Sexy Outer Limits: Was The Ori and Islam
Tim Bruening
Bob wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 15:09:08 -0500, "Atlas Bugged"
> <atlasbug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >"Bob" <sp...@uce.gov> wrote in message
> >news:43f8bc60...@news-server.houston.rr.com...
> >> The Outer Limits has a show based on a foxy android who puts out. The
> >> DVD version "The Outer Limits and Sex", has the uncut version. They
> >> picked a very well endowed android for the part.
> >
> >The show pursued that theme several times after the episode to which you
> >refer, "Valerie 23," and the gals were always foxy. But that first ep was
> >when they were on Showtime, so two versions of the show exist, one with the
> >real-deal nudity. Nice.
>
> Have you seen
>
> The Outer Limits (The New Series) - Sex & Science Fiction (1995)
> Studio: MGM (Video & DVD)
> DVD Release Date: September 3, 2002
> Run Time: 264 minutes
> Episodes: Caught in the Act, Bits of Love, Valerie 23, The Human
> Operators, Skin Deep, Flower Child
>
> "The Human Operators" was known as "Ship" on the prudish channel.
In "Caught in the Act", a woman named Hannah was taken over by an alien parasite
that caused her to absorb the bodies of men into her body, yet her total mass
didn't increase. She did not get fat, and her boyfriend was still able to lift
her at the end of the episode. Where did the mass of her victims go?
Bob
<tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>In "Caught in the Act", a woman named Hannah was taken over by an alien parasite
>that caused her to absorb the bodies of men into her body, yet her total mass
>didn't increase. She did not get fat, and her boyfriend was still able to lift
>her at the end of the episode. Where did the mass of her victims go?
I assumed it was converted to energy as she absorbed it.
--
--
In Hillary Clinton's new book "Living History," Hillary details what
it was like meeting Bill Clinton, falling in love with him, getting
married, and living a passionate, wonderful life as husband and wife.
Then on page two, the trouble starts.
Tim Bruening
Bob wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Feb 2006 12:43:03 -0800, Tim Bruening
> <tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>
> >In "Caught in the Act", a woman named Hannah was taken over by an alien parasite
> >that caused her to absorb the bodies of men into her body, yet her total mass
> >didn't increase. She did not get fat, and her boyfriend was still able to lift
> >her at the end of the episode. Where did the mass of her victims go?
>
> I assumed it was converted to energy as she absorbed it.
Then were did the energy go? Why didn't Hannah vaporize from heat energy?
Robert J. Kolker
>>her at the end of the episode. Where did the mass of her victims go?
>
>
> I assumed it was converted to energy as she absorbed it.
Knowing the conversion factor is c^2 she must have lit up the place.
Highly implausible. H-bombs wreck atols with less than one percent mass
defect.
Bob Kolker
Barry Margolin
The food you eat is also converted to energy, but you haven't exploded
or increased in mass equivalent to the amount you've ingested. I guess
we have to assume that she has soe way of excreting the excess, like we
do.
--
Barry Margolin, bar...@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***
Tim Bruening
Barry Margolin wrote:
> In article <45v319F...@individual.net>,
> "Robert J. Kolker" <now...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> > Bob wrote:
> >
> > >>her at the end of the episode. Where did the mass of her victims go?
> > >
> > >
> > > I assumed it was converted to energy as she absorbed it.
> >
> > Knowing the conversion factor is c^2 she must have lit up the place.
> > Highly implausible. H-bombs wreck atols with less than one percent mass
> > defect.
>
> The food you eat is also converted to energy, but you haven't exploded
> or increased in mass equivalent to the amount you've ingested. I guess
> we have to assume that she has soe way of excreting the excess, like we
> do.
We only convert a very tiny part of the food's mass into energy. Hannah
would have had to convert all the mass of the people she absorbed into energy
to keep from greatly increasing her weight. I doubt that her intestines or
her plumbing system could have handled her defecating all that mass out!
Ten Quidado
"Tim Bruening" <tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote in message
news:43FA65C2...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us...
So there was maybe a little diarrhea.
CatPanDaddy
"Tim Bruening" <tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote in message
news:43FA65C2...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us...
>
>
Well, there goes dinner! ;-)
Bob
Apparently the alien took care of all that.
Bob
You have never seen an atol with an alien on it.
Bob
<tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>We only convert a very tiny part of the food's mass into energy. Hannah
>would have had to convert all the mass of the people she absorbed into energy
>to keep from greatly increasing her weight. I doubt that her intestines or
>her plumbing system could have handled her defecating all that mass out!
The alien took a huge dump in the 11th dimension.
