Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Benzene solution

44 views
Skip to first unread message

john

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 3:11:14 PM10/21/16
to
If atoms are discs, like galaxies, then
it should be possible to solve
Benzene CLASSICALLY that way.
And it is:
http://users.accesscomm.ca/john/BenzeneE.GIF

Odd Bodkin

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 4:19:05 PM10/21/16
to
So....
When questioned about why John thinks the way he does, John goes mute.
When questioned about even WHAT he believes in detail, John goes mute.
Instead, John utters his customary slur and then changes the subject.

Interestingly, even when he changes the subject, he repeats his own
behavior.
- Only some galaxies are shaped like discs. What about the galaxies that
aren't?
- John waxes about the numerical coincidences between the size of
hydrogen atoms and the size of ONE galaxy (the Milky Way), but what
about the fact this ratio doesn't hold for OTHER galaxies?
- He says "if" atoms are discs, but there is no evidence that atoms are
even shaped like discs. He says that would be hidden by their
precessing, but still doesn't change the fact that atoms give no
evidence of being shaped like discs.
- He says atoms shaped like discs that appear otherwise because they
precess would be like precessing galaxies. Except galaxies show no
evidence of precession, either.
- So atoms are discs even though they don't behave like discs, they
precess even though they don't show evidence of precession, they're like
galaxies that are discs except for the ones that aren't, the precession
is like the precession of galaxies except they don't, and they have
similar size ratios for one galaxy but not for any others.

But still.... John believes these things. Why? Who knows?

--
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

john

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 4:26:49 PM10/21/16
to
Odd the Traitor
"When questioned about why John thinks the way he does, John goes mute.
When questioned about even WHAT he believes in detail, John goes mute. "

Why do YOU think the way you do, Traitor?
You deny coverups as they are exposed
daily.
Science is BY FAR the most important
thing for militaries that want to get one-up,
yet you think that new knowledge will
be given freely to all.
Why would you think that?

pcard...@volcanomail.com

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 4:32:59 PM10/21/16
to
Probably schizophrenia.

Odd Bodkin

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 4:35:25 PM10/21/16
to
On 10/21/2016 3:26 PM, john wrote:
> Odd the Traitor
> "When questioned about why John thinks the way he does, John goes mute.
> When questioned about even WHAT he believes in detail, John goes mute. "
>
> Why do YOU think the way you do, Traitor?

You haven't answered my questions, John. Why deflect? Why not answer
them for yourself? You know what it looks like when you can't answer
them? You look confused.

> You deny coverups as they are exposed
> daily.
> Science is BY FAR the most important
> thing for militaries that want to get one-up,
> yet you think that new knowledge will
> be given freely to all.
> Why would you think that?

Such deep grained fears, John. Tell me this, John. Do you believe that
there are large numbers of scientists that are being held captive by the
military and are being FORCED to do cutting-edge science but on the
stipulation that that knowledge will not be ever shared among the
scientific community because of their military value? How do you imagine
life works for those people?

Odd Bodkin

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 4:44:21 PM10/21/16
to
I don't think so, really. But I think he does fall into the camp of the
neurotic fretters who feel a constant sense of threat and wariness.
These are the people who buy into Big Secrets held by Big Organizations,
who have Ulterior Motives that spell doom for those not in the know.
There's something unknown out there, he believes, and it's dangerous.
Little anecdotes are enough to fuel the
smoke-then-fire-no-wait-inferno-no-wait-conflagration way of thinking.

Except it's not thinking. It's just a gnawing feeling in the gut that
never goes away, and which then pollutes thinking. Like a toothache
affects the way you think.

And John doesn't like to think this may be a problem, so instead he
looks at others and says, "Why don't YOU feel the way I do? If you don't
feel this, you're blind or stupid!" As in, "If you don't have my
neurosis, then you're not healthy."

john

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 4:54:44 PM10/21/16
to
Odd
Okay, let's explore your "beliefs", Odd:

Do you believe that, if there WERE aliens
(like some astronauts have thought),
the government would tell you?

hanson

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 4:57:15 PM10/21/16
to

Sefton "john" <johnse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If atoms are discs, like galaxies, then
> it should be possible to solve
> Benzene CLASSICALLY that way.
> And it is: [1]
> http://users.accesscomm.ca/john/BenzeneE.GIF
>
hanson wrote:
Atoms are not discs. Some molecules can
be modeled to be like disks.
The "Benzene's CLASSICAL" model was shown
by Kekule in 1865, when your Great-great-great
Grandpa was in school, and you used that in your [1].
>
Maybe you forgot to says that your model is the
Vegan version, and shown to you by your Galactic
Commander whom you mentioned a few days back.
So, what's the problem that you still have?

