Albert Einstein... he's the bomb!
The Starmaker
was arrested twice in 1906 for domestic violence towards his wife?
At the time, Mileva. Police records show that on two instances in
1906, Albert Einstein struck and left bloodied his wife of three
years, Mileva, and was arrested for it.�
�The first police report filed by Mileva on 26 Febrary states that she
merely came up to his study as he worked to ask him if he wanted some
coffee, when suddenly he flew into a rage, and began choking and
striking her. He also threatened to stab her with his pen.�
�The second report,� �indicates that, one morning, as Einstein exited
the bathroom, his wife wished him a �good morning�, at which, again,
he flew into a fiery rage, pushing her in the face repeatedly and
gouging her eyes.�
The Starmaker
http://oudeis23.wordpress.com/2008/06/21/einstein-arrested-twice-in-1906-for-domestic-violence/
That Einstein *knows* how to treat a woman! That is what you call a
...smart guy...he's the bomb!
BURT
> Did you know that Albert Einstein
> was arrested twice in 1906 for domestic violence towards his wife?
>
> At the time, Mileva. Police records show that on two instances in
> 1906, Albert Einstein struck and left bloodied his wife of three
> years, Mileva, and was arrested for it.”
>
> “The first police report filed by Mileva on 26 Febrary states that she
> merely came up to his study as he worked to ask him if he wanted some
> coffee, when suddenly he flew into a rage, and began choking and
> striking her. He also threatened to stab her with his pen.”
>
> “The second report,” “indicates that, one morning, as Einstein exited
> the bathroom, his wife wished him a ‘good morning’, at which, again,
> he flew into a fiery rage, pushing her in the face repeatedly and
> gouging her eyes.”
>
> The Starmaker
>
>
> That Einstein *knows* how to treat a woman! That is what you call a
> ...smart guy...he's the bomb!
You're insane.
FDR
> Did you know that Albert Einstein
> was arrested twice in 1906 for domestic violence towards his wife?
>
> At the time, Mileva. Police records show that on two instances in
> 1906, Albert Einstein struck and left bloodied his wife of three
>
> �The first police report filed by Mileva on 26 Febrary states that she
> merely came up to his study as he worked to ask him if he wanted some
> coffee, when suddenly he flew into a rage, and began choking and
>
> �The second report,� �indicates that, one morning, as Einstein exited
> the bathroom, his wife wished him a �good morning�, at which, again,
> he flew into a fiery rage, pushing her in the face repeatedly and
>
>
>
> The Starmaker
>
> http://oudeis23.wordpress.com/2008/06/21/einstein-arrested-twice-in-1906-for-domestic-violence/
>
>
>
> That Einstein *knows* how to treat a woman! That is what you call a
> ...smart guy...he's the bomb!
Did you know the Starmaker will always be a douche bag?
The Starmaker
>
> The Starmaker wrote:
> > Did you know that Albert Einstein
> > was arrested twice in 1906 for domestic violence towards his wife?
> >
> > At the time, Mileva. Police records show that on two instances in
> > 1906, Albert Einstein struck and left bloodied his wife of three
> >
> > �The first police report filed by Mileva on 26 Febrary states that she
> > merely came up to his study as he worked to ask him if he wanted some
> > coffee, when suddenly he flew into a rage, and began choking and
> >
> > �The second report,� �indicates that, one morning, as Einstein exited
> > the bathroom, his wife wished him a �good morning�, at which, again,
> > he flew into a fiery rage, pushing her in the face repeatedly and
> >
> >
> >
> > The Starmaker
> >
> > http://oudeis23.wordpress.com/2008/06/21/einstein-arrested-twice-in-1906-for-domestic-violence/
> >
> >
> >
> > That Einstein *knows* how to treat a woman! That is what you call a
> > ...smart guy...he's the bomb!
>
> Did you know the Starmaker will always be a douche bag?
oops, I forgot to post his "mug shot"
http://oudeis23.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/einstein_patentoffice.jpg?w=169&h=220
and I didn't know he had 15 kids!
now i understand this photo of him....
http://www.ideachampions.com/weblogs/ad081167b0887560be0fb9a75101af2c.jpg
girls love that photo!
The Starmaker
Androcles
"FDR" <FDR@fkfkdkfd> wrote in message
news:EradnTgl-81kPX7X...@giganews.com...
> The Starmaker wrote:
>> Did you know that Albert Einstein
>> was arrested twice in 1906 for domestic violence towards his wife?
>>
>> At the time, Mileva. Police records show that on two instances in
>> 1906, Albert Einstein struck and left bloodied his wife of three
>>
>> �The first police report filed by Mileva on 26 Febrary states that she
>> merely came up to his study as he worked to ask him if he wanted some
>> coffee, when suddenly he flew into a rage, and began choking and
>>
>> �The second report,� �indicates that, one morning, as Einstein exited
>> the bathroom, his wife wished him a �good morning�, at which, again,
>> he flew into a fiery rage, pushing her in the face repeatedly and
>>
>>
>>
>> The Starmaker
>>
>> http://oudeis23.wordpress.com/2008/06/21/einstein-arrested-twice-in-1906-for-domestic-violence/
>>
>>
>>
>> That Einstein *knows* how to treat a woman! That is what you call a
>> ...smart guy...he's the bomb!
>
> Did you know the Starmaker will always be a douche bag?
*plonk*
Do not reply to this generic message, it was automatically generated;
you have been kill-filed, either for being boringly stupid, repetitive,
unfunny, ineducable, repeatedly posting politics, religion or off-topic
subjects to a sci. newsgroup, attempting cheapskate free advertising
for profit, because you are a troll, simply insane or any combination
or permutation of the aforementioned reasons; any reply will go unread.
Boringly stupid is the most common cause of kill-filing, but because
this message is generic the other reasons have been included. You are
left to decide which is most applicable to you.
There is no appeal, I have despotic power over whom I will electronically
admit into my home and you do not qualify as a reasonable person I would
wish to converse with or even poke fun at. Some weirdoes are not kill-
filed, they amuse me and I retain them for their entertainment value
as I would any chicken with two heads, either one of which enables the
dumb bird to scratch dirt, step back, look down, step forward to the
same spot and repeat the process eternally.
This should not trouble you, many of those plonked find it a blessing
that they are not required to think and can persist in their bigotry
or crackpot theories without challenge.
You have the right to free speech, I have the right not to listen. The
kill-file will be cleared annually with spring cleaning or whenever I
purchase a new computer or hard drive.