Ten Quidado
> On Mon, 20 Feb 2006 14:49:25 -0800, Tim Bruening
> <tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>
> >> I assumed it was converted to energy as she absorbed it.
>
> >Then were did the energy go? Why didn't Hannah vaporize from heat
energy?
>
> Apparently the alien took care of all that.
Ah, so it was magic. Thanks.
Ten Quidado
> On Mon, 20 Feb 2006 16:58:43 -0800, Tim Bruening
> <tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>
> >We only convert a very tiny part of the food's mass into energy. Hannah
> >would have had to convert all the mass of the people she absorbed into
energy
> >to keep from greatly increasing her weight. I doubt that her intestines
or
> >her plumbing system could have handled her defecating all that mass out!
>
> The alien took a huge dump in the 11th dimension.
Which, according to transient membrane superstring theory, warped back into
time and caused the Tunguska Blast of 1909. It would also explain that
second album by A Flock of Seagulls.
William December Starr
Barry Margolin <bar...@alum.mit.edu> said:
> The food you eat is also converted to energy, but you haven't
> exploded or increased in mass equivalent to the amount you've
> ingested.
No matter in the food is converted to energy. Rather, energy
that's already present in the food, in the form of molecular bonds,
is liberated (and then put to work).
--
William December Starr <wds...@panix.com>
Tim Bruening
Ten Quidado wrote:
How did the seagulls operate musical and recording instruments? I've never
seen a bird with hands.
Robert J. Kolker
>
>
> No matter in the food is converted to energy. Rather, energy
> that's already present in the food, in the form of molecular bonds,
> is liberated (and then put to work).
Correct. The energy is derived from Coulomb forces.
The stretching and snapping of electrostatic rubber bands is what makes
us go.
Bob Kolker
>
Ten Quidado
They were a pack of pecking pluckers.
David Chapman
From the Collected Witterings of Robert J. Kolker, volume 23:
> The stretching and snapping of electrostatic rubber bands is what makes
> us go.
What a fascinating image.
--
"My son is not a terrorist - he is a junior IT support officer."
Bob
<now...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> No matter in the food is converted to energy. Rather, energy
>> that's already present in the food, in the form of molecular bonds,
>> is liberated (and then put to work).
>Correct. The energy is derived from Coulomb forces.
You left out exchange forces, which arise because of the Pauli
Exclusion Principle. They are responsible for most bonds in molecules.
Coulomb forces are restricted mostly to ionic bonds and Van der Waals
bonds.
Tim V.
>> The food you eat is also converted to energy, but you haven't
>> exploded or increased in mass equivalent to the amount you've
>> ingested. I guess we have to assume that she has soe way of
>> excreting the excess, like we do.
>
> We only convert a very tiny part of the food's mass into energy.
> Hannah would have had to convert all the mass of the people she
> absorbed into energy to keep from greatly increasing her weight. I
> doubt that her intestines or her plumbing system could have handled
> her defecating all that mass out!
>
And none of her orifices could handle absorbing an entire person at one
time, yet she did. It's Sci-Fi, anything is possible.
--
Tim.
"Those who give up essential liberties for temporary safety deserve neither
liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
Robert J. Kolker
>
>
> You left out exchange forces, which arise because of the Pauli
> Exclusion Principle. They are responsible for most bonds in molecules.
>
> Coulomb forces are restricted mostly to ionic bonds and Van der Waals
> bonds.
Good point. Thank you for the heads up.
Bob Kolker
Bob
Why is it that spin 1/2 partticles have this property? A mathematician
like you would understand the importance of the Permutation Group.
Being is an Act. We learn that from Existential Metaphysics. It is
perfectly consistent with physics. The particles created and destroyed
in the Vacuum are the result of an action. Combining particles is also
an action, and when you do it with spin 1/2 particles you get the
Pauli Exclusion Principle. It's all symmetry, which is a way to
describe action.
Is the Supreme Being (aka "Immutable Core") the quantum field? Are
physicists staring into the face of God?
Robert J. Kolker
>
> Why is it that spin 1/2 partticles have this property? A mathematician
> like you would understand the importance of the Permutation Group.
I assume you mean the group generated by the Pauli Spin Matrices?
Bob Kolker
George Max
The great looking actess that played "Hannah" in that episode "Caught
In The Act" is Alyssa Milano. Still very hot, but now on the show
"Charmed"
Bob
I thought it was the other way around, but it has been a very long
time so who am I to know.
Eva
news:aUvKf.3843$UN....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > The alien took a huge dump in the 11th dimension.
