. Show me this "joke".
> > >
> > > In a rectangle, the length of a side *opposite* to a side of length L is
> > > also L.
> >
> > However, the question asked for the "other side", not
> > the "opposite side". To me, the most natural interpretation
> > of "other side" for a rectangle is one of the perpendicular
> > sides.
> >
> > A less natural interpretation would be "any one of the
> > other three sides".
> >
> > And the least natural interpretation would be "the opposite
> > side".
> >
> side and back, then they would swim to the opposite side and back.
However, if I asked you for the length of the two
sides of a rectangle, or one side and "the other side"
of a rectangle, most people would not quote the
length of two parallel sides.
Context is everything. That's why I said "other side
FOR A RECTANGLE" above. I put it in my context,
you took it out.
- Randy
Barry
> However, the question asked for the "other side", not
> the "opposite side". To me, the most natural interpretation
> of "other side" for a rectangle is one of the perpendicular
> sides.
> A less natural interpretation would be "any one of the
> other three sides".
> And the least natural interpretation would be "the opposite
> side".
To me, the other side is "over there". As in "the other side of the room".
I also noted that the OP used the singular form. There is one opposite
side but two adjacent sides.
I for one would never refer to an adjacent side as *the* other side.
I also note that both posters seem to think that the other (sic) is
stupid. What better way to satisfy your ego than to play a trick?
Such are the vagaries of the English language.
Of course, the OP seems to be Taiwanese...
Barry
Randy Poe
Barry wrote:
> Randy Poe wrote:
>
> > However, the question asked for the "other side", not
> > the "opposite side". To me, the most natural interpretation
> > of "other side" for a rectangle is one of the perpendicular
> > sides.
>
> > A less natural interpretation would be "any one of the
> > other three sides".
>
> > And the least natural interpretation would be "the opposite
> > side".
>
>
> To me, the other side is "over there". As in "the other side of the room".
Even for a rectangle? So if you had a rectangular room 10 x 20 m,
you told me one measurement was 10 m, and I asked you
for "the other side" you'd tell me 10 m?
You really wouldn't use the context that we're talking about
a rectangle's dimensions to interpret this differently?
- Randy
Eric Gisse
To Henri's credit, he actually did. Surprised the hell out of me, to be
honest.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/degGrese.jpg
>
> Dirk Vdm
Eric Gisse
Except the vector that defines one side of a rectangle is not the same
as the other vector even if they have the same length.
If a professor asks me a question and even if I know the answer, he
will have to wait a minute if he throws in a massive and worthless red
herring that makes me question why he is a professor.
>
> Barry
Dirk Van de moortel
"Eric Gisse" <jow...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1160512043....@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
Oh boy, what an obvious fake.
Just look at the smeared out background around his name.
Way to go, Rabbidge. I'll keep a copy of this one :-)
Dirk Vdm
Barry
> Barry wrote:
> Even for a rectangle? So if you had a rectangular room 10 x 20 m,
> you told me one measurement was 10 m, and I asked you
> for "the other side" you'd tell me 10 m?
> You really wouldn't use the context that we're talking about
> a rectangle's dimensions to interpret this differently?
I telling you how I actually did interpret it in this particular context.
If we were measuring a truly rectangular room, I would probably presume
that you knew that opposites were equal and that you meant the adjacent
side.
In practice, you'll find that experienced people do measure all four
sides - just to be sure.
Measure twice and cut once - as they say.
In this context, I explained:
____________
I also note that both posters seem to think that the other (sic) is
stupid. What better way to satisfy your ego than to play a trick?
____________
Here, the context consists of two guys who are trying to prove which is
the smartest. It may be that the OP isn't the smartest of the two and
phrased his "joke" badly.
Nevertheless I'm 90% sure that his intention was to catch his "opponent"
out.
Barry
Barry
> Except the vector that defines one side of a rectangle is not the same
> as the other vector even if they have the same length.
> If a professor asks me a question and even if I know the answer, he
> will have to wait a minute if he throws in a massive and worthless red
> herring that makes me question why he is a professor.
If a professor does that, then I suppose he's trying to see who can sort
the wheat from the chaff (the information) so that he can sort the wheat
from the chaff (his students).
I've often observed, in my short life, that sorting the wheat from the
chaff is a valuable skill.