I'm fully aware that you may be so stupid as to reply, but the purpose
of this message is to encourage others to kill-file fuckwits like you.
I hope you find this explanation is satisfactory but even if you don't,
damnly my frank, I don't give a dear. Have a nice day.
Hagar
"The Starmaker" <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:4q67e5t8lt5lbrovl...@4ax.com...
> Did you know that Albert Einstein
> was arrested twice in 1906 for domestic violence towards his wife?
That's because some stupid women need to be reminded more than
once, and a nice set of shiners will do just that. Of course she had
it coming.
Jax
> Did you know that Albert Einstein
> was arrested twice in 1906 for domestic violence towards his wife?
>
> At the time, Mileva. Police records show that on two instances in
> 1906, Albert Einstein struck and left bloodied his wife of three
> years, Mileva, and was arrested for it.”
>
> “The first police report filed by Mileva on 26 Febrary states that she
> merely came up to his study as he worked to ask him if he wanted some
> coffee, when suddenly he flew into a rage, and began choking and
> striking her. He also threatened to stab her with his pen.”
>
> “The second report,” “indicates that, one morning, as Einstein exited
> the bathroom, his wife wished him a ‘good morning’, at which, again,
> he flew into a fiery rage, pushing her in the face repeatedly and
> gouging her eyes.”
>
> The Starmaker
>
>
> That Einstein *knows* how to treat a woman! That is what you call a
> ...smart guy...he's the bomb!
Stop lying.
BradGuth
Stop being Jewish (is tougher than you might think)
~ BG
Charles H. Sampson
> Did you know that Albert Einstein
> was arrested twice in 1906 for domestic violence towards his wife?
Yes.
Charlie
--
All the world's a stage, and most
of us are desperately unrehearsed. Sean O'Casey
Skybuck Flying
LEAVE HIM ALONE !
JUST LEAVE HIM ALONE ! =D
ALL YOU PEOPLE WANT IS MORE MORE MORE MORRRRRREEEE ! =D
Bye,
Skybuck ;) :)
Ken S. Tucker
> Did you know that Albert Einstein
> was arrested twice in 1906 for domestic violence towards his wife?
>
> At the time, Mileva. Police records show that on two instances in
> 1906, Albert Einstein struck and left bloodied his wife of three
> years, Mileva, and was arrested for it.”
>
> “The first police report filed by Mileva on 26 Febrary states that she
> merely came up to his study as he worked to ask him if he wanted some
> coffee, when suddenly he flew into a rage, and began choking and
> striking her. He also threatened to stab her with his pen.”
>
> “The second report,” “indicates that, one morning, as Einstein exited
> the bathroom, his wife wished him a ‘good morning’, at which, again,
> he flew into a fiery rage, pushing her in the face repeatedly and
> gouging her eyes.”
>
> The Starmaker
>
>
> That Einstein *knows* how to treat a woman! That is what you call a
> ...smart guy...he's the bomb!
IIRC back in those days, spankin' wife with more than 10
smacks was abusive, what is it now-a-days?
Ken
Henry Wilson DSc
wrote:
>Did you know that Albert Einstein
>was arrested twice in 1906 for domestic violence towards his wife?
>
>At the time, Mileva. Police records show that on two instances in
>1906, Albert Einstein struck and left bloodied his wife of three
>years, Mileva, and was arrested for it.�
>
>�The first police report filed by Mileva on 26 Febrary states that she
>merely came up to his study as he worked to ask him if he wanted some
>coffee, when suddenly he flew into a rage, and began choking and
>striking her. He also threatened to stab her with his pen.�
>
>�The second report,� �indicates that, one morning, as Einstein exited
>the bathroom, his wife wished him a �good morning�, at which, again,
>he flew into a fiery rage, pushing her in the face repeatedly and
>gouging her eyes.�
She probably told him his theory was plain bullshit. People often get beaten up
for telling the truth.
>The Starmaker
>
>http://oudeis23.wordpress.com/2008/06/21/einstein-arrested-twice-in-1906-for-domestic-violence/
>
>
>
>That Einstein *knows* how to treat a woman! That is what you call a
>...smart guy...he's the bomb!
>
>
>
>
Henry Wilson...www.scisite.info/index.htm
Einstein...World's greatest SciFi writer..
BradGuth
> On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 17:36:20 -0700, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >Did you know that Albert Einstein
> >was arrested twice in 1906 for domestic violence towards his wife?
>
> >At the time, Mileva. Police records show that on two instances in
> >1906, Albert Einstein struck and left bloodied his wife of three
> >years, Mileva, and was arrested for it.”
>
> >“The first police report filed by Mileva on 26 Febrary states that she
> >merely came up to his study as he worked to ask him if he wanted some
> >coffee, when suddenly he flew into a rage, and began choking and
> >striking her. He also threatened to stab her with his pen.”
>
> >“The second report,” “indicates that, one morning, as Einstein exited
> >the bathroom, his wife wished him a ‘good morning’, at which, again,
> >he flew into a fiery rage, pushing her in the face repeatedly and
> >gouging her eyes.”
>
> She probably told him his theory was plain bullshit. People often get beaten up
> for telling the truth.
>
> >The Starmaker
>
>
> >That Einstein *knows* how to treat a woman! That is what you call a
> >...smart guy...he's the bomb!
>
> Henry Wilson...www.scisite.info/index.htm
>
> Einstein...World's greatest SciFi writer..
It's always best to eliminate any possible accusations of plagiarizing
by killing the messenger. Otherwise, perhaps she merely pointed out
what a wussy sex partner Einstein was.
~ BG
hanson
>
The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> cited
<http://tinyurl.com/yfckxmu > and wrote
== Albert Einstein was arrested twice in 1906 for domestic
violence towards his wife, at the time, Mileva. .
Police records show that on two instances in 1906,
Albert Einstein struck and left bloodied his wife of three
�The 1st police report filed by Mileva on 26 Febrary states that she
merely came up to his study as he worked to ask him if he wanted some
coffee, when suddenly he flew into a rage, and began choking and
�The 2nd report indicates that, "one morning, as Einstein exited
the bathroom, his wife wished him a �good morning�, at which, again,
he flew into a fiery rage, pushing her in the face repeatedly and
Grossman says: "I have no doubt that Einstein continued persistent
abuse of his wife until their divorce. I am not surprised at these
allegations."
These reports clearly have been suppressed by those who wish to
perpertuate Einstein's legacy, but the fact is that the most revered
scientist of all times was a brutal abuser who never hesitated to teach
his wife a lessonshould she cross him in any way.
