The bungling of Peter Moylan

[Arindam Banerjee]

On Thursday, 23 February 2023 at 21:52:18 UTC+11, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 21/02/23 02:33, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
>
> > Yes, at the centre of the Earth there is no net force, as matter
> > pulls symmetrically from all sides. so no pressure, so no
> > temperature, so superconducting currents are possible leading to the
> > magentic field we know. Not just for Earth, but the sun and dark
> > stars.
> You still haven't seen the flaw in that argument? Calculation of
> pressure as a function of depth requires only high school calculus.

Yes, provided there is stuff *below* that depth.
At the centre of the Earth there is stuff all around, and none below.
Get that into your head.
Read any good physics book.
The net force at any inside a closed surface is always zero, whether gravity or electrostatics.
That is what classical physics says with suitable maths to back it up.
So at the centre or core, there are many closed surfaces above stretching up to the surface of the Earth or star.
Force from each surface is zero.
Force from all surfaces is zero.
So net force is zero.
Another way to look at it, is that at the core you are pulled from all sides so net force upon you is zero.
No force, no pressure, no temperature except what seeps in from above to convert into the superconducting current at 3 deg K.



> Admittedly it's probably only the more talented high school pupils who
> can work through the entire derivation, but it should be elementary for
> anyone with an engineering degree.

You were a bad student, so you do not remember as I do that the force from gravity INSIDE a closed surface at any point is always zero.
That derivation requires some knowledge of calculas.
Perhaps you may have some inkling about calculas, never found one in Australia who knew much about it.

> Try it some time. You might get a surprise.

You will give me a bigger surprise if you find out exactly where it is found in Resnick and Halliday that the force at any point within a closed surface is zero.
>
> Hint: at the centre of the earth there is indeed no force due to gravity
> - that part cancels out - but there is still a (very large) force due to
> compression of matter.

Rubbish. When force is zero, there is no pressure of any sort. No compression.
Compression happens several kilometers below the Earth's surface. Till the rocks melt. For there is matter below them to force this compression.
As we go towards the core it vanishes to zero.
Think of a hollow rubber ball. No matter how hard you compress from the outside, nothing of that force will reach the centre for it will be distributed all around

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
>
> --
> Peter Moylan Newcastle, NSW http://www.pmoylan.org

[Anton Shepelev]

I reply to message by Arindam Banerjee titled:

The bungling of Peter Moylan

I ask you to abstain from mentioning posters' names in the
subject, especially in a negative or challenging manner,
because it is considered not only impolite but insulting.
The rare exception is a `ping' message for someone who has
not posted for a long while. Who you like to find a thread
named "The debunking of Arindam Banerjee" ?

--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments

[Arindam Banerjee]

On Thursday, 23 February 2023 at 23:25:34 UTC+5:30, Anton Shepelev wrote:
> I reply to message by Arindam Banerjee titled:
>
> The bungling of Peter Moylan
>
> I ask you to abstain from mentioning posters' names in the
> subject, especially in a negative or challenging manner,
> because it is considered not only impolite but insulting.

Who the hell are you but yet another bloated Einstianian bungler? You have no authority here, this is an unmoderated newsgroup. Pointing out important bungles made by authority figures is for the public interest.
I give people who attack me exactly what they deserve.
Moylan has been sniping at me for decades, like all the other devils here.
I am pointing out how ridiculous his bunglings are.
And of all those who support his wrong ideas about the nature of the core of the Earth.

> The rare exception is a `ping' message for someone who has
> not posted for a long while. Who you like to find a thread
> named "The debunking of Arindam Banerjee" ?

Fool, they have been trying to do that for decades, the devils.
Their agent Archie in sci.physics tries to get the whole of the physics academics to harass me somehow.
All they can manage is denial and abuse, mixed with irrelevancies. All devilish, nothing scientific. Unless we consider crazed gibberish in math garb to be science, but even that fails to debunk me!

[Hibou]

Le 23/02/2023 à 11:31, Arindam Banerjee a écrit :
> On Thursday, 23 February 2023 at 21:52:18 UTC+11, Peter Moylan wrote:
>> On 21/02/23 02:33, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, at the centre of the Earth there is no net force, as matter
>>> pulls symmetrically from all sides. so no pressure, so no
>>> temperature, so superconducting currents are possible leading to the
>>> magentic field we know. Not just for Earth, but the sun and dark
>>> stars.
>>
>> You still haven't seen the flaw in that argument? Calculation of
>> pressure as a function of depth requires only high school calculus.
>
> Yes, provided there is stuff *below* that depth.
> At the centre of the Earth there is stuff all around, and none below.
> Get that into your head.

> Read any good physics book. [...]

Asperity always rings alarm bells.

It's a while since I've thought about this sort of thing, but let me
give it a go, in a hand-waving sort of way.

There is, I suppose, a gravitational centre of the Earth, where all the
gravitational pulls, in all directions from all its components, add up
to nothing. At this point there is no /acceleration/ from this source.

/Pressure/ is /force/ divided by area. The matter that makes up the
Earth is being pulled by gravity towards the gravitational centre, with
forces according to the formula f = ma. The forces act on the matter,
and would accelerate it if it weren't for an equal and opposite push
from the matter beneath. All the gravitational a's point towards the
centre, are smaller near the centre and zero at it; but the forces and
the pressure are cumulative and reach a maximum there. (If you pile
bricks on top of each other, their weight adds up.)

At this point I Google, in search of confirmation, and find that the
pressure at the centre of the Earth is reckoned to be 330 to 360 GPa -
quite a long way from zero.

I think Peter's right. You might want to look into this a bit further
before going back to the rail gun.

[Hibou]

Le 24/02/2023 à 08:40, Stefan Ram a écrit :

> Hibou writes:
>>
>> /Pressure/ is /force/ divided by area.
>

> In equilibrium, this force is zero, as the pressure on the
> surface of a volume element from the elastic matter inside
> of it cancels the pressure from the outside, but one has a
> certain compression of the elastic matter inside as a
> quantity which conveys the specificity of the situation.

I think I'd say, not that the force is zero, but that there are two
equal and opposite forces and pressures. The water presses on the diver,
and the squidgy (elastic) matter the diver is made of presses back.

The diver is stressed (pressed upon) and strained (deformed - not too
much, we hope).

[Peter Moylan]

One way to look at this is to imagine that one is sitting at the centre
and looking in a particular direction. What you see (at least mentally)
is a wedge of matter between you and the surface. What is the weight of
this matter? Weight varies with distance from the centre - as Arindam
correctly said, the upper layers of the Earth do not contribute to the
gravitational force - but it adds up to a lot of weight. Add this up by
all possible wedges, and it adds to a lot of weight sitting on top of
you. That works out to a lot of pressure.

Arindam's mistake was to look only at gravitational force. There are
other forces, and the other ones don't cancel out.

In the movie "Journey to the Centre of the Earth" there is an assumption
that there is a cavity at the centre. If that were so, the net force in
the cavity would indeed be zero. But such a cavity would collapse,
because of the enormous pressure on the matter surrounding it.

[Hibou]

Le 24/02/2023 à 12:14, Peter Moylan a écrit :
>
> One way to look at this is to imagine that one is sitting at the centre
> and looking in a particular direction. What you see (at least mentally)
> is a wedge of matter between you and the surface. What is the weight of
> this matter? Weight varies with distance from the centre - as Arindam
> correctly said, the upper layers of the Earth do not contribute to the
> gravitational force - but it adds up to a lot of weight. Add this up by
> all possible wedges, and it adds to a lot of weight sitting on top of

> you. That works out to a lot of pressure. [...]

Doesn't everything with mass contribute to gravity (F = G * m1 * m2 /
r²)? There is more volume in the upper layers of your wedges, a lot of
mass contributing to gravity, and a lot of weight. The bottom layers
will be denser (iron etc.), but the wedges are narrower there, gravity
self-cancels more and more the deeper one goes, so they contribute less
weight.

This graph assumes uniform density, so isn't quite right:
<https://ux1.eiu.edu/~cfadd/3050/Ch09Gravity/Images/Earth4.gif>

[J. J. Lodder]

I don't know about the movie (there are several) but Jules Verne
in his book never states that the travellers arrived at the centre.
The arrive at a huge subterrenean cavern, with a huge lake/sea in
it.From there it is upwards again.
No indications are given how deep it lies,
but it cannot be at the centre for there is a 'down' direction.

But on usage: a book titled "Journey to the Centre of the Earth"
does not imply that the travellers actually arrive there,
in the course of the narrative.
(both in French and in English)
It indicates the aim they set out with,

Jan

[Anton Shepelev]

Arindam Banerjee:

> Who the hell are you but yet another bloated Einstianian
> bungler?

Insults are the resort of those who have no arguments.

> You have no authority here, this is an unmoderated
> newsgroup.

Nor do you.

> Pointing out important bungles made by authority figures
> is for the public interest.

> [...]

> I give people who attack me exactly what they deserve.