>
>
> Which, according to transient membrane superstring theory, warped back
into
> time and caused the Tunguska Blast of 1909. It would also explain that
> second album by A Flock of Seagulls.
They were allowed to make a second album??
Eva
--
Join the Stargate SG-1 SETI@home Team
http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/team_display.php?teamid=30516
"Ceremonies have killed religions for they provide the masked comforts to
delusionals..."
W. Blaine Dowler
They can generate the group yes, but there are way more particles than that
group alone contains. You'd need to include a variety of dimensions for
both spin and isospin generations to truly describe all spin 1/2 particles.
On the other hand, if you restrict yourself to the quarks and basic leptons
that generate the groups, you'll have a much more manageable system.
Still, I'd say that the particles come first, and we've chosen to represent
them mathematically.
Blaine
Tim Bruening
"Tim V." wrote:
> Tim Bruening <tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote in
> news:43FA65C2...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us:
>
> >> The food you eat is also converted to energy, but you haven't
> >> exploded or increased in mass equivalent to the amount you've
> >> ingested. I guess we have to assume that she has soe way of
> >> excreting the excess, like we do.
> >
> > We only convert a very tiny part of the food's mass into energy.
> > Hannah would have had to convert all the mass of the people she
> > absorbed into energy to keep from greatly increasing her weight. I
> > doubt that her intestines or her plumbing system could have handled
> > her defecating all that mass out!
> >
>
> And none of her orifices could handle absorbing an entire person at one
> time, yet she did. It's Sci-Fi, anything is possible.
Even violating the laws of thermodynamics? (Its Sci-Fi, not magic).
Tim Bruening
Barry Margolin wrote:
> In article <45v319F...@individual.net>,
> "Robert J. Kolker" <now...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> > Bob wrote:
> >
> > >>her at the end of the episode. Where did the mass of her victims go?
> > >
> > >
> > > I assumed it was converted to energy as she absorbed it.
> >
> > Knowing the conversion factor is c^2 she must have lit up the place.
> > Highly implausible. H-bombs wreck atols with less than one percent mass
> > defect.
>
> The food you eat is also converted to energy, but you haven't exploded
> or increased in mass equivalent to the amount you've ingested. I guess
> we have to assume that she has soe way of excreting the excess, like we
> do.
We only convert a very tiny part of the food's mass into energy. Hannah
Bob
<tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>We only convert a very tiny part of the food's mass into energy.
We don't convert any mass into energy. The energy we derive from food
is chemical energy, not nuclear energy.
--
Stop Repeat Offenders!
Don't Re-elect Them!
John Schilling
>On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 00:17:14 -0700, Tim Bruening
><tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>>We only convert a very tiny part of the food's mass into energy.
>We don't convert any mass into energy. The energy we derive from food
>is chemical energy, not nuclear energy.
E=MC^2 applies to all forms of energy, not just nuclear. Getting
energy out of a jelly donut, requires converting some of the mass
of the donut to energy.
About twenty nanograms' worth, to put a number on it, which is why
we mostly don't worry about it. But it is, nontheless, true.
--
*John Schilling * "Anything worth doing, *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * is worth doing for money" *
*Chief Scientist & General Partner * -13th Rule of Acquisition *
*White Elephant Research, LLC * "There is no substitute *
*schi...@spock.usc.edu * for success" *
*661-951-9107 or 661-275-6795 * -58th Rule of Acquisition *
tapio.l...@helsinki.fi.invalid
: On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:38:22 GMT, sp...@uce.gov (Bob) wrote:
:>On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 00:17:14 -0700, Tim Bruening
:><tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
:>>We only convert a very tiny part of the food's mass into energy.
:>We don't convert any mass into energy. The energy we derive from food
:>is chemical energy, not nuclear energy.
: E=MC^2 applies to all forms of energy, not just nuclear. Getting
: energy out of a jelly donut, requires converting some of the mass
: of the donut to energy.
: About twenty nanograms' worth, to put a number on it, which is why
: we mostly don't worry about it. But it is, nontheless, true.
This would also mean that the plants, that make the donuts (or at least
their raw material) are able to convert solar light into material. Which is
not the case, but they combine water and carbon diokside into sugars, where
the same atoms in new combinations store some energy into the molecular
bindings. This energy is released when the carbon is again "burned" into
CO2.
-Tapio-
John Schilling
>In alt.tv.outer-limits John Schilling <schi...@spock.usc.edu> wrote:
>: On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:38:22 GMT, sp...@uce.gov (Bob) wrote:
>:>On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 00:17:14 -0700, Tim Bruening
>:><tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>:>>We only convert a very tiny part of the food's mass into energy.