Einstein was, in many ways, pure evil personified.
-- The Starmaker
>
Henry Wilson DSc wrote:
She probably told him his theory was plain bullshit.
People often get beaten up for telling the truth.
>
Usenet accounts about Albert's vile and dark side go back a
decade, by n' large in response to poster Stephen Speicher,
a grossly fanatical & virulent Einstein Dingleberry who provoked
Christopher Jon Bjerknes to do research and write a book about
Einstein's kinky kikeism.
>
To most Jews Einstein's unsavory character is no surprise and
neither is the fact that Einstein's popularity was a promotional
product by the Zionists during the Weimar Republic years.
Albert did fit and was used by the Zio's agenda and they even
proposed to him to become and be the 1st PM of Israel... ahahaha...
>
Einstein chickened out. He had too much baggage that would have
been vetted and vented ... ahaha... like the dirty little secret that it
was NOT Albert Einstein himself, but his first Christian wife Mileva
Maric, who conceived, constructed/mathed & authored the 1905
paper about Relativity.
>
Allegedly she nagged him to publish her manuscript under his name
because in 1905 women belonged into the kitchen but not into the
intellectual realm of physics. He reluctantly and grudgingly did..
But Albert did not include a single footnote, ref, citation nor any
acknowledgments... Freudian slippage or deliberately... ahahaha...
>
There was, early in 2004, a full hour long TV documentary over this,
wherein many physics scholars spoke out about how Albert published
the intellectual SR property created by his non-Jewish wife, & then
how he dumped her when he became famous.
The kicker really is that after Einstein got his promotion into "fame",
by the Zios, and he divorced Mileva, he signed over all the money
from his Nobel prize to her... as "hush money"... ahahaha... an event
which Einstein brushed away with his corny humor, him saying:
>
"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources".
>
That secret source was Mileva of course. So, to Einstein's credit it
must be said that he himself confessed and admitted to his scum
behavior and paid for it with Hush money to his Ex-wife when he
assigned all the monies he received from the (future) Nobel price to
his ex-wife Mileva.
>
<http://tinyurl.com/yjmfyxa> on Einstein's hush money
<http://tinyurl.com/o74vbr> on Einstein guilt and confessions
<http://tinyurl.com/yfqwm5v> Kolker vs Christopher Jon Bjerknes
>
Like in all personality cults... and physics is no exception, the
Prophet's most fanatical and loud disciple come from outside his
own ilk. This is reflected in that the most vociferous and hysterical
comments in defense and in favor of Einstein do come from the
brainwashed Goyim, = non-Jews, aka Einstein Dingleberries, who
stammer in horror "You lie!!'.. against anybody who portrays their
hero in an unfavorable light... ahahaha...
Thanks for the laughs, guys, ....ahahahaha... ahahahahanson
Koobee Wublee
> Usenet accounts about Albert's vile and dark side go back a
> decade, by n' large in response to poster Stephen Speicher,
> a grossly fanatical & virulent Einstein Dingleberry who provoked
> Christopher Jon Bjerknes to do research and write a book about
> Einstein's kinky kikeism.
Thanks for the recent history.
> To most Jews Einstein's unsavory character is no surprise and
> neither is the fact that Einstein's popularity was a promotional
> product by the Zionists during the Weimar Republic years.
> Albert did fit and was used by the Zio's agenda and they even
> proposed to him to become and be the 1st PM of Israel... ahahaha...
Einstein was a nitwit. What do you expect to do when given such a
responsibility?
> Einstein chickened out. He had too much baggage that would have
> been vetted and vented ... ahaha... like the dirty little secret that it
> was NOT Albert Einstein himself, but his first Christian wife Mileva
> Maric, who conceived, constructed/mathed & authored the 1905
> paper about Relativity.
Given Mileva being so much intelligent than Einstein the nitwit, the
plagiarist, and the liar, the possibility of that Mileva being the
original authors of Einstein’s 1905 papers is very high indeed.
> Allegedly she nagged him to publish her manuscript under his name
> because in 1905 women belonged into the kitchen but not into the
> intellectual realm of physics. He reluctantly and grudgingly did..
> But Albert did not include a single footnote, ref, citation nor any
> acknowledgments... Freudian slippage or deliberately... ahahaha...
She should have fought her way out to publish that under her name just
like Misner.
> There was, early in 2004, a full hour long TV documentary over this,
> wherein many physics scholars spoke out about how Albert published
> the intellectual SR property created by his non-Jewish wife, & then
> how he dumped her when he became famous.
>
> The kicker really is that after Einstein got his promotion into "fame",
> by the Zios, and he divorced Mileva, he signed over all the money
> from his Nobel prize to her... as "hush money"... ahahaha... an event
> which Einstein brushed away with his corny humor, him saying:
A tell-tale sign.
> "The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources".
That phrase is all over the internet now. Mr. Stachel whose job
depends on promoting a nitwit, a plagiarist, and a liar into godhood
would naturally try to erase any references to that quote.
> That secret source was Mileva of course. So, to Einstein's credit it
> must be said that he himself confessed and admitted to his scum
> behavior and paid for it with Hush money to his Ex-wife when he
> assigned all the monies he received from the (future) Nobel price to
> his ex-wife Mileva.
Don’t forget that the Lorentz transform was logically inconsistent
ever since day one when Larmor wrote it down. More than a decade
earlier, Voigt tossed the Lorentz transform into the trashbin in favor
of the Voigt transform.
> <http://tinyurl.com/yjmfyxa> on Einstein's hush money
>
> <http://tinyurl.com/o74vbr> on Einstein guilt and confessions
>
> <http://tinyurl.com/yfqwm5v> Kolker vs Christopher Jon Bjerknes
I thought Mr. Kolker has much integrity than that. Attacking Mr.
Bjerkness’s dick size and suggesting Mr. Bjerkness sleeping with his
grandmother reflects how desperate Einstein Dinglberries are. Thanks
for bringing up history into perspective.
> Like in all personality cults... and physics is no exception, the
> Prophet's most fanatical and loud disciple come from outside his
> own ilk. This is reflected in that the most vociferous and hysterical
> comments in defense and in favor of Einstein do come from the
> brainwashed Goyim, = non-Jews, aka Einstein Dingleberries, who
> stammer in horror "You lie!!'.. against anybody who portrays their
> hero in an unfavorable light... ahahaha...