It seems to me that you have a good professor there!
Barry
Eric Gisse
Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
> >>
> >> He never sent a photo of those credentials.
> >> Besides, the credentials he would have, would show
> >> the name "Ralph Rabbidge" anyway ;-)
> >
> > To Henri's credit, he actually did. Surprised the hell out of me, to be
> > honest.
> >
> > www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/degGrese.jpg
> >
>
> Oh boy, what an obvious fake.
> Just look at the smeared out background around his name.
Oh dear.
I feel silly now! I never noticed the artifacting that forms a PERFECT
RECTANGLE around his name on the left degree and the tan rectangle of
different color. The right name is unreadable to me...
I definitely need glasses again, jesus.
Watch this space for an anticipated future update.
Eric Gisse
Dude, you are confused.
>
> Barry
Dirk Van de moortel
"Eric Gisse" <jow...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1160514845.5...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
> Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
> [...]
>
>> >>
>> >> He never sent a photo of those credentials.
>> >> Besides, the credentials he would have, would show
>> >> the name "Ralph Rabbidge" anyway ;-)
>> >
>> > To Henri's credit, he actually did. Surprised the hell out of me, to be
>> > honest.
>> >
>> > www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/degGrese.jpg
>> >
>>
>> Oh boy, what an obvious fake.
>> Just look at the smeared out background around his name.
>
> Oh dear.
>
> I feel silly now! I never noticed the artifacting that forms a PERFECT
> RECTANGLE around his name on the left degree and the tan rectangle of
> different color. The right name is unreadable to me...
>
> I definitely need glasses again, jesus.
heh... when look very carefully, you'll notice that it's not even
all that perfect a rectangle. The top line of the smeared out region
follows the subtle curve that you get when you draw horizontal lines
without looking. The curvng is caused by having the joint between
hand and wrist fixed on the table. Try it :-)
>
> Watch this space for an anticipated future update.
Yes, that's why I kept a copy of his "original".
Dirk Vdm
Bill Hobba
>
> Barry wrote:
>> Eric Gisse wrote:
>>
>>
>> >>It's not stupid, it's just a silly trick - like asking where we bury
>> >>the
>> >>survivors.
>>
>> > I already know the answer to what I believe he is asking, but until he
>> > asks it in a proper way I'm going to laugh at him and call him a
>> > retard.
>>
>> The way you phrase that sentence suggests that you haven't yet seen his
>> "joke".
>
> I've been known to be a little thick. Show me this "joke".
>
>
> 1) Area is not a vector. I don't fucking care how many concepts from
> vector calculus you pilfer - none of them apply here.
Maybe after understanding that he can understand why the Jacobean in change
of coordinates uses its absolute value - and that is just second year
calculus combined with first year linear algebra and the basic properties of
determinants. I wonder how these guys would go if they actually studied the
rigorous stuff like Apostol (highly recommended BTW I got it for $6.00 over
EBAY)
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9508021
Thanks
Bill
>
> 2) I already know how to find the area of the rectangle that is formed
> by two vectors. Since I mentioned this before, and because he asked his
> stupid question again, it is not the answer he wants.
>
>>
>> If I started with $A and spent it all except for $L, how much do I have
>> left?
>>
>> Barry
>
Eric Gisse
Sorry Bill, I don't understand what you are saying.
What are you talking about, re: Jacobian and which Apostol - there are
a bunch?
karand...@yahoo.com
no
karand...@yahoo.com
nope
Bill Hobba
Hi Eric
Whoops - wrong link. It should have been:
http://www.amazon.com/Mathematical-Analysis-Second-Tom-Apostol/dp/0201002884/sr=8-1/qid=1160617185/ref=sr_1_1/002-9455919-3577625?ie=UTF8&s=books
The book is Mathematical Analysis Second Edition by Tom Apostol. As
mentioned I picked up one really cheap on EBAY - $6.00. Normally over $100.