>:>We don't convert any mass into energy. The energy we derive from food
>:>is chemical energy, not nuclear energy.
>: E=MC^2 applies to all forms of energy, not just nuclear. Getting
>: energy out of a jelly donut, requires converting some of the mass
>: of the donut to energy.
>: About twenty nanograms' worth, to put a number on it, which is why
>: we mostly don't worry about it. But it is, nontheless, true.
>This would also mean that the plants, that make the donuts (or at least
>their raw material) are able to convert solar light into material. Which is
>not the case,
Actually, it is.
>but they combine water and carbon dioxide into sugars, where the same
>atoms in new combinations store some energy into the molecular bindings.
Right. But the new combination of atoms weighs more than the old
combination of atoms. Even though they are the same atoms. This
may seem strange, but it is the way the universe actually works.
If you've got a reference that says, for example, that the mass
of a hydrogen atom is 1.674E-27 kilograms, that's true, but the
fine print is, that's *only* the mass of a hydrogen atom that is
standing absolutely still and absolutely alone. If it is moving,
if it is close enough to another atom to feel its electric or
magnetic field, certainly if it is actually passing an electron
back and forth with another atom, its mass will be slightly
different than 1.675E-27 kilograms.
Exactly how different, depends on how it is moving, where and in
what sort of fields it is situated, etc. But if you take six
carbon dioxide and six water molecules and weigh them, feed them
to a plant and have it make one glucose and six oxygen molecules,
and then very precisely weigh the glucose and oxygen, the glucose
and oxygen will weigh about 6E-32 grams more than did the water
and carbon dioxide. Even though it's the exact same atoms.
And this is no different than the way nuclear energy works. As
you know, if you take an atom of Uranium and fission it, you
convert part of its mass to energy. But, the atom of plutonium
had 92 protons, 143 neutrons, and 92 electrons. What's left over
from the fission, is (typically) an atom of Xenon with 54 protons,
84 neutrons, and 54 electrons, an atom of Strontium with 38 protons,
57 neutrons, and 38 electrons, and two stray neutrons. Add it all
up, and you get 92 protons, 143 neutrons, and 92 electrons. Exact
same collection of subatomic particles. But, arranged differently,
which means the mass has decreased by about 4E-25 grams.
I'll skip the example for fusion, but the same principle applies.
Whether it's chemistry or nuclear physics, you start with a bunch
of particles with mass X, rearrange them without adding or taking
away any, and find that the mass of the exact same collection of
particles is Not X.
>This energy is released when the carbon is again "burned" into
>CO2.
Right. And the "extra" 6E-32 grams of mass in each of your glucose
molecules, is gone away now that their atoms have been rearranged
to make water and carbon dioxide molecules.
If you can grok that this happens when you rearrange protons and
neutrons inside an atom to generate nuclear energy, you should be
able to accept that it happens when you rearrange atoms inside a
molecule to generate chemical energy. But whether you accept it
or not, it *does* happen. That's how the universe works.
--
*John Schilling * "Anything worth doing, *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * is worth doing for money" *
*Chief Scientist & General Partner * -13th Rule of Acquisition *
*White Elephant Research, LLC * "There is no substitute *
*schi...@spock.usc.edu * for success" *
*661-718-0955 or 661-275-6795 * -58th Rule of Acquisition *
Tim Bruening
Citizen Bob Actual
<tsbr...@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>We only convert a very tiny part of the food's mass into energy. Hannah
>would have had to convert all the mass of the people she absorbed into
>energy to keep from greatly increasing her weight. I doubt that her intestines
>or her plumbing system could have handled her defecating all that mass out!
She came from an alternative reality and likely is still connected to
it. The excess energy ended up there, possibly to maintain the bridge
between the two realities.
--
Ban Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO)!
Primary Cause of Global Warming!
The DHMO Institute
Houston, Texas
Tim Bruening
Barry Margolin wrote:
> In article <45v319F...@individual.net>,
> "Robert J. Kolker" <now...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> > Bob wrote:
> >
> > >>her at the end of the episode. Where did the mass of her victims go?
> > >
> > >
> > > I assumed it was converted to energy as she absorbed it.
> >
> > Knowing the conversion factor is c^2 she must have lit up the place.
> > Highly implausible. H-bombs wreck atols with less than one percent mass
> > defect.
>
> The food you eat is also converted to energy, but you haven't exploded
> or increased in mass equivalent to the amount you've ingested. I guess
> we have to assume that she has soe way of excreting the excess, like we
> do.
We only convert a very tiny part of the food's mass into energy. Hannah