> Thanks for the laughs, guys, ....ahahahaha... ahahahahanson
This is actually no laughing matter. The bottom line is that Einstein
was a nitwit, plagiarist, and a liar. The stupid things that were
credited to him were junk. That really reflects the intellectual
might of the self-styled physicists. <shrug and sigh>
For example, they talk about black holes to make them feel important
in their accomplishments, and yet upon scrutinizes of the subjects
involved, we know that the mathematics that have created black holes
was itself totally man-made in nature. On top of that, there are an
infinite number of solutions to the field equations that are static,
spherically symmetric, and asymptotically flat. Among them, most of
these solutions do not predict black holes. In doing so, the self-
styled physicists have failed to justify why the Schwarzschild metric
is more realistic than the Schwarzschild’s original metric. Without
thinking, Professor Draper tried to bull$hit boundary conditions in
selecting which metric is more realistic than the others but failed
embarrassingly so.
Einstein Dingleberries seem to have no shame. <shrug>
BradGuth
Contributor "hanson" is unfortunately worth something less than used
toilet paper, but then many Einstein lovers and haters give a great
deal of credit to such TP, as long as it's kosher TP to begin with.
Unfortunately, you can never tell which side "hanson" is on, even
though this time he/she/they seem to be on our side of sharing the
whole truth and nothing but the truth.
~ BG
Hagar
"hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote in message
news:hcbaf8$91b$1...@adenine.netfront.net...
> "Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote:
>>
> The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> cited
> <http://tinyurl.com/yfckxmu > and wrote
> == Albert Einstein was arrested twice in 1906 for domestic
< snip drivel >
So what if his wife came up with the theory hand he received the
Nobel ... he gave her the money, didn't he ..
Furthermore, this year's Nobel Peace Prize proves that it is a
totally empty gesture. Alfred must be spinning in his grave.
Let's just hope the Anointed One uses his prize money to
take his recently turned "Proud to be an American" hussy
to KFC for a "Hillary Special" treat (Two small breasts,
two thick thighs and a left wing)..
hanson
and without any doubt the unkosher stuff on used TP wrote:
> Koobee Wublee <koobee.wub...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> "hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote:
>
hanson wrote:
> > Usenet accounts about Albert's vile and dark side go back a
> > decade, by n' large in response to poster Stephen Speicher,
> > a grossly fanatical & virulent Einstein Dingleberry who provoked
> > Christopher Jon Bjerknes to do research and write a book about
> > Einstein's kinky kikeism.
>
> Thanks for the recent history.
>
> > To most Jews Einstein's unsavory character is no surprise and
> > neither is the fact that Einstein's popularity was a promotional
> > product by the Zionists during the Weimar Republic years.
> > Albert did fit and was used by the Zio's agenda and they even
> > proposed to him to become and be the 1st PM of Israel... ahahaha...
>
> Einstein was a nitwit. What do you expect to do when given such a
> responsibility?
>
> > Einstein chickened out. He had too much baggage that would have
> > been vetted and vented ... ahaha... like the dirty little secret that it
> > was NOT Albert Einstein himself, but his first Christian wife Mileva
> > Maric, who conceived, constructed/mathed & authored the 1905
> > paper about Relativity.
>
> Given Mileva being so much intelligent than Einstein the nitwit, the
> plagiarist, and the liar, the possibility of that Mileva being the
>
hanson wrote:
> > Allegedly she nagged him to publish her manuscript under his name
> > because in 1905 women belonged into the kitchen but not into the
> > intellectual realm of physics. He reluctantly and grudgingly did..
> > But Albert did not include a single footnote, ref, citation nor any
> > acknowledgments... Freudian slippage or deliberately... ahahaha...
>
> She should have fought her way out to publish that under her name just
> like Misner.
>
> > There was, early in 2004, a full hour long TV documentary over this,
> > wherein many physics scholars spoke out about how Albert published
> > the intellectual SR property created by his non-Jewish wife, & then
> > how he dumped her when he became famous.
> > The kicker really is that after Einstein got his promotion into "fame",
> > by the Zios, and he divorced Mileva, he signed over all the money
> > from his Nobel prize to her... as "hush money"... ahahaha... an event
> > which Einstein brushed away with his corny humor, him saying:
>
> A tell-tale sign.
>
hanson wrote:
> > "The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources".
>
> That phrase is all over the internet now. Mr. Stachel whose job
> depends on promoting a nitwit, a plagiarist, and a liar into godhood
> would naturally try to erase any references to that quote.
>
> > That secret source was Mileva of course. So, to Einstein's credit it
> > must be said that he himself confessed and admitted to his scum
> > behavior and paid for it with Hush money to his Ex-wife when he
> > assigned all the monies he received from the (future) Nobel price to
> > his ex-wife Mileva.
>
> Don�t forget that the Lorentz transform was logically inconsistent
> ever since day one when Larmor wrote it down. More than a decade
> earlier, Voigt tossed the Lorentz transform into the trashbin in favor
> of the Voigt transform.
>
> > <http://tinyurl.com/yjmfyxa> on Einstein's hush money
>
> > <http://tinyurl.com/o74vbr> on Einstein guilt and confessions
>
> > <http://tinyurl.com/yfqwm5v> Kolker vs Christopher Jon Bjerknes
>
> I thought Mr. Kolker has much integrity than that. Attacking Mr.
> grandmother reflects how desperate Einstein Dinglberries are. Thanks
> for bringing up history into perspective.
>
> > Like in all personality cults... and physics is no exception, the
> > Prophet's most fanatical and loud disciple come from outside his
> > own ilk. This is reflected in that the most vociferous and hysterical
> > comments in defense and in favor of Einstein do come from the
> > brainwashed Goyim, = non-Jews, aka Einstein Dingleberries, who
> > stammer in horror "You lie!!'.. against anybody who portrays their
> > hero in an unfavorable light... ahahaha...
> > Thanks for the laughs, guys, ....ahahahaha... ahahahahanson
>
> This is actually no laughing matter. The bottom line is that Einstein
> was a nitwit, plagiarist, and a liar. The stupid things that were
> credited to him were junk. That really reflects the intellectual
> might of the self-styled physicists. <shrug and sigh>
>
> For example, they talk about black holes to make them feel important
> in their accomplishments, and yet upon scrutinizes of the subjects
> involved, we know that the mathematics that have created black holes
> was itself totally man-made in nature. On top of that, there are an
> infinite number of solutions to the field equations that are static,
> spherically symmetric, and asymptotically flat. Among them, most of
> these solutions do not predict black holes. In doing so, the self-
> styled physicists have failed to justify why the Schwarzschild metric
> thinking, Professor Draper tried to bull$hit boundary conditions in
> selecting which metric is more realistic than the others but failed
> embarrassingly so.