All I see is that you attack everybody who dares to disagree
with you. Since reasoning with irrational people is a waste
of time, I will ostracise you from my conversation until you
repent and mend your evil ways; and I ask other readers to
consider doing the same.

[Peter Moylan]

On 25/02/23 09:06, Anton Shepelev wrote:
> Arindam Banerjee:
>
>> Who the hell are you but yet another bloated Einstianian bungler?
>
> Insults are the resort of those who have no arguments.
>
>> You have no authority here, this is an unmoderated newsgroup.
>
> Nor do you.
>
>> Pointing out important bungles made by authority figures is for the
>> public interest. [...] I give people who attack me exactly what
>> they deserve.
>
> All I see is that you attack everybody who dares to disagree with
> you. Since reasoning with irrational people is a waste of time, I
> will ostracise you from my conversation until you repent and mend
> your evil ways; and I ask other readers to consider doing the same.

I think you'll find that he's already in nearly everyone's killfile. I
only removed him from mine because we haven't had much comedy here lately.

[Peter Moylan]

On 25/02/23 06:03, J. J. Lodder wrote:

> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

>> In the movie "Journey to the Centre of the Earth" there is an
>> assumption that there is a cavity at the centre. If that were so,
>> the net force in the cavity would indeed be zero. But such a cavity
>> would collapse, because of the enormous pressure on the matter
>> surrounding it.
>
> I don't know about the movie (there are several) but Jules Verne in
> his book never states that the travellers arrived at the centre. The
> arrive at a huge subterrenean cavern, with a huge lake/sea in it.From
> there it is upwards again. No indications are given how deep it
> lies, but it cannot be at the centre for there is a 'down'
> direction.
>
> But on usage: a book titled "Journey to the Centre of the Earth" does
> not imply that the travellers actually arrive there, in the course of
> the narrative. (both in French and in English) It indicates the aim
> they set out with,

Yes, good point. I'll have to re-read the book to see what he actually
said. I recall that they built a raft and crossed the lake, but I can't
recall what they did between then and when they blown upwards by the
volcano.

The reason I didn't specify which movie is that I don't know how to tell
them apart. The one I saw did have one hilarious feature: after a lot of
walking in a way that suggested they had normal weight, they walked into
a cavern and were suddenly floated up into the air. That's how they knew
they had reached the centre.

[Arindam Banerjee]

On Saturday, 25 February 2023 at 03:36:52 UTC+5:30, Anton Shepelev wrote:
> Arindam Banerjee:
> > Who the hell are you but yet another bloated Einstianian
> > bungler?
> Insults are the resort of those who have no arguments.

I talk about facts. Thin skinned cry babies can weep elsewhere.

> > You have no authority here, this is an unmoderated
> > newsgroup.
> Nor do you.

I don't try to shut up others.

> > Pointing out important bungles made by authority figures
> > is for the public interest.

So I do it. I was brought up by Jesuits, Communists and Aryas to be brave, noble, altristic, brilliant, supreme, and show that by upholding the highest public interests. In this case I am exposing the disastrous misdirections by esteemed and ridiculous Einsteinian nincompoops. That is necessary to clear the ground for better science and technology.

> > [...]
> > I give people who attack me exactly what they deserve.
> All I see is that you attack everybody who dares to disagree
> with you. Since reasoning with irrational people is a waste
> of time, I will ostracise you from my conversation until you
> repent and mend your evil ways; and I ask other readers to
> consider doing the same.

Fool, I do not care to attack anyone,not worth it. I attack wrong and bad ideas, and those who champion them.
This is an unmoderated newsgroup, fool, not a classroom or sitting room. People can write as they please so long as they keep to usenet guidelines relating to originality and multiple posting or spam. I strictly follow the usenet guidelines for parliamentary discourse. Which means, attacking the follies and bunglings of public figures held in esteem. That is how democracy works. Usenet is the last bastion of free speech.
Those from slave nations conditioned to agree or else may not understand, so make fools of themselves as you do here.

Failing miserably to see the bungle I pointed out in the MMI experiment, you instead talk about irrelevant matters. Miserable indecent impudent moral and mental coward, stupid slave-minded wretch, fuck off.

[Sam Plusnet]

On 24-Feb-23 12:14, Peter Moylan wrote:

> In the movie "Journey to the Centre of the Earth" there is an assumption
> that there is a cavity at the centre. If that were so, the net force in
> the cavity would indeed be zero. But such a cavity would collapse,
> because of the enormous pressure on the matter surrounding it.

I suppose "Journey towards the Centre of the Earth" didn't convey the
same level of excitement.

--
Sam Plusnet

[Arindam Banerjee]

Here the lunacy of the esteemed and ridiculous schizophrenic Einsteinian mind is shown in full grandeur. There is no force, but there is compression! Now, compression is pressure, just another word. And pressure is force divided by area, so force has to be there wherever there is pressure.. What the prof is saying is that there is no force there, but hey there is force. Crazy, but that is exactly what the physics of the past 100 years is all about. A desperate attempt to uphold the Jewish metaphysics.

>
> Rubbish. When force is zero, there is no pressure of any sort. No compression.
> Compression happens several kilometers below the Earth's surface. Till the rocks melt. For there is matter below them to force this compression.
> As we go towards the core it vanishes to zero.
> Think of a hollow rubber ball. No matter how hard you compress from the outside, nothing of that force will reach the centre for it will be distributed all around

So the core of the Earth may well have holes in it.

[Arindam Banerjee]

You are not funny Moylan as such, but an object of fun and relaxation for me.
I do not post here to hear the praise from the sheepish and the foolish.
I post here to show up their moral and mental shortcomings.
For public interest and knowledge, for a better future.

[Arindam Banerjee]

How mysterious are they! They do not exist. The only force is electrostatic and with movement, electromagnetic. All is charge, in the infinite universe.

> >
> > In the movie "Journey to the Centre of the Earth" there is an assumption
> > that there is a cavity at the centre. If that were so, the net force in
> > the cavity would indeed be zero.

Ah, that was the time when Jewish physics was not dominant, Lodder.

[Dingbat]

What is hilarious about it? At the centre of a perfectly spherical earth with
evenly distributed mass which approximation Jules Verne may be excused
for, they'd be weightless since they'd have equal amounts of earth mass
pulling in all directions. They'd have been walking in a way that suggested
they had weight; it's not always easy to tell how much weight they had.
Jules Verne doesn't address temperature and pressure because he had no
way to know that the centre is liquid and at an uninhabitable temperature,
so he may also be excused for assuming a habitable temperature and a
solid centre. A cavern at the centre to suit his plot is a product of artistic
license, setting aside the vexing issue of how water in a cavern in which
there is no gravity can form a lake.

[Anton Shepelev]

Hello, Peter Moylan.

On 25/02/2023 04:19 you wrote:

>> All I see is that you attack everybody who dares to disagree with
>> you. Since reasoning with irrational people is a waste of time, I
>> will ostracise you from my conversation until you repent and mend
>> your evil ways; and I ask other readers to consider doing the same.
> I think you'll find that he's already in nearly everyone's killfile.
> I only removed him from mine because we haven't had much comedy here
> lately.

A rather bad comedy, at that, and we had better not encoutage it, to
help him cure his megalomania.

--
Testing HotdogEd for Android

[Peter Moylan]

There are times, though, when I suspect that we are being set up for a
gigantic joke, when it is finally revealed that he never actually
believed in the dodgy physics he is promoting.

[Arindam Banerjee]

The ideal of tectonic plates was not current in Verne's time, it was propounded by Wegener later
Verne thought that there were lava pools which erupted in volcanic form, so an extinct volcano would bypass them and lead to the centre of the Earth which of course could be hollow. Now we know that there are seas of lava upon which the continents float. What is yet to be internalised is that below these oceans of magma or hot rock, there are thouands of kilometers of thermal insulation at decreasing pressures and temperatures till we reach a very cold core.

There could well be life forms in the regions between the magma oceans and the cold core, which fortunately even the most rapacious capitalist cannot harm. If I had a mind to write fiction, I would write about their lives and societies.

Doyle in one of his science fiction stories had it that the Earth was a huge animal.

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee

[Arindam Banerjee]

Fuck off, then, toxic toad.

[Arindam Banerjee]

Nothing dodgy about my physics, learned fool. Keep on so hoping and keep on bullshitting as long as Jews & Protestants rule the world of physics.
Up Jesuit physics! Down Jewish physics!
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee

[Kerr-Mudd, John]

On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 17:45:30 -0800 (PST)
Arindam Banerjee <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Saturday, 25 February 2023 at 03:36:52 UTC+5:30, Anton Shepelev wrote:
> > Arindam Banerjee:
> > > Who the hell are you but yet another bloated Einstianian
> > > bungler?
> > Insults are the resort of those who have no arguments.

[]

> Fool, I do not care to attack anyone,not worth it. I attack wrong and bad ideas, and those who champion them.

[]

> Failing miserably to see the bungle I pointed out in the MMI experiment, you instead talk about irrelevant matters. Miserable indecent impudent moral and mental coward, stupid slave-minded wretch, fuck off.

Oh dear.