At $100.00 I would not care to recommend it but at $6.00 very highly
recommended. Caveat - you need to be a bit anal about rigor in math like I
am - if an intuitive understanding is fine for you and you are not
interested in things like Lebesque integration then its style may be a turn
off. A quick search on EBAY showed it can be had for about $5.00 - even
cheaper than mine
http://cgi.ebay.com/Mathematical-Analysis-2e-by-Tom-M-Apostol-1974-new_W0QQitemZ170035520508QQihZ007QQcategoryZ2228QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItemSorry I was obscure. The reason the absolute value of the Jacobean is usedis because integrals are taken over areas/volumes which of course are alwayspositive so the transformed infintesimal area/volume must also be positive -simple properties of area/volume. It was simply a comment that if Barry didnot understand such basic properties of areas he would never understandsomething of intermediate difficulty such as change of coordinates inmultiple integration. And that is how it is done at the intuitive level -study analysis texts like Apostol and things require even greater care.ThanksBill>> What are you talking about, re: Jacobian and which Apostol - there are> a bunch?>>>>> Thanks>> Bill>>>> >>> > 2) I already know how to find the area of the rectangle that is formed>> > by two vectors. Since I mentioned this before, and because he asked his>> > stupid question again, it is not the answer he wants.>> >>> >>>> >> If I started with $A and spent it all except for $L, how much do Ihave>> >> left?>> >>>> >> Barry>> >>
Bill Hobba
"Bill Hobba" <rub...@junk.com> wrote in message
news:6phXg.45733$rP1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
I have no idea what happened - it posted gibberish. Here is what I wanted
to say:
The reason the absolute value of the Jacobean is used is because integrals
are taken over areas/volumes which of course are always positive so the
transformed infinitesimal area/volume must also be positive - simple
Barry
>> Barry wrote:
>> It's not stupid, it's just a silly trick - like asking where we bury the survivors
... ...
>> In a rectangle, the length of a side *opposite* to a side of length L is also L.
> It was simply a comment that if Barry did not understand such basic properties of areas
> he would never understand something of intermediate difficulty such as change of
> coordinates in multiple integration.
I'm wondering what I wrote that made you think that I don't understand
the basic properties of areas.
Barry
Bill Hobba
"Barry" <Sir...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1160622302....@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
The fact you post links to out of context definitions like 'Area
represented by a vector whose size is the size of the area in question and
whose direction is that of a normal to the surface in question. This can
only be defined for flat surfaces, or for regions of curved surfaces which
are sufficiently small that they can be considered flat.'. I know from your
posts you are not a total tyro and are probably posting to get bites for you
own amusement - the above being a case in point. Rather than discuss the
issue you post with a question - typical tactic of those who purpose is
misdirection with the ultimate goal being engaging in posts that lead
basically nowhere.
Bill
>
>
> Barry
>
Eric Gisse
I'm going through a real analysis course right now.
This course constantly whispers "you want to be a physicist, not a
mathematician - what the fuck are you doing?" into my ear. Though
probably not nearly as loudly as when I was taking my proofs class, or
when I briefly considered taking discrete mathematics.
Then again, understanding exactly when and why the tools I would use as
a physicist are valid is a skill I'm willing to suffer a bit in order
to have. I'm certaintly not getting that warm fuzzy feeling about
supremums and infemums of sets that my classmates are getting, but on
the other hand I'm enjoying the infinite series section so it is a bit
of a crapshoot.
>
> Thanks
> Bill
Barry
> "Barry" wrote
>>I'm wondering what I wrote that made you think that I don't understand
>>the basic properties of areas.
> The fact you post links to out of context definitions like...
Eric was asked a question which included the term "Area Vector" and had
responded with "Area isn't a vector, retard".
I wasn't familiar with the term, so I looked it up.
I found that the term "vector area" was in fact in use and told Eric
that "It's quite surprising, but... " and referred him to some websites.
> Rather than discuss the
> issue you post with a question - typical tactic of those who purpose is
> misdirection with the ultimate goal being engaging in posts that lead
> basically nowhere.
I hadn't posted a question.
I subsequently wrote:
___________
It's not stupid, it's just a silly trick - like asking where we bury the
survivors
... ...
In a rectangle, the length of a side *opposite* to a side of length L is
also L.
____________
In my opinion, the OP was asking a trick question.
I was not misdirecting anyone. I was trying to clear up a matter that
was being misunderstood.
Nothing in any of the above suggests that I don't know anything about
"areas" or that I was engaging in any "tactics".
In both cases, I was passing on information to Eric that he didn't seem
to already possess.
I was more than a little disappointed that he used the term "retard",
because I don't think resorting to personal insults help his case.