>
> Einstein Dingleberries seem to have no shame. <shrug>
>
Contributor "hanson" is unfortunately worth something less than used
toilet paper, but then many Einstein lovers and haters give a great
deal of credit to such TP, as long as it's kosher TP to begin with.
Unfortunately, you can never tell which side "hanson" is on, even
though this time he/she/they seem to be on our side of sharing the
whole truth and nothing but the truth.
~ BG
>
ahahahaha... why & what about did you crank yourself, Brad?...
Your really sound like the unkosher stuff on used TP... ahaha...
But thanks for the laughs... ahahaha... AHAHAH...
>
Koobee Wublee, I understand that you regard these historic
things as serious matters. To me however, having left academia,
ever since I freed myself from the slavery of post-docing, these
events have become very entertaining tid-bits worth reading in
the locus where one extrudes Guthballs and enjoys the feeling.
Remember, taking a good shit is worth half a fuck...
ahahahaha... Take care KW... hanson
>
PS:
When and if fancy strikes I may wanna take up and discuss
with you some issues about the nature of Black holes. A
case can be made for their nature to be a very different
animal then the popular Schwartzschild solution (which
was propose IIRC century earlier by B. Pascal). Here are
my notions about it. You do the math on it (make a new thread):
<http://tinyurl.com/ykf356z> Barycenters Black Holes / Ghez.
hanson
"Koobee Wublee" <koobee...@gmail.com> wrote
> "hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote:
>
hanson wrote:
> > Usenet accounts about Albert's vile and dark side go back a
> > decade, by n' large in response to poster Stephen Speicher,
> > a grossly fanatical & virulent Einstein Dingleberry who provoked
> > Christopher Jon Bjerknes to do research and write a book about
> > Einstein's kinky kikeism.
>
> Thanks for the recent history.
>
> > To most Jews Einstein's unsavory character is no surprise and
> > neither is the fact that Einstein's popularity was a promotional
> > product by the Zionists during the Weimar Republic years.
> > Albert did fit and was used by the Zio's agenda and they even
> > proposed to him to become and be the 1st PM of Israel... ahahaha...
>
> Einstein was a nitwit. What do you expect to do when given such a
> responsibility?
>
> > Einstein chickened out. He had too much baggage that would have
> > been vetted and vented ... ahaha... like the dirty little secret that it
> > was NOT Albert Einstein himself, but his first Christian wife Mileva
> > Maric, who conceived, constructed/mathed & authored the 1905
> > paper about Relativity.
>
> Given Mileva being so much intelligent than Einstein the nitwit, the
> plagiarist, and the liar, the possibility of that Mileva being the
>
hanson wrote:
> > Allegedly she nagged him to publish her manuscript under his name
> > because in 1905 women belonged into the kitchen but not into the
> > intellectual realm of physics. He reluctantly and grudgingly did..
> > But Albert did not include a single footnote, ref, citation nor any
> > acknowledgments... Freudian slippage or deliberately... ahahaha...
>
> She should have fought her way out to publish that under her name just
> like Misner.
>
> > There was, early in 2004, a full hour long TV documentary over this,
> > wherein many physics scholars spoke out about how Albert published
> > the intellectual SR property created by his non-Jewish wife, & then
> > how he dumped her when he became famous.
> > The kicker really is that after Einstein got his promotion into "fame",
> > by the Zios, and he divorced Mileva, he signed over all the money
> > from his Nobel prize to her... as "hush money"... ahahaha... an event
> > which Einstein brushed away with his corny humor, him saying:
>
> A tell-tale sign.
>
hanson wrote:
>
> That phrase is all over the internet now. Mr. Stachel whose job
> depends on promoting a nitwit, a plagiarist, and a liar into godhood
> would naturally try to erase any references to that quote.
>
> > That secret source was Mileva of course. So, to Einstein's credit it
> > must be said that he himself confessed and admitted to his scum
> > behavior and paid for it with Hush money to his Ex-wife when he
> > assigned all the monies he received from the (future) Nobel price to
> > his ex-wife Mileva.
>
> Don�t forget that the Lorentz transform was logically inconsistent
> ever since day one when Larmor wrote it down. More than a decade
> earlier, Voigt tossed the Lorentz transform into the trashbin in favor
> of the Voigt transform.
>
> > <http://tinyurl.com/yjmfyxa> on Einstein's hush money
>
> > <http://tinyurl.com/o74vbr> on Einstein guilt and confessions
>
> > <http://tinyurl.com/yfqwm5v> Kolker vs Christopher Jon Bjerknes
>
> I thought Mr. Kolker has much integrity than that. Attacking Mr.
> grandmother reflects how desperate Einstein Dinglberries are. Thanks
> for bringing up history into perspective.
>
> > Like in all personality cults... and physics is no exception, the
> > Prophet's most fanatical and loud disciple come from outside his
> > own ilk. This is reflected in that the most vociferous and hysterical
> > comments in defense and in favor of Einstein do come from the
> > brainwashed Goyim, = non-Jews, aka Einstein Dingleberries, who
> > stammer in horror "You lie!!'.. against anybody who portrays their
> > hero in an unfavorable light... ahahaha...
> > Thanks for the laughs, guys, ....ahahahaha... ahahahahanson
>
> This is actually no laughing matter. The bottom line is that Einstein
> was a nitwit, plagiarist, and a liar. The stupid things that were
> credited to him were junk. That really reflects the intellectual
> might of the self-styled physicists. <shrug and sigh>
>
> For example, they talk about black holes to make them feel important
> in their accomplishments, and yet upon scrutinizes of the subjects
> involved, we know that the mathematics that have created black holes
> was itself totally man-made in nature. On top of that, there are an
> infinite number of solutions to the field equations that are static,
> spherically symmetric, and asymptotically flat. Among them, most of
> these solutions do not predict black holes. In doing so, the self-
> styled physicists have failed to justify why the Schwarzschild metric
> thinking, Professor Draper tried to bull$hit boundary conditions in
> selecting which metric is more realistic than the others but failed
> embarrassingly so.
>
> Einstein Dingleberries seem to have no shame. <shrug>
>
I understand that you regard these historic things as serious matters.