Ok I think that's it. There never was going to be any rational expositionn
of this "new" physics, I was naive. May your genius be confined to ravings
in a killfile - clearly sci.physics had enough of you years ago.

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

[Anton Shepelev]

Hello, Peter Moylan.

On 25/02/2023 13:07 you wrote:

>> A rather bad comedy, at that, and we had better not encoutage it,
>> to help him cure his megalomania.
> There are times, though, when I suspect that we are being set up for
> a gigantic joke, when it is finally revealed that he never actually
> believed in the dodgy physics he is promoting.

His mental problem prevents him from effecting a joke about physics,
which requires iventiveness, rationality, and at least a basic
understanding of mainstream physics. 'dodgy' is the word: he will not
discuss his "theory" at all.

[J. J. Lodder]

Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

> On 25/02/23 06:03, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> In the movie "Journey to the Centre of the Earth" there is an
> >> assumption that there is a cavity at the centre. If that were so,
> >> the net force in the cavity would indeed be zero. But such a cavity
> >> would collapse, because of the enormous pressure on the matter
> >> surrounding it.
> >
> > I don't know about the movie (there are several) but Jules Verne in
> > his book never states that the travellers arrived at the centre. The
> > arrive at a huge subterrenean cavern, with a huge lake/sea in it.From
> > there it is upwards again. No indications are given how deep it
> > lies, but it cannot be at the centre for there is a 'down'
> > direction.
> >
> > But on usage: a book titled "Journey to the Centre of the Earth" does
> > not imply that the travellers actually arrive there, in the course of
> > the narrative. (both in French and in English) It indicates the aim
> > they set out with,
>
> Yes, good point. I'll have to re-read the book to see what he actually
> said. I recall that they built a raft and crossed the lake, but I can't
> recall what they did between then and when they blown upwards by the
> volcano.

One should remember that Jules Verne wrote in a time
in which the underground caverns in France
were being discovered and explored.
Those discoveries in speleology were of course widely reported
in the popular press.
The 'Gouffre de Padirac' for example actually has an underground lake
where you can travel by boat.
<https://www.tourisme-lot.com/les-incontournables-du-lot/lieux-d-exception/gouffre-de-padirac>
(but Verne did not know about that one when he wrote)
There must be other ones.

Jules Verne set the precedent for what many later SF authors would do:
start with what the readers have heard about, and exaggerate it,
Just a little bit of course.

> The reason I didn't specify which movie is that I don't know how to tell
> them apart. The one I saw did have one hilarious feature: after a lot of
> walking in a way that suggested they had normal weight, they walked into
> a cavern and were suddenly floated up into the air. That's how they knew
> they had reached the centre.

I would have to reread too,
but I would be surprised to find this in the original Verne.
BTW, you can see from his 'Voyage vers la Lune' that Verne
did not understand gravity and weightlesness completely,

Jan

[Arindam Banerjee]

Liar.

[Arindam Banerjee]

Liar

>
> --
> Bah, and indeed Humbug.

Just another liar.

[Peter T. Daniels]

I don't think I've seen any of the movies, but I read _some_ book in
which the adventurers reached the center of the earth because they
were sucked into The Maelström, which seemed to be one specific
enormous whirlpool somewhere in the North Atlantic where it could
acquire its Scandinavian-looking name. Is that Verne, or someone else?
(It's not Burroughs, surely. John Carter got to Mars by telepathy, or
something.)

[Peter T. Daniels]

Sure it is. We have movies (fifty years old, but movies) of people
walking on the Moon, with 1/6 g gravity, and it doesn't look like
ordinary walking. (How did the fakers fake _that_, conspiratorialists?)

> Jules Verne doesn't address temperature and pressure because he had no
> way to know that the centre is liquid and at an uninhabitable temperature,
> so he may also be excused for assuming a habitable temperature and a
> solid centre. A cavern at the centre to suit his plot is a product of artistic
> license, setting aside the vexing issue of how water in a cavern in which
> there is no gravity can form a lake.

"Liquid"? Do the ordinary states of matter have any meaning under those
conditions of temperature and pressure?

[Peter T. Daniels]

Mammoth Cave, Kentucky, USA, became known to Westerners
at the very end of the 18th century, and within a few decades
was well known.

(Luray Caverns, Virginia, USA, which is claimed to be even bigger,
was "discovered" by Westerners only in 1878.)

[Dingbat]

This says that the inner core is solid (which I hadn't known) and the outer core
is liquid, so people seem to think our states of matter apply:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_outer_core
>
I don't know enough physics to venture to contradict them.

[Dingbat]

Someone else but with the same title Journey to the Center of the Earth,
if this is the plot you're talking about:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0052948/plotsummary/

>
> (It's not Burroughs, surely. John Carter got to Mars by telepathy, or
> something.)
>

John Huntington Carter (if I correctly remember the whole name) is
a character from science fiction by Edgar Rice Burroughs. If you were
saying that and not seeking a response, ignore my comments.

[Peter T. Daniels]

After quite a bit of clicking around in the IMdB entry, I found that
the movie claims to be based on Verne, and not "someone else."

Maybe someone who's read the book fewer than 60 years ago can
say whether it involves The Maelström.

Since John Carter got to Mars by a thoroughly non-realistic method,
it seems safe to assume that Burroughs's explorer got to the center
of the earth -- I think he called it Pellucidar -- in a similarly unlikely
manner.

[J. J. Lodder]

Dingbat <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Saturday, February 25, 2023 at 6:14:25?AM UTC-8, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Saturday, February 25, 2023 at 12:28:03?AM UTC-5, Dingbat wrote:
> > > On Friday, February 24, 2023 at 5:31:30?PM UTC-8, Peter Moylan wrote:
[-]

> > > What is hilarious about it? At the centre of a perfectly spherical
> > > earth with evenly distributed mass which approximation Jules Verne may
> > > be excused for, they'd be weightless since they'd have equal amounts
> > > of earth mass pulling in all directions. They'd have been walking in a
> > > way that suggested they had weight; it's not always easy to tell how
> > > much weight they had.
> > Sure it is. We have movies (fifty years old, but movies) of people
> > walking on the Moon, with 1/6 g gravity, and it doesn't look like
> > ordinary walking. (How did the fakers fake _that_, conspiratorialists?)
> > > Jules Verne doesn't address temperature and pressure because he had no
> > > way to know that the centre is liquid and at an uninhabitable
> > > temperature, so he may also be excused for assuming a habitable
> > > temperature and a solid centre. A cavern at the centre to suit his
> > > plot is a product of artistic license, setting aside the vexing issue
> > > of how water in a cavern in which there is no gravity can form a lake.
> > "Liquid"? Do the ordinary states of matter have any meaning under those
> > conditions of temperature and pressure?
> >
> This says that the inner core is solid (which I hadn't known) and the
> outer core is liquid, so people seem to think our states of matter apply:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_outer_core
> >
> I don't know enough physics to venture to contradict them.

There isn't any reason to.
Actually conditions at the centre of the Earth are quite mild,
as equations of state go,

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

'Looking' indeed. From Dutch. Modern Dutch spelling 'maalstroom'.

> Is that Verne, or someone else?
> (It's not Burroughs, surely. John Carter got to Mars by telepathy, or
> something.)

Off Norway, south of the Lofoten.
First literary use of it in English by Edgar Allen Poe,
'A Descent into the Maelstrom',
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Descent_into_the_Maelström>

Jan

[Peter T. Daniels]

Ah. I probably read that. But it didn't actually take the fellow anywhere,
so I don't know why I would have conflated it with center-of-the-earth
stories.

M-W has the English form without the umlaut, borrowed from Dutch.
Swedish spells it with ö, Norwegian with crossed-o, so it does indeed
look Scandinavian.

[J. J. Lodder]

Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

The Maelstrom features in Jules Verne's 20 000 leagues under the Sea.
The Nautilus gets sucked into it.

> M-W has the English form without the umlaut, borrowed from Dutch.
> Swedish spells it with ö, Norwegian with crossed-o, so it does indeed
> look Scandinavian.

Certainly, once those Scandinavians got it.
They put those accents on everything.
However:
<https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/maelstrom>
gives you a the Dutch origin.

I have no idea how Poe learned of its existence,

Jan

[Peter T. Daniels]

I'm pretty sure I didn't read that. I think I got bored after a few chapters

> > M-W has the English form without the umlaut, borrowed from Dutch.
> > Swedish spells it with ö, Norwegian with crossed-o, so it does indeed
> > look Scandinavian.
>
> Certainly, once those Scandinavians got it.
> They put those accents on everything.
> However:
> <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/maelstrom>
> gives you a the Dutch origin.
>
> I have no idea how Poe learned of its existence,

It's described as "off the cost of Norway,." not as "off the coast
of the Lowlands," so it's not unexpected that he encountered it
in a description of Scandinavian sailing or whaling.

[Peter Moylan]

Etymonline suggests (citing the OED) that it could originally be from
Færoic mal(u)streymur; but it does also say that Danish later got it
from Dutch.