Now, why don't you try to discuss physics with posts that go somewhere
rather than making comments about personalities.
Barry
Eric Gisse
Barry wrote:
[...]
> In both cases, I was passing on information to Eric that he didn't seem
> to already possess.
The next time you try to do that, try to pass on information that is
relevant - only one of your 3 links even possibly applies in this
situation. All of your information was already known to me, too.
>
> I was more than a little disappointed that he used the term "retard",
> because I don't think resorting to personal insults help his case.
Why?
Sure, he can type on a keyboard, but it doesn't make him intelligent.
Have you ever read his "theory" ? He fucks up vector analysis line by
line. He can't even use acceptable notation, nor explain his notation
in terms people can actually understand. Any argument is ignored, and
his dumb ass "theory" is reposted without modification
It isn't my fault he acts like a retard.
Bill Hobba
I will be taking analysis later - I did quite bit in my initial degree as
well. The first subject I am doing is probability models - it includes
Brownian motion, Bose Einstein statistics, that sort of thing. But since it
is in math and not physics the applications range beyond physics into
computer science, engineering, actuarial science etc. The text is Ross -
Probability Models. I believe his opening comments are relevant 'It is
generally felt that there are two approaches to the study of probability
theory. One approach is heuristic and non rigorous and attempts to develop
in the student an intuitive feel for the subject which enables him or her to
'think probabilistically'. The other approach attempts a rigorous
development of probability by using the tools of measure theory. It is the
first approach that is employed in this text. However because it is
extremely important in both understanding and applying probability theory to
'think probabilistically' this text should also be useful to students
primarily interested in the second approach.' Those in the class that get
off on supremums, infemums etc and loose sight of the applications are doing
themselves a grave disservice - just the same as those who just get off on
the applications and ignore rigor eventually run into trouble. You need
both.
Thanks
Bill
>
>>
>> Thanks
>> Bill
>
Bill Hobba
"Barry" <sasa...@squaw.ca> wrote in message
news:YdkXg.138374$MQ5....@newsfe15.lga...
> Bill Hobba wrote:
>
>> "Barry" wrote
>
>>>I'm wondering what I wrote that made you think that I don't understand
>>>the basic properties of areas.
>
>
>> The fact you post links to out of context definitions like...
>
> Eric was asked a question which included the term "Area Vector" and had
> responded with "Area isn't a vector, retard".
>
> I wasn't familiar with the term, so I looked it up.
>
> I found that the term "vector area" was in fact in use and told Eric that
> "It's quite surprising, but... " and referred him to some websites.
Basic fact about the English language - adjectives modify meaning depending
on context - vector area is not necessarily a type of area just as for
example saying someone is drinking white lightening does not mean they are
somehow putting lightening down their throat. Its meaning is entirely
dependant on context. Vector area is not a type of area. The fact I need
to point out this very very basic fact is rather telling IMHO.
Bill
Eric Gisse
Bill Hobba wrote:
> Those in the class that get
> off on supremums, infemums etc and loose sight of the applications are doing
> themselves a grave disservice - just the same as those who just get off on
> the applications and ignore rigor eventually run into trouble. You need
> both.
Agreed. Thats why I'm sticking with it.
>
> Thanks
> Bill
>
>
> >
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Bill
> >
Barry
> Barry wrote:
>>I was more than a little disappointed that he used the term "retard",
>>because I don't think resorting to personal insults help his case.
> Why?
Because resorting to personal insults suggests that you have nothing
constructive to say.
> It isn't my fault he acts like a retard.
No, you're only responsible for your own behaviour.
Barry
Bill Hobba wrote:
> "Barry" wrote
>> Eric was asked a question which included the term "Area Vector" and
had responded with "Area isn't a vector, retard".
>> I wasn't familiar with the term, so I looked it up.
>> I found that the term "vector area" was in fact in use and told
Eric that "It's quite surprising, but... " and referred him to some
websites.
> Basic fact about the English language - adjectives modify meaning
> depending on context - vector area is not necessarily a type of area
> just as for example saying someone is drinking white lightening does
> not mean they are somehow putting lightening down their throat.
> Its meaning is entirely dependant on context. Vector area is not a
> type of area. The fact I need to point out this very very basic fact
> is rather telling IMHO.