To me however, having left academia, ever since I freed myself from
the slavery of post-docing, these events have become very entertaining
>
When and if fancy strikes I may wanna take up and discuss with you
some issues about the nature of Black holes. A case can be made
for their nature to be a very different animal then the popular
Schwartzschild solution (which was propose IIRC century earlier
by B. Pascal). Here are my notions about it. You do the math on it
(make a new thread):
<http://tinyurl.com/ykf356z> Barycenters Black Holes / Ghez.
hanson
Henry Wilson DSc
>"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote:
>>
>The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> cited
><http://tinyurl.com/yfckxmu > and wrote
>== Albert Einstein was arrested twice in 1906 for domestic
>violence towards his wife, at the time, Mileva. .
>Police records show that on two instances in 1906,
> Albert Einstein struck and left bloodied his wife of three
>years, Mileva, and was arrested for it.�
>�The 1st police report filed by Mileva on 26 Febrary states that she
>merely came up to his study as he worked to ask him if he wanted some
>coffee, when suddenly he flew into a rage, and began choking and
>striking her. He also threatened to stab her with his pen.�
>�The 2nd report indicates that, "one morning, as Einstein exited
>the bathroom, his wife wished him a �good morning�, at which, again,
>he flew into a fiery rage, pushing her in the face repeatedly and
>gouging her eyes.�
Henry Wilson...www.scisite.info/index.htm
BradGuth
> ahahahaha.... "BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> who is clearly
> > ever since day one when Larmor wrote it down. More than a decade
> > earlier, Voigt tossed the Lorentz transform into the trashbin in favor
> > of the Voigt transform.
>
> hanson wrote:
> > > <http://tinyurl.com/yjmfyxa> on Einstein's hush money
>
> > > <http://tinyurl.com/o74vbr> on Einstein guilt and confessions
>
> > > <http://tinyurl.com/yfqwm5v> Kolker vs Christopher Jon Bjerknes
>
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > I thought Mr. Kolker has much integrity than that. Attacking Mr.
> > grandmother reflects how desperate Einstein Dinglberries are. Thanks
> > for bringing up history into perspective.
>
> hanson wrote:
> > > Like in all personality cults... and physics is no exception, the
> > > Prophet's most fanatical and loud disciple come from outside his
> > > own ilk. This is reflected in that the most vociferous and hysterical
> > > comments in defense and in favor of Einstein do come from the
> > > brainwashed Goyim, = non-Jews, aka Einstein Dingleberries, who
> > > stammer in horror "You lie!!'.. against anybody who portrays their
> > > hero in an unfavorable light... ahahaha...
> > > Thanks for the laughs, guys, ....ahahahaha... ahahahahanson
>
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > This is actually no laughing matter. The bottom line is that Einstein
> > was a nitwit, plagiarist, and a liar. The stupid things that were
> > credited to him were junk. That really reflects the intellectual
> > might of the self-styled physicists. <shrug and sigh>
>
> > For example, they talk about black holes to make them feel important
> > in their accomplishments, and yet upon scrutinizes of the subjects
> > involved, we know that the mathematics that have created black holes
> > was itself totally man-made in nature. On top of that, there are an
> > infinite number of solutions to the field equations that are static,
> > spherically symmetric, and asymptotically flat. Among them, most of
> > these solutions do not predict black holes. In doing so, the self-
> > styled physicists have failed to justify why the Schwarzschild metric
Your black holes of something other than horrific mass is
unfortunately what I've been arguing for nearly a decade. I happen to
favor positrons/antimatter surrounded by those 1e100 photons/atom or
conceivably per positron. However, the BHB (black hole barycenter)
notion is one I hadn't thought much about.
The absolute vacuum of a stellar or galactic formed barycenter may not
allow photons to pass through. Therefore it could be the absolute
lack of mass that we perceive as a black hole. This too I'd argued
some years ago, having suggested that it takes at least a few (say
1e3) atoms per km3 in order for photons to function, whereas below
that threshold is where photons fail to migrate.
~ BG
BURT
>
> - Show quoted text -
If the center of the Earth is zero gravity what is the center of a
black hole?
Mitch Raemsch
BradGuth
? antigravity ?
Are positrons not the same as antimatter?
~ BG
Aleph
enough thought and then wrote:
> <snip>
>
> If the center of the Earth is zero gravity what is the center of a
> black hole?
>
What on Earth makes you think the centre of the Earth is zero gravity?
Oh right, I have just realised this is a discussion between Mitch, Brad
Guth and Hanson.
The anticluon field is strong.
--
Aleph
This message was posted to usenet so please reply that way. Emails to
this account are very likely to be ignored.
_...@jeff_relf.seattle.invalid
Brad·Guth's “hollow earth” theory is insane. Pressure accrues.
Imagine the pressure you'd feel at the bottom of the Mariana Trench.
The center of earth is like that but, instead of water,
you have zetta·tons of blazing·hot steel pressing down on you.
Henry Wilson DSc
>"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote:
>>
>The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> cited
><http://tinyurl.com/yfckxmu > and wrote
>== Albert Einstein was arrested twice in 1906 for domestic
>violence towards his wife, at the time, Mileva. .
>Police records show that on two instances in 1906,
> Albert Einstein struck and left bloodied his wife of three
>years, Mileva, and was arrested for it.�
>�The 1st police report filed by Mileva on 26 Febrary states that she
>merely came up to his study as he worked to ask him if he wanted some
>coffee, when suddenly he flew into a rage, and began choking and
>striking her. He also threatened to stab her with his pen.�
>�The 2nd report indicates that, "one morning, as Einstein exited
>the bathroom, his wife wished him a �good morning�, at which, again,
>he flew into a fiery rage, pushing her in the face repeatedly and
>gouging her eyes.�
I suspect that George Hammond might be Einstein's illegitimate son.
Henry Wilson...www.scisite.info/index.htm
BradGuth
It's just a theory, although hollow is relative.
How about a reduced pressure and/or lower density interior?
~ BG
eric gisse
[...]
Hey look at that, the anti-Einstein echo chamber found a sounding board.
BradGuth
> > ever since day one when Larmor wrote it down. More than a decade
> > earlier, Voigt tossed the Lorentz transform into the trashbin in favor
> > of the Voigt transform.
>
> hanson wrote:
> > > <http://tinyurl.com/yjmfyxa> on Einstein's hush money
>
> > > <http://tinyurl.com/o74vbr> on Einstein guilt and confessions
>
> > > <http://tinyurl.com/yfqwm5v> Kolker vs Christopher Jon Bjerknes
>
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > I thought Mr. Kolker has much integrity than that. Attacking Mr.