[David Kleinecke]

On Saturday, February 25, 2023 at 4:12:38 PM UTC-8, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 26/02/23 04:41, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Saturday, February 25, 2023 at 12:24:35 PM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder
> > wrote:
>
> >> Off Norway, south of the Lofoten. First literary use of it in
> >> English by Edgar Allen Poe, 'A Descent into the Maelstrom',
> >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Descent_into_the_Maelström>

I can't resist pointing to the "Dorothy and the Wizard in Oz" for underground civilization and to Ludvig Holberg for a complete voyage. Lucian of Samostata went to some weird places but I fear belief in a spherical earth was not yet firm enough for a trip inside.

[Arindam Banerjee]

Considering the thousands of kilometers of thermal insulation by solid rock, below the magma layers, it is extremely cold at around 3 deg K, contributing to the cosmic background radiation from its large black body. Ditto for all the stars.

>
> Jan

[Arindam Banerjee]

Quoting from wiki about the development of plate tectonics:
"The development of the theory of Plate Tectonics was the scientific and cultural change which occurred during a period of 50 years of scientific debate. The event of the acceptance itself was a paradigm shift and can therefore be classified as a scientific revolution.[44] Around the start of the twentieth century, various theorists unsuccessfully attempted to explain the many geographical, geological, and biological continuities between continents. In 1912 the meteorologist Alfred Wegener described what he called continental drift, an idea that culminated fifty years later in the modern theory of plate tectonics.[45]"

So it took 50 years for them to accept the revolutionary notion of plate tectonics from Alfred Wegener.
Let us see if the Jewish physicists can block my revolutionary physics for that long.
Que sera, sera. We will see what we shall see.

[Peter Moylan]

On 26/02/23 12:28, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

> Considering the thousands of kilometers of thermal insulation by
> solid rock, below the magma layers, it is extremely cold at around 3
> deg K, contributing to the cosmic background radiation from its large
> black body. Ditto for all the stars.

Now and then we hear of mental crises that occur when a student
encounters differences that cannot be reconciled. Typically this is a
conflict between religion and science, as for example when a creationist
is studying geology, but there are other possibilities.

As a student, how did you cope with subjects like mathematics and
physics, where there must have been many conflicts between what was
taught and what you believe?

[Arindam Banerjee]

On Sunday, 26 February 2023 at 07:42:23 UTC+5:30, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 26/02/23 12:28, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
>
> > Considering the thousands of kilometers of thermal insulation by
> > solid rock, below the magma layers, it is extremely cold at around 3
> > deg K, contributing to the cosmic background radiation from its large
> > black body. Ditto for all the stars.
> Now and then we hear of mental crises that occur when a student
> encounters differences that cannot be reconciled. Typically this is a
> conflict between religion and science, as for example when a creationist
> is studying geology, but there are other possibilities.

Fortunately I am Arya, so did not have to believe creationism in the church and evolution in the school. Thus, I am free from indoctrinated schizophrenia.

>
> As a student, how did you cope with subjects like mathematics and
> physics, where there must have been many conflicts between what was
> taught and what you believe?

When I found that the staff at RMIT were let us say too political and expected me to lie about my research in order to get my PhD, I left RMIT, never to return.
That is how I coped.
For my M.Tech work at IITD on googling, very original,not that it was known as such then, I got a B but I passed. Some old profs were furious. But my guide fought for me. Later, my M. Tech work was published at a conference in US and must have made an impact, in 1987. Got a nice fat job in TRL, not long after that, which accounts for my present well being.

True I did not get my PhD, and no glittering as tinfoil career after that, but at least I do NOT lead the life of a liar and fraud.
One has to pay for one's principles.
Dedicating all work to God means letting God decide what is best for you.
I have gained immeasrably from this Jesuit approach.
AMDG.
And God woll provide, in God's own time, and God's own ways.
Not that this will work for the fancypants atheists like you, Moylan.

[Arindam Banerjee]

23 years have passed since I replaced e=mcc with e=0.5mvvN(N-k)

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Den 25.02.2023 kl. 11.07 skrev Peter Moylan:

> There are times, though, when I suspect that we are being set up for a
> gigantic joke, when it is finally revealed that he never actually
> believed in the dodgy physics he is promoting.

A Danish troll who was active in the Danish Fidonet, was able to attract
something like 75 % of the attention in the admin group, and a lot of
attention in every group where he was active. It took years before he
finally was exposed. He had run the whole show deliberately.

--
Bertel, Denmark

[Peter Moylan]

I was thinking more of the undergraduate subjects, where exercises and
assignments to show that you can apply what you've learnt are
unavoidable. I'll concede that relativity can be glossed over at that
level, on the grounds that it is such a small part of a typical EE
degree. (As I recall it, we went all the way from the starting point to
the derivation of E=mc^2 in only a couple of lectures.) Basic mechanics
is another matter. To solve a typical assignment problem in statics or
dynamics you must at least be able to pretend to believe that Newton's
laws are correct, or you'll get nowhere with the calculation.

Or did your disbelief in Newton's laws come only later?

> True I did not get my PhD, and no glittering as tinfoil career after
> that, but at least I do NOT lead the life of a liar and fraud. One
> has to pay for one's principles. Dedicating all work to God means
> letting God decide what is best for you. I have gained immeasrably
> from this Jesuit approach. AMDG. And God woll provide, in God's own
> time, and God's own ways. Not that this will work for the fancypants
> atheists like you, Moylan.

I too have gained from my education, and it has worked for me. Most of
the regulars in this newsgroup can probably say the same. Following the
god of the Jews can be risky; it might lead you to Jewish physics.

[Arindam Banerjee]

How many there know that the meaning of lund in Hindi is penis?

[Arindam Banerjee]

I always found the "derivation" shonky and unscientific, being based upon crazy postulates; it was never formally taught to us as our teachers did not want confusion in class for we in IITKgP were a feisty lot and gave the quantum mechanics prof hell;and the MMI stuff was always dodgy, even when I was in high school, but it was only in 2005 that the bungle about analysis of the results became clear to me.

Basic mechanics
> is another matter. To solve a typical assignment problem in statics or
> dynamics you must at least be able to pretend to believe that Newton's
> laws are correct, or you'll get nowhere with the calculation.

True. But they do not explain many things about the universe, like the creation and destruction of energy, and the violation of inertia from my experiments. Which is obvious to all except academics.
So for scientific advancement the laws have to be revised, and I did thst.

>
> Or did your disbelief in Newton's laws come only later?

I do not disbelieve Newton's laws. I adore them just as much as I despise Jewish physics. So I update Newton and reject Einstein.

> > True I did not get my PhD, and no glittering as tinfoil career after
> > that, but at least I do NOT lead the life of a liar and fraud. One
> > has to pay for one's principles. Dedicating all work to God means
> > letting God decide what is best for you. I have gained immeasrably
> > from this Jesuit approach. AMDG. And God woll provide, in God's own
> > time, and God's own ways. Not that this will work for the fancypants
> > atheists like you, Moylan.
> I too have gained from my education, and it has worked for me. Most of
> the regulars in this newsgroup can probably say the same. Following the
> god of the Jews can be risky; it might lead you to Jewish physics.

It may also lead to floods and other ills for the Jews, for Jehovah gets ill-tempered when his chosen ones behave badly.
I am on great terms with all the Gods and Goddesses, including Jehovah. For me God or Good is a short way to say prajapatirhishi.

[Sam Plusnet]

I wonder if Flat-Earthers write fiction in which someone tunnels down to
the other face of the flat earth (assuming it has one)?

How would gravity operate there (given flat earth assumptions)?

For that matter, how far down would one have to dig?

Do we have a Flat Earth correspondent in aue?


--
Sam Plusnet

[Jerry Friedman]

No Discworlder ever tunneled down to the turtle?

--
Jerry Friedman

[J. J. Lodder]

Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

> On Saturday, February 25, 2023 at 2:51:02?PM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > On Saturday, February 25, 2023 at 12:24:35?PM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

[-]

Do you really believe that those Lowlanders were limited to coastal
sailing?
And fyi, most of the whaling was done by those 'Lowlanders' too,

Jan

[Sam Plusnet]

That is indeed a good point.
All you have to do, is go out to the Rim and look down.
Which no Flat-Earther has ever bothered to do.

--
Sam Plusnet

[J. J. Lodder]

Sam Plusnet <n...@home.com> wrote:

> On 26-Feb-23 19:19, Jerry Friedman wrote:

> > On Sunday, February 26, 2023 at 11:47:41?AM UTC-7, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> >> On 26-Feb-23 0:50, David Kleinecke wrote:

> >>> On Saturday, February 25, 2023 at 4:12:38?PM UTC-8, Peter Moylan wrote:
> >>>> On 26/02/23 04:41, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> >>>>> On Saturday, February 25, 2023 at 12:24:35?PM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder

> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Off Norway, south of the Lofoten. First literary use of it in
> >>>>>> English by Edgar Allen Poe, 'A Descent into the Maelstrom',
> >>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Descent_into_the_Maelström>
> >>>
> >>> I can't resist pointing to the "Dorothy and the Wizard in Oz" for
> >>>underground civilization and to Ludvig Holberg for a complete voyage.
> >>>Lucian of Samostata went to some weird places but I fear belief in a
> >>>spherical earth was not yet firm enough for a trip inside
> >> I wonder if Flat-Earthers write fiction in which someone tunnels down to
> >> the other face of the flat earth (assuming it has one)?
> >>
> >> How would gravity operate there (given flat earth assumptions)?
> >>
> >> For that matter, how far down would one have to dig?
> >>
> >> Do we have a Flat Earth correspondent in aue?
> >
> > No Discworlder ever tunneled down to the turtle?
> >
> That is indeed a good point.
> All you have to do, is go out to the Rim and look down.
> Which no Flat-Earther has ever bothered to do.