Odd Bodkin

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 5:10:24 PM10/21/16
to
I believe the government would not be able to hide the information of
the existence of aliens. I don't believe that aliens are intercepted by
government officials who then decide whether that news should get out or
now.

What I'll tell you is that if there are dozens of people in a town who
believe in aliens, this does not even come close to proving that there
are aliens. What it proves is that there are people who come together
out of a point of commonality and they like to be with each other. Most
of the people who live near Loch Ness and believe in the Loch Ness
monster are there because they MOVED there out of their belief in the
monster, not because they've lived their all their lives and have seen
the monster.

I believe that you greatly overestimate the power of the government to
do anything, let alone hide information. I believe they have some power
to keep some of their own activities secret (and even then, things fall
apart pretty quickly -- Watergate, Snowden, Iran-Contra, etc.), but they
don't have much power to keep the activities of others secret. But I
also think you have a wicked emotional need to believe in the Bogeyman.

Alright, I've been straightforward with you. Now, John, man up and ante
up. Answer my questions. Stop dodging and deflecting like a scared,
miserable chickenshit.

john

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 5:16:55 PM10/21/16
to
Hanson
Atoms ARE discs.
Their precession rate is 1 per 10^-16 seconds.
Unseeable.

But the precession rate of galaxies is
once per 100 million years. This SHOULD
be seeable by its effects on light
and the shape of the disc.
And it is.

The precession causes galactic rotation
curves taken from opposite sides of the
disc to be asymmetrical . Analysis of
this should reveal that this is the cause.
Also, there are opposite warps observed
on the disc. This would be caused by
precession.

It is interesting that the discs seem
to be warped at their OUTER edges,
which implies that the rotation of
the disc causes a vortex in the Space
surrounding it that then ACTS BACK
on the disc to precess it.
:)
Cool thought.

john

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 5:20:38 PM10/21/16
to
Odd said
". Answer my questions"

1. Say "please".
2. State your question without appending
your usual arrogance.
3. Ask ONE question .

Go

Odd Bodkin

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 5:49:05 PM10/21/16
to
On 10/21/2016 4:20 PM, john wrote:
> Odd said
> ". Answer my questions"
>
> 1. Say "please".

Please.

> 2. State your question without appending
> your usual arrogance.

The questions have already been asked. My tone is no different than
yours, who has opted to call me a traitor to the human race. Don't get
uppity.

> 3. Ask ONE question .

You have a backlog. If you can't absorb more than one at a time, take
the first one and answer it. Then we'll move on to the next one.

>
> Go

Odd Bodkin

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 5:52:59 PM10/21/16
to
On 10/21/2016 4:16 PM, john wrote:
> Hanson
> Atoms ARE discs.
> Their precession rate is 1 per 10^-16 seconds.
> Unseeable.

And since it is not testable by experiment, it is not a scientific claim.

>
> But the precession rate of galaxies is
> once per 100 million years.

Nope. No evidence of precession.

> This SHOULD
> be seeable by its effects on light

The effect on light should be a blue shift on one edge of a disk galaxy
where our line of sight is along the axis of the disc, and a red shift
on the opposite side. Not there.

> and the shape of the disc.
> And it is.

Sorry, those are accounted for already.

>
> The precession causes galactic rotation
> curves taken from opposite sides of the
> disc to be asymmetrical . Analysis of
> this should reveal that this is the cause.
> Also, there are opposite warps observed
> on the disc. This would be caused by
> precession.

Not demonstrated. Precession does not cause warps on the edges of
rotating material discs.

>
> It is interesting that the discs seem
> to be warped at their OUTER edges,
> which implies that the rotation of
> the disc causes a vortex in the Space
> surrounding it that then ACTS BACK
> on the disc to precess it.
> :)
> Cool thought.
>


edpr...@gmail.com

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 5:55:35 PM10/21/16
to
John I have ask you just ONE question. So if you are in such a
generous mood,

1. please answer me now.