> > grandmother reflects how desperate Einstein Dinglberries are. Thanks
> > for bringing up history into perspective.
>
> hanson wrote:
> > > Like in all personality cults... and physics is no exception, the
> > > Prophet's most fanatical and loud disciple come from outside his
> > > own ilk. This is reflected in that the most vociferous and hysterical
> > > comments in defense and in favor of Einstein do come from the
> > > brainwashed Goyim, = non-Jews, aka Einstein Dingleberries, who
> > > stammer in horror "You lie!!'.. against anybody who portrays their
> > > hero in an unfavorable light... ahahaha...
> > > Thanks for the laughs, guys, ....ahahahaha... ahahahahanson
>
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > This is actually no laughing matter. The bottom line is that Einstein
> > was a nitwit, plagiarist, and a liar. The stupid things that were
> > credited to him were junk. That really reflects the intellectual
> > might of the self-styled physicists. <shrug and sigh>
>
> > For example, they talk about black holes to make them feel important
> > in their accomplishments, and yet upon scrutinizes of the subjects
> > involved, we know that the mathematics that have created black holes
> > was itself totally man-made in nature. On top of that, there are an
> > infinite number of solutions to the field equations that are static,
> > spherically symmetric, and asymptotically flat. Among them, most of
> > these solutions do not predict black holes. In doing so, the self-
> > styled physicists have failed to justify why the Schwarzschild metric
> > thinking, Professor Draper tried to bull$hit boundary conditions in
> > selecting which metric is more realistic than the others but failed
> > embarrassingly so.
>
> > Einstein Dingleberries seem to have no shame. <shrug>
>
> hanson wrote:
>
> I understand that you regard these historic things as serious matters.
> To me however, having left academia, ever since I freed myself from
> the slavery of post-docing, these events have become very entertaining
> tid-bits worth enjoying with laughs... ahahahaha
>
> When and if fancy strikes I may wanna take up and discuss with you
> some issues about the nature of Black holes. A case can be made
> for their nature to be a very different animal then the popular
> Schwartzschild solution (which was propose IIRC century earlier
> by B. Pascal). Here are my notions about it. You do the math on it
> (make a new thread):
> <http://tinyurl.com/ykf356z> Barycenters Black Holes / Ghez.
> Take care, KW
> hanson
First off, there could be more than one kind of black hole. (mass and
massless)
Your black holes made of something other than horrific mass is
_...@jeff_relf.seattle.invalid
Pressure accrues.
The deeper you go the higher the pressure and temperature.
What could produce “ reduced pressure and/or lower density ”
at the center of the earth ?
_...@jeff_relf.seattle.invalid
Just Me
> Did you know that Albert Einstein
> was arrested twice in 1906 for domestic violence towards his wife?
>
> 1906, Albert Einstein struck and left bloodied his wife of three
> years, Mileva, and was arrested for it.”
>
> merely came up to his study as he worked to ask him if he wanted some
> coffee, when suddenly he flew into a rage, and began choking and
> striking her. He also threatened to stab her with his pen.”
>
> the bathroom, his wife wished him a ‘good morning’, at which, again,
> he flew into a fiery rage, pushing her in the face repeatedly and
>
> The Starmaker
>
> http://oudeis23.wordpress.com/2008/06/21/einstein-arrested-twice-in-1...
>
> That Einstein *knows* how to treat a woman! That is what you call a
> ...smart guy...he's the bomb!
And what if it should turn out--given there's any truth to all this--
that Mileva was a nymphomaniac adulteress who was schtupping ALL of
Einstein's best buddies? I mention this on basis of three biographical
facts that have long been reported from many scientifically reputable
sources, namely his friends.
1. Friends of Einstein stated the complaint that they would often find
the man in that small apartment in Bern alone, nursing the baby with a
bottle in one hand, while working his calculations with the other.
Where was Mileva? And why didn't she have the baby with her?
2. After Einstein had been awarded the chair in Theoretical Physics at
the ETR, when Berlin came calling, for some reason Mileva, after only
3 months returned to Zurich. Why? What was back in Zurich that she
couldn't have in Berlin? There she had no relatives, no friends but
Einstein's friends. What about Zurich did Mileva love so much?
3. In 1917, Einstein became seriously ill, he collapsed and when near
death, his cousin Elsa came to care for him and nurse him back to
health. Elsa came. Not Mileva. What was keeping Mileva all THAT busy
in Zurich?
4. Einstein divorced Mileva and married Elsa.
If you ever needed better evidence for the hypothesis that this
Hungarian temptress Mileva Maric was an uncaring, husband abusing,
nymphomaniac adulteress who would have been slapped and spanked to
death by any other man than Albert Einstein, then you'd be out looking
for far more than any proper scientist would ever need.
Just a little ability for filling in the blanks is all you got to
have, along with the empirical background of experience with such
women as to be able to recognize one when you see one.
And why, may you ask, is there no direct testimony out there to the
specific effect of stating that this was indeed the case with Mileva?
1. Mileva was smart, damned near a scientist who handled her affairs
like a scientist to keep them secret.
2. She knew that her own future material comfort depended on letting
no part of such a scandal become public. If there was to be a divorce,
it must be she who brings it.
3. If indeed it were Einstein's friends she was fooling around with,
they would be the last to tell. And now there was Einstein's worldwide
reputation to consider.
4. Not every scientist of those times was an old horn-dog like
Schrödinger who didn't give a damn what anyone thought. Soon as he
found out his wife was schtupping Weil, his best pal, what did he do?
He used it for just the excuse he needed to go out and schtupp ten to
her every one. Einstein sadly did not have that advantage. He had
married one smart little cookie who was so smart that she actually
managed to keep the wool pulled over the eyes of the smartest man in
the world.
You have to give her credit, if not for Relativity, then at least for
an uncanny ability for keeping all her little eggs in one basket.
--
JM
http://doo-dads.blogspot.com/2009/10/strong-force-snipe-hunt.html
Helmut Wabnig
wrote:
>Schr�dinger who didn't give a damn what anyone thought. Soon as he
>found out his wife was schtupping Weil, his best pal, what did he do?
>He used it for just the excuse he needed to go out and schtupp ten to
>her every one. Einstein sadly did not have that advantage. He had
>married one smart little cookie who was so smart that she actually
>managed to keep the wool pulled over the eyes of the smartest man in
>the world.