Don't you know that there is a large and secret UN police there
who shoot everyone trying to on sight?

Jan
(honest, not my invention)

[Peter Moylan]

On 27/02/23 12:20, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> On 26-Feb-23 19:19, Jerry Friedman wrote:
>> On Sunday, February 26, 2023 at 11:47:41 AM UTC-7, Sam Plusnet
>> wrote:

>>> I wonder if Flat-Earthers write fiction in which someone tunnels
>>> down to the other face of the flat earth (assuming it has one)?
>>>
>>> How would gravity operate there (given flat earth assumptions)?
>>>
>>> For that matter, how far down would one have to dig?
>>>
>>> Do we have a Flat Earth correspondent in aue?
>>
>> No Discworlder ever tunneled down to the turtle?

No tunnelling that I know of, but I believe that Discworlders have
lowered people over the edge on ropes to see the details of what was
down there. As I recall it - but it's a distant memory - they needed to
know the sex of the turtle to settle some theological point.

> That is indeed a good point. All you have to do, is go out to the
> Rim and look down. Which no Flat-Earther has ever bothered to do.

Is there any agreement among flat-earthers about the location of the rim?

I saw a claim a couple of years ago, probably on Facebook, that
Australia doesn't exist, and that stories about it are faked. I almost
replied, but then realised that any words of mine would be taken to be
part of the hoax.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Yes. There is a theory popular in Germany that the city of Bielefeld
doesn't exist. I said in another group that I had been there, and
someone said that just proved I was part of the conspiracy.


--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 36 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

[Peter T. Daniels]

What's that got to do with whose territory the thing is closest to?
Or what Poe was reading?

> And fyi, most of the whaling was done by those 'Lowlanders' too,

Right, *Moby-Dick* is full of Dutchies. The main non-English
language od New Bedford is -- Portuguese.

[Adam Funk]

On 2023-02-27, Peter Moylan wrote:

> On 27/02/23 12:20, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>> On 26-Feb-23 19:19, Jerry Friedman wrote:
>>> On Sunday, February 26, 2023 at 11:47:41 AM UTC-7, Sam Plusnet
>>> wrote:
>
>>>> I wonder if Flat-Earthers write fiction in which someone tunnels
>>>> down to the other face of the flat earth (assuming it has one)?
>>>>
>>>> How would gravity operate there (given flat earth assumptions)?
>>>>
>>>> For that matter, how far down would one have to dig?
>>>>
>>>> Do we have a Flat Earth correspondent in aue?
>>>
>>> No Discworlder ever tunneled down to the turtle?
>
> No tunnelling that I know of, but I believe that Discworlders have
> lowered people over the edge on ropes to see the details of what was
> down there. As I recall it - but it's a distant memory - they needed to
> know the sex of the turtle to settle some theological point.

Yes, there's a space capsule launch at the end of the first book but
it goes wrong; fortunately some magic happens at the beginning of the
next one to save the main characters.

>
>> That is indeed a good point. All you have to do, is go out to the
>> Rim and look down. Which no Flat-Earther has ever bothered to do.
>
> Is there any agreement among flat-earthers about the location of the rim?
>
> I saw a claim a couple of years ago, probably on Facebook, that
> Australia doesn't exist, and that stories about it are faked. I almost
> replied, but then realised that any words of mine would be taken to be
> part of the hoax.
>


--

It is probable that television drama of high caliber and produced by
first-rate artists will materially raise the level of dramatic taste
of the nation. ---David Sarnoff, CEO of RCA, 1939; in Stoll 1995

[J. J. Lodder]

Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

> On 27/02/23 12:20, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> > On 26-Feb-23 19:19, Jerry Friedman wrote:

> >> On Sunday, February 26, 2023 at 11:47:41?AM UTC-7, Sam Plusnet

> >> wrote:
>
> >>> I wonder if Flat-Earthers write fiction in which someone tunnels
> >>> down to the other face of the flat earth (assuming it has one)?
> >>>
> >>> How would gravity operate there (given flat earth assumptions)?
> >>>
> >>> For that matter, how far down would one have to dig?
> >>>
> >>> Do we have a Flat Earth correspondent in aue?
> >>
> >> No Discworlder ever tunneled down to the turtle?
>
> No tunnelling that I know of, but I believe that Discworlders have
> lowered people over the edge on ropes to see the details of what was
> down there. As I recall it - but it's a distant memory - they needed to
> know the sex of the turtle to settle some theological point.
>
> > That is indeed a good point. All you have to do, is go out to the
> > Rim and look down. Which no Flat-Earther has ever bothered to do.
>
> Is there any agreement among flat-earthers about the location of the rim?

There is nothing the Flat-Earthers agree on, among themselves.
However, by far the most common idea is that Antarctica is the rim,
and that the ice prevents the oceans from flowing off.

> I saw a claim a couple of years ago, probably on Facebook, that
> Australia doesn't exist, and that stories about it are faked. I almost
> replied, but then realised that any words of mine would be taken to be
> part of the hoax.

Yes, those cross-Antarctic flights were a hoax too,

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

> On Sunday, February 26, 2023 at 5:31:41?PM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > On Saturday, February 25, 2023 at 2:51:02?PM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

> > > > > On Saturday, February 25, 2023 at 12:24:35?PM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder:

So that's where Poe learned about the Maelstrom?
Don't you see that you are being driven to being ridiculous
by your anti-everything-Dutch mania?
And why bother me with your new-fangled 19th century provincialisms?

FYI, 'Spitsbergen', (the original name meaning 'spire mountains')
Norwegian 'Svalbard', was discovered by a Dutch expedition
under Willem Barentsz in 1596. (yes, that's 16th century)

The Dutch also set up the first large scale whaling station there.
(Smeerenburg, E. equivalent Smearsburg, in 1611)
Their 'Noordse Compagnie' (Nordic Company) was set up
for whaling and trading along the way.
Whaling stopped in the 18th, because there were not enough whales left.

Anyone who sails north along the Norwegian coast
will discover the Lofoten, and the very dangerous tidal currents
around those islands.
The gyrating current behind the Lofoten was was named '(de) Maalstroom'
by the Dutch, and the Norwegians and the rest took over the name.

Jan

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

He thinks you have an anti-everything-USA mania. Nonsense, of course.

> And why bother me with your new-fangled 19th century provincialisms?
>
> FYI, 'Spitsbergen', (the original name meaning 'spire mountains')
> Norwegian 'Svalbard', was discovered by a Dutch expedition
> under Willem Barentsz in 1596. (yes, that's 16th century)
>
> The Dutch also set up the first large scale whaling station there.
> (Smeerenburg, E. equivalent Smearsburg, in 1611)
> Their 'Noordse Compagnie' (Nordic Company) was set up
> for whaling and trading along the way.
> Whaling stopped in the 18th, because there were not enough whales left.
>
> Anyone who sails north along the Norwegian coast
> will discover the Lofoten, and the very dangerous tidal currents
> around those islands.
> The gyrating current behind the Lofoten was was named '(de) Maalstroom'
> by the Dutch, and the Norwegians and the rest took over the name.
>
> Jan
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Peter T. Daniels]

The Maelström

Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you would know, or at least look up, that
New Bedford, the main center of American whaling, is in Massachusetts
and not near Richmond, Philadelphia, New York, or Baltimore.

> Don't you see that you are being driven to being ridiculous
> by your anti-everything-Dutch mania?

The only evidence I have for Dutch whaling -- or for most of the
things you claim I am "anti" -- is your unsubstantiated remark
above and similar assertions. I cannot be "anti" something I've
never heard of. What I'm "anti" is your astonishing chauvinism.

> And why bother me with your new-fangled 19th century provincialisms?

If you cite a literary work, you use the author's spellings.

> FYI, 'Spitsbergen', (the original name meaning 'spire mountains')
> Norwegian 'Svalbard', was discovered by a Dutch expedition
> under Willem Barentsz in 1596. (yes, that's 16th century)

And that has something to do with Poe's knowledge of The Maelström?

> The Dutch also set up the first large scale whaling station there.
> (Smeerenburg, E. equivalent Smearsburg, in 1611)
> Their 'Noordse Compagnie' (Nordic Company) was set up
> for whaling and trading along the way.
> Whaling stopped in the 18th, because there were not enough whales left.

Curious. The US whaling industry lasted late into the 19th century.