In this case, "area" is a noun, "areal" is an adjective.
"Vector" is also a noun (although it is sometimes used as an adjective
instead of "vectorial").
So, "vector area" , as you say is not a "type of area", it's its own
thing. I didn't say that it wasn't. In fact I gave links that showed
that it was.
But if "vector" were being used as an adjective, which it isn't...
By the way, Red Rum was a horse - don't dry drinking...
But what does any of that have anything to do with what I wrote?
All I did was post some links. If the relevant pages have errors, write
to the web masters.
Barry
Eric Gisse
Barry wrote:
> Eric Gisse wrote:
>
> > Barry wrote:
>
> >>I was more than a little disappointed that he used the term "retard",
> >>because I don't think resorting to personal insults help his case.
>
> > Why?
>
> Because resorting to personal insults suggests that you have nothing
> constructive to say.
Stop being dense.
Barry
> Barry wrote:
>>Because resorting to personal insults suggests that you have nothing
>>constructive to say.
> Stop being dense.
There you go again.
yen, ka-in
Golden Boar wrote:
> Randy Poe wrote:
> > Barry wrote:
> > > Eric Gisse wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > also L.
> >
> > the "opposite side". To me, the most natural interpretation
> > of "other side" for a rectangle is one of the perpendicular
> > sides.
> >
> > A less natural interpretation would be "any one of the
> > other three sides".
> >
> > And the least natural interpretation would be "the opposite
> > side".
> >
> > - Randy
>
> If you asked someone to jump into a swimming pool and swim to the other
> side and back, then they would swim to the opposite side and back.
"The other side of a rectangle" is english, not chinilish(chinese
english).
Please refer to the following page: (4.1 #4)
http://math.arizona.edu/~savitt/teaching/math111/sol4.pdf
Y.Porat
yen, ka-in wrote:
> Eric Gisse wrote:
> > Henri Wilson wrote:
> > > ..If physics ever gets that low, I will have no option.....I wouldn't want to
> > > be part of it....
> >
> > At any rate, I expect a stunning amount of backpedaling by you in about
> > 2 years. By the way, what will you do if I also get a degree in
> > mathematics?
>
> If you do not do your homework, I suggest you go to bed to save
> your parent's money
>
> Home work for Eric Gisse:
-----------------------
Hey some respect the Eric Gisee the Great!!!!
he is 22 years old student in Alaska university
and a the supervisor of all these NG s !!!!!
and he nevr saw a psychiatirist !!!!!
(:-)
-----------------
Y.Porat
-------------------------------
Henri Wilson
....he would be diagnosed as suffering from delusions of grandeur...
Poor boy...
>-----------------
>Y.Porat
>-------------------------------
HW.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
(another world-shattering announcement coming soon)
Eric Gisse
Henri Wilson wrote:
> On 13 Oct 2006 00:09:07 -0700, "Y.Porat" <map...@012.net.il> wrote:
>
> >
> >yen, ka-in wrote:
> >> Eric Gisse wrote:
> >> > Henri Wilson wrote:
> >> > > ..If physics ever gets that low, I will have no option.....I wouldn't want to
> >> > > be part of it....
> >> >
> >> > At any rate, I expect a stunning amount of backpedaling by you in about
> >> > 2 years. By the way, what will you do if I also get a degree in
> >> > mathematics?
> >>
> >> If you do not do your homework, I suggest you go to bed to save
> >> your parent's money
> >>
> >> Home work for Eric Gisse:
> >
> >-----------------------
> >Hey some respect the Eric Gisee the Great!!!!
> >
> >
> >he is 22 years old student in Alaska university
> >and a the supervisor of all these NG s !!!!!
> >
> >and he nevr saw a psychiatirist !!!!!
> >(:-)
>
> ....he would be diagnosed as suffering from delusions of grandeur...
>
> Poor boy...
Dude.
You used forged pictures as proof that you have an education. Who is
the delusional one?
PD
yen, ka-in wrote:
> Eric Gisse wrote:
> > Henri Wilson wrote:
> > > ..If physics ever gets that low, I will have no option.....I wouldn't want to
> > > be part of it....
> >
> > At any rate, I expect a stunning amount of backpedaling by you in about
> > 2 years. By the way, what will you do if I also get a degree in
> > mathematics?