I'll repeat it here:
2. What evidence (data) do you have that electrons consist of vortices?

3. yes I counted it several times. It is just one question.

john

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 6:02:05 PM10/21/16
to
Odd
What answer can I possibly give you
that you haven't dissed already?
Ask your question- I'm not reading
back through your stuff.
Go ahead- but just don't, if you're
blowing smoke again.
Your call.

john

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 6:12:55 PM10/21/16
to
Ed
"2. What evidence (data) do you have that electrons consist of vortices?"

Me?
Google " electron" "vortex"
http://journals.aps.org/prx/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevX.2.041011

Odd Bodkin

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 6:16:33 PM10/21/16
to
On 10/21/2016 5:02 PM, john wrote:
> Odd
> What answer can I possibly give you
> that you haven't dissed already?
> Ask your question- I'm not reading
> back through your stuff.

Good grief, John, how hard is it to go back to a post from an hour ago?
Here are the questions for the third time. Please pay attention.

"What's the treasonous act?"
"Do you REALLY believe that not taking all of these testimonies
seriously is treason to mankind?"
"So, just to be clear, you believe that anyone who is just a nutcase
will be unable to [talk without notes and without contradicting himself]?"
"OK, so let's just entertain the remote possibility that he is right,
and that the Elite (or maybe it's the aliens -- hard to tell anymore)
have an agenda to wipe out anyone not of Their Kind. What call to action
do you think this produces? What needs to change, John? What are you
personally called to do to be part of the solution?"

> Go ahead- but just don't, if you're
> blowing smoke again.
> Your call.
>


john

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 8:17:29 PM10/21/16
to
Odd


"What's the treasonous act?"
"Do you REALLY believe that not taking all of these testimonies
seriously is treason to mankind?"
"So, just to be clear, you believe that anyone who is just a nutcase
will be unable to [talk without notes and without contradicting himself]?"
"OK, so let's just entertain the remote possibility that he is right,
and that the Elite (or maybe it's the aliens -- hard to tell anymore)
have an agenda to wipe out anyone not of Their Kind. What call to action
do you think this produces? What needs to change, John? What are you
personally called to do to be part of the solution?"

Boyd Bushmann said
of the aliens,
there are wranglers
and there are rustlers.

Now, from the cow's viewpoint, which
is better?
The rustler eats you now, the wrangler
eats you later.

So, if you are the cow, what do you do?

john

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 9:17:38 PM10/21/16
to
Odd
So, all these crazies- Boyd Bushmann,
Phil Schneider, a number of CIA deathbed
confessions, Delores Cannon- they all
get together and plan stories that all
seem to fit together?
And there are many more.
All crazy and me, too, Odd?

A LOT of crazies in YOUR world!!

Don't you ever wonder about that?

Maybe you're missing something

john

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 10:40:30 PM10/21/16
to
Hey Odd
Is Julian Assange crazy?

john

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 10:44:06 PM10/21/16
to
ROLLING ON THE FLOOR
AND LAUGHING OUT LOUD

edpr...@gmail.com

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 11:23:05 PM10/21/16
to
That study concerns a collection of many electrons, John.
Your claim has been that a single electron consists
of vortices. So Sorry, but that article doesn't support your claims at all. Care to try again?
Please?

john

unread,
Oct 21, 2016, 11:47:31 PM10/21/16
to
Ed
So, if MANY electrons fall into
a common vortex, vortices are
not implied for a single electron?
Only Odd has to say please.
He dis pleased me.

john

unread,
Oct 22, 2016, 1:06:23 AM10/22/16
to
Ed
Let's say atoms are in a disc
configuration , and the disc spins, and
the spinning disc processes.
What happens with one electron?

The spinning disc is like a coil- it
generates a magnetic field at
right-angles. But the disc is also
precessing, and the
precession sweeps this magfield around
in a circle, generating an ELECTRIC
field along the axis.

Now, in atoms with equal numbers of
protons and electrons, the generated fields
will cancel, but if the numbers are
unequal- as in cations or anions-
there will be a net electric field.

Is there?

Odd Bodkin

unread,
Oct 22, 2016, 9:44:45 AM10/22/16
to
Which of my questions is this supposed to be an answer to?
Why do you live in fear of disaster, John? Does it give you a rush?