> Anyone who sails north along the Norwegian coast
> will discover the Lofoten, and the very dangerous tidal currents
> around those islands.

At least you admit that it's not in Dutch territory and there's no
reason to use a Dutch name for it.

You should be grateful that so many Dutch names survive in
New York City even though they were here for a mere 40 years.

> The gyrating current behind the Lofoten was was named '(de) Maalstroom'
> by the Dutch, and the Norwegians and the rest took over the name.

Um, so what? This seems to be a variant of the Etymological Fallacy.

Incidentally, M-W says the one-o spelling is what we got from Dutch.
Your newfangled double-o spelling looks a bit silly.

[Peter T. Daniels]

> >> language of New Bedford is -- Portuguese.

> > So that's where Poe learned about the Maelstrom?
> > Don't you see that you are being driven to being ridiculous
> > by your anti-everything-Dutch mania?
>
> He thinks you have an anti-everything-USA mania. Nonsense, of course.

Of course. This poster from time to time points out your anti-everything-
Britain mania as well.

[J. J. Lodder]

Yes, and even if that were true it would be silly of him
to think that he must mirror it.

And more feed:
The Lofoten by shape form a 'fuik', like a kind of fishing net.
Easily moved into, hard or even impossible to get out again.
This 'fuik' is another Dutch word taken over into English,
as 'fyke'. (not to be confused with 'fyke' as an old form of 'fig')

In Dutch a 'fuik' can also be used figuratively,

Jan



> > And why bother me with your new-fangled 19th centuryw provincialisms?
> >
> > FYI, 'Spitsbergen', (the original name wmeaning 'spire mountains')

[Sam Plusnet]

I suppose there was another repressive secret force who did that job
before 1945.

Sorry, that was foolish of me.
The UN has existed, in secret, for eons before it decided to go public
in 1945. It's obvious when you think about it.

--
Sam Plusnet

[J. J. Lodder]

Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

Why not claim that I am anti-everything-everything?

Saves some work without becoming more content-free,

Jan

[Sam Plusnet]

A poster some years back, in another group, was born and raised there -
but of course that cannot be true.

--
Sam Plusnet

[TonyCooper]

I have never seen you make a critical comment about Korfball, although
you don't seen to hold the Belgium Diamonds in high regard.



--

Tony Cooper - Orlando,Florida

[J. J. Lodder]

They were not really needed, earlier.
Except for some fakers like Amundsen (who really walked along the rim)
no one could get anywhere near the edge before say 1956.

That US base at the south pole is of course a complete fake too,
just like the ISS and the Hubble,

Jan

[Peter T. Daniels]

The Allies styled themselves the United Nations well before the
organization known by that name was chartered in San Francisco.

[Peter Moylan]

On 28/02/23 02:42, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Monday, February 27, 2023 at 9:06:01 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder
> wrote:

>> Whaling stopped in the 18th, because there were not enough whales
>> left.
>
> Curious. The US whaling industry lasted late into the 19th century.

And the Japanese whaling industry lasted late into the 20th century.
That didn't stop protesters saying there there weren't enough whales left.

[David Kleinecke]

A branch of the Templars. Or maybe vice-versa.

[Kerr-Mudd, John]

What puzzles me is that the Big Conspiracy that hushes up the Hollow
Earth, but no-one worries about what's in the Hollow Moon?
[I hardly sleep at all these days]
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

[Anton Shepelev]

Kerr-Mudd, John:

> what's in the Hollow Moon?

Why are the craters on the Moon of the same depth?

--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments

[J. J. Lodder]

Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

> On Monday, February 27, 2023 at 9:06:01?AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > On Sunday, February 26, 2023 at 5:31:41?PM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

> > > > > On Saturday, February 25, 2023 at 2:51:02?PM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder:

> > > > > > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > > > > > On Saturday, February 25, 2023 at 12:24:35?PM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder:
> > > > > > > > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > I don't think I've seen any of the movies, but I read _some_
> > > > > > > > > book in which the adventurers reached the center of the earth
> > > > > > > > > because they were sucked into The Maelström, which seemed to
> > > > > > > > > be one specific enormous whirlpool somewhere in the North
> > > > > > > > > Atlantic where it could acquire its Scandinavian-looking name.
> > > > > > > > 'Looking' indeed. From Dutch. Modern Dutch spelling 'maalstroom'

> > > > > > > > > Is that Verne, or someone else?
> > > > > > > > > (It's not Burroughs, surely. John Carter got to Mars by
> > > > > > > > > telepathy, or something.)
> > > > > > > > Off Norway, south of the Lofoten.
> > > > > > > > First literary use of it in English by Edgar Allen Poe,
> > > > > > > > 'A Descent into the Maelstrom',
> > > > > > > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Descent_into_the_Maelström>
> > > > > > > Ah. I probably read that. But it didn't actually take the fellow
> > > > > > > anywhere, so I don't know why I would have conflated it with
> > > > > > > center-of-the-earth stories.
> > > > > > The Maelstrom features in Jules Verne's 20 000 leagues under the Sea

> > > > > > The Nautilus gets sucked into it.
> > > > > I'm pretty sure I didn't read that. I think I got bored after a few
> > > > > chapters
> > > > > > > M-W has the English form without the umlaut, borrowed from Dutch.
> > > > > > > Swedish spells it with ö, Norwegian with crossed-o, so it does
> > > > > > > indeed look Scandinavian.
> > > > > > Certainly, once those Scandinavians got it.
> > > > > > They put those accents on everything.
> > > > > > However:
> > > > > > <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/maelstrom>
> > > > > > gives you a the Dutch origin.
> > > > > > I have no idea how Poe learned of its existence,
> > > > > It's described as "off the cost of Norway,." not as "off the coast
> > > > > of the Lowlands," so it's not unexpected that he encountered it
> > > > > in a description of Scandinavian sailing or whaling.
> > > > Do you really believe that those Lowlanders were limited to coastal
> > > > sailing?
> > > What's that got to do with whose territory the thing is closest to?
> > > Or what Poe was reading?
> > > > And fyi, most of the whaling was done by those 'Lowlanders' too,
> > > Right, *Moby-Dick* is full of Dutchies. The main non-English
> > > language od New Bedford is -- Portuguese.
> >
> > So that's where Poe learned about the Maelstrom?
>
> The Maelström

Usenet posting should be done in pure ASCII, if at all possible.
It is up to the reader to restore accents, where necessary,
and if desired.

> Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you would know, or at least look up, that
> New Bedford, the main center of American whaling, is in Massachusetts
> and not near Richmond, Philadelphia, New York, or Baltimore.

And what has that got to do with it?

> > Don't you see that you are being driven to being ridiculous
> > by your anti-everything-Dutch mania?
>
> The only evidence I have for Dutch whaling -- or for most of the
> things you claim I am "anti" -- is your unsubstantiated remark
> above and similar assertions. I cannot be "anti" something I've
> never heard of. What I'm "anti" is your astonishing chauvinism.

Yes, it is well known here that you are completely incapable
of using a search engine.

> > And why bother me with your new-fangled 19th century provincialisms?
>
> If you cite a literary work, you use the author's spellings.
>
> > FYI, 'Spitsbergen', (the original name meaning 'spire mountains')
> > Norwegian 'Svalbard', was discovered by a Dutch expedition
> > under Willem Barentsz in 1596. (yes, that's 16th century)
>
> And that has something to do with Poe's knowledge of The Maelström?

We already agreed that Poe's sources are unknown.

> > The Dutch also set up the first large scale whaling station there.
> > (Smeerenburg, E. equivalent Smearsburg, in 1611)
> > Their 'Noordse Compagnie' (Nordic Company) was set up
> > for whaling and trading along the way.
> > Whaling stopped in the 18th, because there were not enough whales left.
>
> Curious. The US whaling industry lasted late into the 19th century.

My god, did it really escape your notice
that captain Achab sailed to -the Antarctic-?
Where do you think that 'South of the Cape of Good Hope' is?

> > Anyone who sails north along the Norwegian coast
> > will discover the Lofoten, and the very dangerous tidal currents
> > around those islands.
>
> At least you admit that it's not in Dutch territory and there's no
> reason to use a Dutch name for it.

Crazy. You really should try to get over this anti-Dutch mania of yours.

> You should be grateful that so many Dutch names survive in
> New York City even though they were here for a mere 40 years.

Crazier. Do you really think that those Dutch left after those 40 years?
All that changed in 1664 was top level policical control.
The rest remained what it was.

> > The gyrating current behind the Lofoten was was named '(de) Maalstroom'
> > by the Dutch, and the Norwegians and the rest took over the name.
>
> Um, so what? This seems to be a variant of the Etymological Fallacy.

Just well known etymology.

> Incidentally, M-W says the one-o spelling is what we got from Dutch.
> Your newfangled double-o spelling looks a bit silly.

Original spellings cannot be silly, they are what they are.
What's next, are you going to claim that the Dutch are silly because
they spell 'yacht' as 'jacht'?