>
> If you do not do your homework, I suggest you go to bed to save
>
> Home work for Eric Gisse:
> and the legth vector of one side of the rectangle is L.
You've not specified vectors here, you've specified scalars. The
specification of a vector in 3 space requires three quantities, for
example a magnitude and two Euler angles, or three components projected
onto arbitrary axes that span the space. So you're missing two
quantities for the area and two quantities for the given side of the
rectangle. Once you've done that, then we can talk.
> Please find
> the length vector of the other side of the rectangle?
PD
Eric Gisse wrote:
> Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
> > "Eric Gisse" <jow...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1160446519....@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> > >
> > > Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
> > >>
> > >> You mean these degrees?
> > >> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/f0323a1286d5bbb9
> > >> | "What are you talking about. I just told you I have a full
> > >> | degree in physics and maths, including QM, relativity,
> > >> | thermodynamics, optics, nuclear, partial differential
> > >> | equations, laplace transforms, etc. I also have a completely
> > >> | separate science degree majoring in psych and genetics
> > >> | with a few other biological and physics subjects included.
> > >> | I spent eleven years at two of the best universities,
> > >> | overall. I was an experimental officer, in physics research
> > >> | in Australia's CSIRO and other institutions for over twenty
> > >> | years. I will send you a photo of my credentials if you like.
> > >> | They are up on the wall in front of me.
> > >> | I might not have been the best or most sober student but I
> > >> | passed well and got a good grasp of the basics."
> > >>
> > >> Dirk Vdm
> > >
> > > Oh man.
> > >
> > > I still want to know how Henri got a degree in physics if he can't even
> > > correctly state simple concepts in physics without fucking it up in at
> > > least 3 ways.
> > >
> > > I mean, damn. Even if he doesn't believe relativity he should be able
> > > to correctly state it. It isn't that hard.
> >
> > He never sent a photo of those credentials.
> > Besides, the credentials he would have, would show
> > the name "Ralph Rabbidge" anyway ;-)
>
> To Henri's credit, he actually did. Surprised the hell out of me, to be
> honest.
>
> www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/degGrese.jpg
This is rather sad.
The Sydney Technical College is a trade school. It has never offered a
degree in physics. That information is freely available from their
public information office. In the 1950s and 1960's, it expanded its
scope to include a diploma as a Technician in such areas as dental care
and biomedical office administration. Today, a simple perusal of the
current career certification offerings at www.sit.nsw.edu.au will give
you a good idea of the areas of their institutional mission.
It's quite possible that Henri was a successful technician.
It's also quite possible that he is a talented tracer and calligrapher.
PD
>
> >
> > Dirk Vdm
Sorcerer
"PD" <TheDrap...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1160794987.5...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
If x * 0 = y * 0, does that mean that x=y?
Once again Phuckwit Duck demonstrates he can't write
one line of algebra and get it right.
Androcles
Henri Wilson
Wrong.
The NSW University of Technology grew out of the Sydney Tech College in, I
think, 1955 and took over students such as I, who had begun diploma courses.
The diploma, equivalent to pass degree, was still handed out in the name of the
STC while the degrees were given in the name of the NSWUT. I think the Diploma
was given full degree status two years after I finished.
I completed all but one year of my course at the NSWUT site in Kensington. I
might add it was and still is a very good university.
The diploma was basically a part time degree and recognized as such by
employers. It had exactly the same carriculum as the three year full time
degree. To convert to full degree with honours, one had do an extra two years
part-time or one year full time.
I didn't have the opportunity then but made up for it with a second degree
from ANU, which incidentally is currently rated number 27 university in the
world.
One thing is certain, I appear to know a helluva lot more about physics than
anyone else on this NG.
>That information is freely available from their
>public information office. In the 1950s and 1960's, it expanded its
>scope to include a diploma as a Technician in such areas as dental care
>and biomedical office administration. Today, a simple perusal of the
>current career certification offerings at www.sit.nsw.edu.au will give
>you a good idea of the areas of their institutional mission.
You don't have a clue. Basket weaving is more in your line..
>It's quite possible that Henri was a successful technician.
Indeed I was, while I was studying.
>It's also quite possible that he is a talented tracer and calligrapher.
Yes I can do all that as well as being expert at physics....