Odd Bodkin

unread,
Oct 22, 2016, 9:47:13 AM10/22/16
to
On 10/21/2016 8:17 PM, john wrote:
> Odd
> So, all these crazies- Boyd Bushmann,
> Phil Schneider, a number of CIA deathbed
> confessions, Delores Cannon- they all
> get together and plan stories that all
> seem to fit together?

They don't have to get together, John. All they have to do is to listen
to each other and tell a story that is similar.

> And there are many more.
> All crazy and me, too, Odd?

Crazy or attention-seeking liars.

>
> A LOT of crazies in YOUR world!!

Must be thousands of them. Let's see, with one in a million people being
crazy or attention-seeking liars, that would be 7 thousand of them.
Except that more than one in a million people are crazy (documented).

>
> Don't you ever wonder about that?

Not much.

>
> Maybe you're missing something
>

Maybe you are too.

Odd Bodkin

unread,
Oct 22, 2016, 9:48:40 AM10/22/16
to
On 10/21/2016 9:40 PM, john wrote:
> Hey Odd
> Is Julian Assange crazy?
>

He's certainly an attention-seeking, woman-assaulting, media whore.

But you won't find stuff about aliens coming from Assange. Wonder why?
You won't find him laying out plans for the Elite killing off 95% of the
human population. Wonder why?

john

unread,
Oct 22, 2016, 11:20:25 AM10/22/16
to
Odd
"On 10/21/2016 9:40 PM, john wrote:
> Hey Odd
> Is Julian Assange crazy?
>

He's certainly an attention-seeking, woman-assaulting, media whore.

But you won't find stuff about aliens coming from Assange. Wonder why?
You won't find him laying out plans for the Elite killing off 95% of the
human population. Wonder why? "

You have an interesting "all or nothing"
mentality. Black or white. The number
of times I have heard you, in your
various incarnations, say, "There are
TWO possibilities......".

Why do you think that way?
If there is a cabal running the USA,
why would figurehead politicians
know anything? Did you listen to
his speech yesterday?

Odd Bodkin

unread,
Oct 22, 2016, 2:59:25 PM10/22/16
to
On 10/22/2016 10:20 AM, john wrote:
> You have an interesting "all or nothing"
> mentality. Black or white. The number
> of times I have heard you, in your
> various incarnations, say, "There are
> TWO possibilities......".
>
> Why do you think that way?
> If there is a cabal running the USA,
> why would figurehead politicians
> know anything? Did you listen to
> his speech yesterday?

You have an interesting way of suspecting things are true, even if there
is no evidence of it, other than someone saying it's true and
proclaiming doom. Why do you embrace with adoration proclamations of doom?

john

unread,
Oct 22, 2016, 5:03:23 PM10/22/16
to
Did you see the video of armed
vehicles surrounding the Ecuadorean
embassy where Assange is-
just before the internet went
down twice on Friday?
They backed off.

What I know, is that emails can go
through numerous servers and,
depending on traffic, many different
routes. And every server contains
copies, thereafter, for how long I'm not sure.
You cannot destroy that physically.

edpr...@gmail.com

unread,
Oct 22, 2016, 7:43:32 PM10/22/16
to
On Friday, October 21, 2016 at 11:47:31 PM UTC-4, john wrote:
> Ed
> So, if MANY electrons fall into
> a common vortex, vortices are
> not implied for a single electron?

Exactly, they are not implied. Does a flock of birds
imply that a single bird is composed of a flock of smaller ones?


> Only Odd has to say please.
> He dis pleased me.

He has been very patient with you. I only join occasionally
because I am often busy with my off line life and some
of your answers just are not logical.

Enjoy the rest of the weekend, both of you.

edpr...@gmail.com

unread,
Oct 22, 2016, 7:48:50 PM10/22/16
to
tell me: how you are going to maintain
a "disc" of cations?

Long before any precession, the cations
will have flown apart.

It seems clear you are trying to impose a macroscopic
experience of the world on the subatomic realm.
It is much more complex than that.

ed

john

unread,
Oct 22, 2016, 9:26:05 PM10/22/16
to
ed
Are you sure it wasn't a 'swarm'?
That's how Odd says gravity works.
I'm sorry I called you a traitor to the
human race, Odd.
That was a little extreme.

Odd Bodkin

unread,
Oct 24, 2016, 9:49:10 AM10/24/16
to
I'll say.

Apology accepted. But watching you for similar extremism.
0 new messages