Jan

[Ruud Harmsen]

Tue, 28 Feb 2023 11:37:57 +0100: nos...@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder) scribeva:

>> The Maelström
>
>Usenet posting should be done in pure ASCII, if at all possible.
>It is up to the reader to restore accents, where necessary,
>and if desired.

Nonsense, in 2023. Covered by Mime. No problem at all.
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com

[Hibou]

Le 27/02/2023 à 15:42, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
>
> You should be grateful that so many Dutch names survive in
> New York City even though they were here for a mere 40 years.

Hmm. When colonising a new country, isn't there a shortage of names, and
doesn't one nick them where one can?

'New York', for instance, which does double duty for a city and a state.
(It's true there's York and Yorkshire.)

I understand some of the streets there don't have names at all (si ! si
!), but numbers and compass points. In those circumstances, one is
hardly likely to waste new names by using them to replace existing ones.

[Hibou]

Le 28/02/2023 à 11:27, Ruud Harmsen a écrit :
> J. J. Lodder scribeva:

>>
>> Usenet posting should be done in pure ASCII, if at all possible.
>> It is up to the reader to restore accents, where necessary,
>> and if desired.
>
> Nonsense, in 2023. Covered by Mime. No problem at all.

Oui, vive la /hétérogénéité/ !

(Apparently the word with the most accents in French.)

[J. J. Lodder]

Hibou <vpaereru-u...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:

Most Dutch names were kept, afaik.
The problems arose later.
Some of those Nieuw-Amsterdammers owned huge farms.
(by the New York standards of today)
When these were eventually subdivided no names were at hand.

There are exceptions though. 'Stuyvesant Park' for example
wasn't named thus until mid-19th century,
when it was split off from the Stuyvesant farm,

Jan

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Monday, February 27, 2023 at 7:43:32 PM UTC-5, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 28/02/23 02:42, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Monday, February 27, 2023 at 9:06:01 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder
> > wrote:
>
> >> Whaling stopped in the 18th, because there were not enough whales
> >> left.
> >
> > Curious. The US whaling industry lasted late into the 19th century.
> And the Japanese whaling industry lasted late into the 20th century.
> That didn't stop protesters saying there there weren't enough whales left.

The statement "because there were not enough whales left" in the 18th
century is false.

[J. J. Lodder]

Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

> On Monday, February 27, 2023 at 7:43:32?PM UTC-5, Peter Moylan wrote:
> > On 28/02/23 02:42, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> > > On Monday, February 27, 2023 at 9:06:01?AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder

> > > wrote:
> >
> > >> Whaling stopped in the 18th, because there were not enough whales
> > >> left.
> > >
> > > Curious. The US whaling industry lasted late into the 19th century.
> > And the Japanese whaling industry lasted late into the 20th century.
> > That didn't stop protesters saying there there weren't enough whales left.
>
> The statement "because there were not enough whales left" in the 18th
> century is false.

Of course not.
The statement obviously applied to the Dutch whaling station
on Spitsbergen.
You are quote-mining again,

Jan

[Peter T. Daniels]

If that is true, then adding "in the immediate vicinity" would have made
your statement true (and the Dutch whaling "industry" laughable). American
whalers crisscrossed the Pacific -- on voyages that could last up to three
years (and to reach the Pacific they had to "round the Horn":
https://essex.nha.org/into-the-pacific/ ) -- pursuing the presumably
diminishing quarry. (Later in the 19th c., the iindustry relocated to San
Francisco and the Oregon Territory.) Dutchland had no problem exercising
imperialism over a very great Pacific archipelago.

> You are quote-mining again,

I omitted only the first five words and did not delete them from
what I responded to, which remains immediately above. Nothing
earlier in the paragraph suggested that Dutch whalers did not
venture outside, what, the North Sea?

Incidentally, Richmond, Philadelphia, New York, and Baltimore are
the places associated with Poe's short life. None of them is particularly
associated with whaling.

If you choose to denigrate Poe, a major figure in American literature,
ask yourself if you enjoy detective stories. He invented the genre.

[Pamela]

On 09:52 28 Feb 2023, Anton Shepelev said:

> Kerr-Mudd, John:
>
>> what's in the Hollow Moon?
>
> Why are the craters on the Moon of the same depth?
>

Because the mice won't eat cheese below a certain depth that has gone
stale?

[Arindam Banerjee]

On Friday, 24 February 2023 at 14:02:08 UTC+5:30, Hibou wrote:
> Le 23/02/2023 à 11:31, Arindam Banerjee a écrit :
> > On Thursday, 23 February 2023 at 21:52:18 UTC+11, Peter Moylan wrote:
> >> On 21/02/23 02:33, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Yes, at the centre of the Earth there is no net force, as matter
> >>> pulls symmetrically from all sides. so no pressure, so no
> >>> temperature, so superconducting currents are possible leading to the
> >>> magentic field we know. Not just for Earth, but the sun and dark
> >>> stars.
> >>
> >> You still haven't seen the flaw in that argument? Calculation of
> >> pressure as a function of depth requires only high school calculus.
> >
> > Yes, provided there is stuff *below* that depth.
> > At the centre of the Earth there is stuff all around, and none below.
> > Get that into your head.
> > Read any good physics book. [...]
>
> Asperity always rings alarm bells.
>
> It's a while since I've thought about this sort of thing, but let me
> give it a go, in a hand-waving sort of way.
>
> There is, I suppose, a gravitational centre of the Earth, where all the
> gravitational pulls, in all directions from all its components, add up
> to nothing. At this point there is no /acceleration/ from this source.
Upon this source. Not from.
>
> /Pressure/ is /force/ divided by area. The matter that makes up the
> Earth is being pulled by gravity towards the gravitational centre, with
> forces according to the formula f = ma.

The value ig a or g changes from 9.81m/ss to 0 at the centre, let us not forget.

The forces act on the matter,
> and would accelerate it if it weren't for an equal and opposite push
> from the matter beneath. All the gravitational a's point towards the
> centre, are smaller near the centre and zero at it; but the forces and
> the pressure are cumulative and reach a maximum there. (If you pile
> bricks on top of each other, their weight adds up.)

Only if you have a lot of matter like a whole Earth below it.

>
> At this point I Google, in search of confirmation, and find that the
> pressure at the centre of the Earth is reckoned to be 330 to 360 GPa -
> quite a long way from zero.

Dumbfuckery here. No logic. Hand waving. From those who want to say that the Sun's core is so hot, the Earth's must be too. To justify the bollocks of relativity.
Nonsense all around on a grand , global scale.
>
> I think Peter's right. You might want to look into this a bit further
> before going back to the rail gun.

I think that only time can heal the madness in physics, and that will happen after a few generations, when my new physics will rule after the cretins of our time die out.
Hopefully, a lot earler.

[Anton Shepelev]

Pamela to Anton Shepelev:

> > Why are the craters on the Moon of the same depth?
>
> Because the mice won't eat cheese below a certain depth
> that has gone stale?

But cheese spoils from the outside!

[Anton Shepelev]

Ruud Harmsen to J. J. Lodder:

> > Usenet posting should be done in pure ASCII, if at all
> > possible. It is up to the reader to restore accents,
> > where necessary, and if desired.
>
> Nonsense, in 2023. Covered by Mime. No problem at all.

The right format of Usenet articles is determined not by the
year, but by the corresponding standard. Mime has nothing
to do with plain-text postings in whatever encoding.

[Anders D. Nygaard]

Den 02-03-2023 kl. 22:02 skrev Anton Shepelev:
> Ruud Harmsen to J. J. Lodder:
>>> Usenet posting should be done in pure ASCII, if at all
>>> possible. It is up to the reader to restore accents,
>>> where necessary, and if desired.

Nonsense. Usenet postings should convey what you want
to convey, and not require readers to "restore" anything.

>> Nonsense, in 2023. Covered by Mime. No problem at all.
>
> The right format of Usenet articles is determined not by the
> year, but by the corresponding standard. Mime has nothing
> to do with plain-text postings in whatever encoding.

You are right, inasmuch as the way to go beyond US-ASCII
is to specify a charset in the Content-Type header, e.g.

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

But Ruud is right, in the sense that the definition of this header field
is (as per https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5536.html#section-3.2)
described in the standards relating to MIME,
e.g. https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2045#section-5

A well-behaved Usenet client will do that for you automatically
when you use non-ASCII characters, and display the characters
appropriately when you are on the receiving end.

/Anders, Denmark

[Phil Carmody]

Anton Shepelev <anto...@gmail.moc> writes:
> Ruud Harmsen to J. J. Lodder:
>> > Usenet posting should be done in pure ASCII, if at all
>> > possible. It is up to the reader to restore accents,
>> > where necessary, and if desired.
>>
>> Nonsense, in 2023. Covered by Mime. No problem at all.
>
> The right format of Usenet articles is determined not by the
> year, but by the corresponding standard. Mime has nothing
> to do with plain-text postings in whatever encoding.

You missed his logical fallacies.

Firtsly, he was attempting to address the possibility of posting in pure
ASCII by bringing up the possibility of posting in other encodings,
which is irrelevant.