>
>PD
>
>>
>> >
>> > Dirk Vdm
Dirk Van de moortel
"Henri Wilson" <HW@..> wrote in message news:ilp0j29v1uno5v7on...@4ax.com...
So you haven't even *noticed* what a poor forgery you produced?
You know what, take your jar-bottom glasses and look at the
rectangle around your name:
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/degGrese.jpg
Don't see anything fishy?
Dirk Vdm
Barry
> yen, ka-in wrote:
>> A rectangle sits in 3D space. The area vector of the rectangle is A,
>> and the legth vector of one side of the rectangle is L.
>> Please find
>> the length vector of the other side of the rectangle?
> You've not specified vectors here, you've specified scalars. The
> specification of a vector in 3 space requires three quantities, for
> example a magnitude and two Euler angles, or three components
> projected onto arbitrary axes that span the space. So you're missing
> two quantities for the area and two quantities for the given side of
> the rectangle. Once you've done that, then we can talk.
But the rectangle *and its sides* are on a 2D slice of the 3 space, so
the problem is effectively 2 Dimensional.
And the question only asks for the length, not the direction, of the
"length vector".
The information given should be sufficient to answer the question.
Barry
Barry
> Eric Gisse wrote:
>>To Henri's credit, he actually did. Surprised the hell out of me, to be
>>honest.
>>www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/degGrese.jpg
> This is rather sad.
> The Sydney Technical College is a trade school. It has never offered a
> degree in physics.
The B.Sc. degree is from the Australian National University.
The Diploma is from the Sydney Technical College.
The photo does not seem to conflict with his claims.
Barry
Dirk Van de moortel
"Barry" <sasa...@squaw.ca> wrote in message news:xW7Yg.430$Lk7...@newsfe23.lga...
Come on, just *look* at the way his name is written on a smeared
out region of the diploma :-)
Dirk Vdm
Barry
>>PD wrote:
I just wondered why someone would want to discuss the Sydney Technical
College Diploma while ignoring the Australian National University Degree.
I know little about forgeries, so I've stayed out of that part of the
discussion.
Why would anyone go to any trouble merely to pretend to have a
Bachelor's degree in physics?
It's not a very impressive thing.
Are you impressed by Bachelor's degrees?
Barry
Dirk Van de moortel
"Barry" <sasa...@squaw.ca> wrote in message news:MG8Yg.541$Zi....@newsfe22.lga...
You mean, why would "Henry Wilson" go to the trouble?
heh... you must be new here :-)
>
> It's not a very impressive thing.
>
> Are you impressed by Bachelor's degrees?
No, of course not.
A BS is merely half a MS.
But that's irrelevant.
I'm impressed by the extremely clumsy way he forged
his "degree", and even more by the way it doesn't even
seem to matter to some :-)
Dirk Vdm
shuba
> "Barry" <sasa...@squaw.ca> wrote in message
> > Why would anyone go to any trouble merely to pretend to have a Bachelor's
> > degree in physics?
>
> You mean, why would "Henry Wilson" go to the trouble?
> heh... you must be new here :-)
A search for "Jackie" may change your mind about that.
---Tim Shuba---
Dirk Van de moortel
"shuba" <tim....@lycos.ScPoAmM> wrote in message news:tim.shuba-2D504...@sn-ip.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net...
Ah, of course that makes sense.
This must be the same Barry that I have been calling names
like "Mingst" a while ago. Thanks for reminding :-)
Dirk Vdm
Sorcerer
"Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvand...@ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com> wrote
in message news:fR8Yg.129030$yc5.2...@phobos.telenet-ops.be...
Well, since its more than you have or ever will I can understand you
being impressed.
Androcles.
Barry
> You used forged pictures as proof that you have an education. Who is
> the delusional one?
Eric, you're so gullible.
First you were prepared to believe the documents were genuine.
Then, because a buddy claimed that they're fakes, you did a complete
turn around.
You're judging things by who is writing, rather than by what is
written.
If you wish to be a Scientist, you'll have to learn to develop your
critical faculties. Be a little more sceptical and a little more
receptive.
It's a fine balance and right now you're way off kilter.
A good friend who points out mistakes and imperfections and rebukes
evil is to be respected as if he reveals a secret of hidden treasure. -
Buddha
(That's Buddha, not a Buddy and certainly not Barry - the quote that
is).
Barry