Secondly, MIME permits abominations; that MIME lets you do something is
not an argument for doing it, as if it were, it would be an argument
supporting the use of abominations too.

Phil
--
We are no longer hunters and nomads. No longer awed and frightened, as we have
gained some understanding of the world in which we live. As such, we can cast
aside childish remnants from the dawn of our civilization.
-- NotSanguine on SoylentNews, after Eugen Weber in /The Western Tradition/

[Arindam Banerjee]

On Thursday, 23 February 2023 at 17:01:53 UTC+5:30, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
Something like Saki, who wrote "The stampeding of Lady Bastable".

> On Thursday, 23 February 2023 at 21:52:18 UTC+11, Peter Moylan wrote:
> > On 21/02/23 02:33, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, at the centre of the Earth there is no net force, as matter
> > > pulls symmetrically from all sides. so no pressure, so no
> > > temperature, so superconducting currents are possible leading to the
> > > magentic field we know. Not just for Earth, but the sun and dark
> > > stars.
> > You still haven't seen the flaw in that argument? Calculation of
> > pressure as a function of depth requires only high school calculus.
>
> Yes, provided there is stuff *below* that depth.
> At the centre of the Earth there is stuff all around, and none below.
> Get that into your head.
> Read any good physics book.

> The net force at any inside a closed surface is always zero, whether gravity or electrostatics.
> That is what classical physics says with suitable maths to back it up.
> So at the centre or core, there are many closed surfaces above stretching up to the surface of the Earth or star.
> Force from each surface is zero.
> Force from all surfaces is zero.
> So net force is zero.
> Another way to look at it, is that at the core you are pulled from all sides so net force upon you is zero.
> No force, no pressure, no temperature except what seeps in from above to convert into the superconducting current at 3 deg K.
>
>
>
> > Admittedly it's probably only the more talented high school pupils who
> > can work through the entire derivation, but it should be elementary for
> > anyone with an engineering degree.
>
> You were a bad student, so you do not remember as I do that the force from gravity INSIDE a closed surface at any point is always zero.
> That derivation requires some knowledge of calculas.
> Perhaps you may have some inkling about calculas, never found one in Australia who knew much about it.
>
> > Try it some time. You might get a surprise.
>
> You will give me a bigger surprise if you find out exactly where it is found in Resnick and Halliday that the force at any point within a closed surface is zero.
> >
> > Hint: at the centre of the earth there is indeed no force due to gravity
> > - that part cancels out - but there is still a (very large) force due to
> > compression of matter.
>
> Rubbish. When force is zero, there is no pressure of any sort. No compression.
> Compression happens several kilometers below the Earth's surface. Till the rocks melt. For there is matter below them to force this compression.
> As we go towards the core it vanishes to zero.
> Think of a hollow rubber ball. No matter how hard you compress from the outside, nothing of that force will reach the centre for it will be distributed all around
>
> Cheers,
> Arindam Banerjee

[Ruud Harmsen]

Sun, 05 Mar 2023 10:55:11 +0200: Phil Carmody <pc+u...@asdf.org>
scribeva:

>Anton Shepelev <anto...@gmail.moc> writes:
>> Ruud Harmsen to J. J. Lodder:
>>> > Usenet posting should be done in pure ASCII, if at all
>>> > possible. It is up to the reader to restore accents,
>>> > where necessary, and if desired.
>>>
>>> Nonsense, in 2023. Covered by Mime. No problem at all.
>>
>> The right format of Usenet articles is determined not by the
>> year, but by the corresponding standard. Mime has nothing
>> to do with plain-text postings in whatever encoding.
>
>You missed his logical fallacies.
>
>Firtsly, he was attempting to address the possibility of posting in pure
>ASCII by bringing up the possibility of posting in other encodings,
>which is irrelevant.

Are you unaware of the meaning of "should be"?
Hint: it does not refer to a possibility.

>Secondly, MIME permits abominations; that MIME lets you do something is
>not an argument for doing it, as if it were, it would be an argument
>supporting the use of abominations too.

[Anton Shepelev]

J. J. Lodder:
Usenet posting should be done in pure ASCII, if at all
possible. It is up to the reader to restore accents,
where necessary, and if desired.

Ruud Harmsen:

Nonsense, in 2023. Covered by Mime. No problem at all.

Anton Shepelev:

The right format of Usenet articles is determined not by
the year, but by the corresponding standard. Mime has
nothing to do with plain-text postings in whatever
encoding.

Phil Carmody:

> You missed his logical fallacies.
>
> Firtsly, he was attempting to address the possibility of
> posting in pure ASCII by bringing up the possibility of
> posting in other encodings, which is irrelevant.

Who is "he"? I think you mean two people. JJL proposes that
we use ASCII as much as we can, which is OK, and that
newsreaders restore accented characters, which, although
possible, is unheard of. Is there always only one way to
accentuate a word? JJL does not "bring in the possibility of
posting in other encodings", unless he meant human readers,
rather than newsreaders.

> Secondly, MIME permits abominations; that MIME lets you do
> something is not an argument for doing it, as if it were,
> it would be an argument supporting the use of abominations
> too.

It was Ruud who menitoned MIME as a way to post non-ASCII
messages. I now see that it is the only standard way for
doing it, so it is unobjectionably to languages with non-
Latin alphabets or with heavy reliance on accented letters.
It was multipart HTML messages, irrelevant here, that I
called an abomination.

[Madhu]

* Anton Shepelev <20230305155235.9bf1f508cc087f8174458fdc @gmail.moc> :
Wrote on Sun, 5 Mar 2023 15:52:35 +0300:

> It was Ruud who menitoned MIME as a way to post non-ASCII
> messages. I now see that it is the only standard way for
> doing it, so it is unobjectionably to languages with non-
> Latin alphabets or with heavy reliance on accented letters.
> It was multipart HTML messages, irrelevant here, that I
> called an abomination.

You can post it with all your correct mime headers and googlegroups will
consistently ignore your headers header and and pretend its utf8. and
you're worse off than toast where you are if some google user follows
up.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Did you see the w-circumflex in a Welsh word that Athel posted?
I did, in GG.

[Anton Shepelev]

Madhu:

> You can post it with all your correct mime headers and
> googlegroups will consistently ignore your headers header
> and and pretend its utf8. and you're worse off than toast
> where you are if some google user follows up.

It is not only Google these days. Some brain-damaged mobile
e-mail clients presume UTF-8, too.

[Anton Shepelev]

Peter T. Daniels:

> Did you see the w-circumflex in a Welsh word that Athel
> posted? I did, in GG.

Because that post was in UTF-8. This one is not, and see
what you see:

Глокая куздра штеко будланула бокра и курдячит бокрёнка.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2023-03-05 18:26:57 +0000, Anton Shepelev said:

> Peter T. Daniels:
>
>> Did you see the w-circumflex in a Welsh word that Athel
>> posted? I did, in GG.
>
> Because that post was in UTF-8. This one is not, and see
> what you see:
>
> Глокая куздра штеко будланула бокра и курдячит бокрёнка.

It looks like Russian, but Google Translate says it means "The
glistening kuzdra shteko bobbed up the bokra and curled up the bokra."
Something doesn't seem quite right.


--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 36 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Sunday, March 5, 2023 at 1:27:00 PM UTC-5, Anton Shepelev wrote:
> Peter T. Daniels:

> > Did you see the w-circumflex in a Welsh word that Athel
> > posted? I did, in GG.
>
> Because that post was in UTF-8. This one is not, and see
> what you see:
>
> Глокая куздра штеко будланула бокра и курдячит бокрёнка.

I see a sentence (presumably) in Cyrillic alphabet. I suppose it's
Russian. I'd transliterate it "Glokaya kuzdra shteko budlanula
bokra i kurdyachit bokryonka." Is that what was intended?

Google Translate makes nothing of it in Russian, Belarusian,
or Serbian and translates a few words in Ukrainian. (It doesn't
have a Moldovan option.)

[Anton Shepelev]

Athel Cornish-Bowden to Anton Shepelev:

> > Глокая куздра штеко будланула бокра и курдячит бокрёнка.
>
> It looks like Russian, but Google Translate says it means
> "The glistening kuzdra shteko bobbed up the bokra and
> curled up the bokra." Something doesn't seem quite right.

It is an analog of "The iggle squiggs trazed wombly in the
harlish hoop." I wonder how it translates to Russia, but
don't realy want to know.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Sunday, March 5, 2023 at 1:58:09 PM UTC-5, Anton Shepelev wrote:
> Athel Cornish-Bowden to Anton Shepelev:

> > > Глокая куздра штеко будланула бокра и курдячит бокрёнка.
> > It looks like Russian, but Google Translate says it means
> > "The glistening kuzdra shteko bobbed up the bokra and
> > curled up the bokra." Something doesn't seem quite right.
>
> It is an analog of "The iggle squiggs trazed wombly in the
> harlish hoop."

Whatever that is.

> I wonder how it translates to Russia, but
> don't realy want to know.

And that was more important to say than that GG, contrary
to your implication, rendered the Cyrrillic perfectly?