>
>You have to give her credit, if not for Relativity, then at least for
>an uncanny ability for keeping all her little eggs in one basket.
haha, nicely spoken,
just to complete the picture
http://www.teslasociety.com/theoryofrel.htm
http://www.teslasociety.com/theoryofrel.htm
w.
Helmut Wabnig
wrote:
>On Oct 24, 7:36�pm, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Schr�dinger who didn't give a damn what anyone thought. Soon as he
>found out his wife was schtupping Weil, his best pal, what did he do?
>He used it for just the excuse he needed to go out and schtupp ten to
>her every one. Einstein sadly did not have that advantage. He had
>married one smart little cookie who was so smart that she actually
>managed to keep the wool pulled over the eyes of the smartest man in
>the world.
>
>You have to give her credit, if not for Relativity, then at least for
>an uncanny ability for keeping all her little eggs in one basket.
haha, nicely spoken,
just to complete the picture
http://www.teslasociety.com/theoryofrel.htm
http://www.teslasociety.com/mileva_einstein.htm
w.
Koobee Wublee
>
How did you embed that picture?
Let me try.
[IMG]http://www.ember.com/images/Metcalfe.gif[/IMG]
Anyhow, I see these 13 to 14 year olds flocking to grandpa who is
worshipped by Einstein Dingleberries for more than 100 years. When
these kids find out that Einstein was nothing but a nitwit, a
plagiarist, and a liar, see how many children would flock to that
nitwit, that plagiarist, and that liar. However, the only reason who
jeff relf worships Eisntein is that Einstein was indeed a nitwit, a
plagiarist, and a liar. Got anymore photos of Einstein the nitwit,
the plagiarist, and the liar (be it wax or not) in companies of
children?
<shrug>
Nightcrawler
"BradGuth" <brad...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:441e8ea2-89e4-4b3d...@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 29, 7:10 pm, _@Jeff_Relf.Seattle.inValid wrote:
>> Brad�Guth's �hollow earth� theory is insane. Pressure accrues.
>> Imagine the pressure you'd feel at the bottom of the Mariana Trench.
>>
>> The center of earth is like that but, instead of water,
>> you have zetta�tons of blazing�hot steel pressing down on you.
>
> It's just a theory, although hollow is relative.
Hollow is defined, not relative.
> How about a reduced pressure and/or lower density interior?
The pressure at the center is created through compression, not
gravitational attraction AT THE CORE, rather the matter trying to get
TO/THRU the core via the resultant vector created by ALL of the matter
of the earth, not just at the core.
However, do to this compression the matter at the core will have a
higher specific density, thus a bit more gravity than the same material
would have without a large mass trying to press through equally from
all sides.
BradGuth
> "BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:441e8ea2-89e4-4b3d...@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
That’s really odd, because in deep underground caves or mine shafts,
other than the expected atmospheric pressure increase that’s obvious
and somewhat minor (<42% increase per 3.5 km depth unless you plan on
artificially cooling that column of air in order to get a 100%
increase per 3.5 km), there’s hardly any other significant geology
pressures for our physiology to contend with, including while swimming
or scuba diving in those deep underground lakes or aquifers, and
there’s certainly not any big increase in gravity (if anything it only
measurably increases ever so slightly), and there’s certainly no
objective way of telling if the inner core is merely that of a dense
shell that’s hollow inside, or not.
http://nopr.niscair.res.in/bitstream/123456789/2506/1/IJRSP%2037(1)%2064-67.pdf
Just because the pressure within the surrounding crust/bedrock is
increasing by roughly something less than 300 bar/km doesn’t mean
squat, especially when the deepest Russian well started getting into
lower pressures and/or somewhat less rock density at depths below 10
km, and at that kind of shaft depth there’s only a relatively slight
atmospheric pressure increase.
A true geode pocket that’s mineral/glass sealed and situated deep (say
at 10 km) might even conceivably offer less internal atmospheric
pressure than its surroundings until it’s broken into.
A geode formulated layer or pocket with any sort of fluid(s) inside is
also technically hollow, because that fluid or even whatever less
density substance(s) (such as sodium) can be easily removed and/or
displaced by hydrogen, helium, methane or some other gasses. An
interior cavity of crystals can even be easily dissolved or simply
fragmented and removed or reutilized as is. On the backside or
farside of our Selene/moon, under that extremely thick and robust
basalt crust that’s also rather unusually mineral saturated, mascon
populated and otherwise very paramagnetic, as such could be offering
quite a large volume of a hollow interior to work with. Being
situated 100 km underground might seem downright testy, but on the
moon it’s actually kind of nifty to ponder.
“The 1~10% hollow moon / Brad Guth”
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.astronomy/browse_frm/thread/b88503c97a50160d?hl=en#
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”
BradGuth
You forgot to mention "wife beater" and drug induced "Satan
worshiper", because that’s what their Zionist/Jewish policy includes
and approves of, as well as slave ownership and apparently body
snatchings for live organ harvesting, along with their kosher approved
SEC and its Ponzi Madoff types that have no remorse about steeling
from God or their putting of dark-skinned folks on a stick.
~ BG
_...@jeff_relf.seattle.invalid
Mr. Koobee Wublee, who's Mr. Metcalfe ?
···················
Re:
www.Google.COM/groups?selm=_%40Jeff_Relf.Seattle.2009_Oct30.0.46am.Dy
news:_@Jeff_Relf.Seattle.2009_Oct30.0.46am.Dy
To post hand·crafted <img> tags (HTML), as I do (above),
you need a news·client that can post HTML·Only
and a news·server that allows it.
My server ( newsRead.Glorb.COM:80 ) is un·filtered;
it allows HTML·Only posts.
As far as I know, my hand·crafted news·client (X.ZIP)
is the only one that can produce HTML·Only posts.
By “HTML·Only”, I mean: “ Content-Type: Text/HTML ”
not: “ Content-Type: multipart/alternative ”.
Aleph
<_@Jeff_Relf.Seattle.inValid> gave it no where near enough thought and
then wrote:
>
> Brad·Guth is insane.
It is ok, Mr Relf, I fixed your post for you.
waldofj
Double-A
The fact that gravity increases measurably in deep caves/mines tells
you that the interior of the Earth is denser than the rock above you.
Otherwise gravity would have already begun to decrease.
Double-A
Indi
>
> Does having a short-term memory loss hurt??
>
I hear he has a little pain from that sometimes, but quickly
forgets about it. :P
--
indi
Nightcrawler
"BradGuth" <brad...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:27da353b-147c-4ed3...@i12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> That�s really odd, because in deep underground caves or mine shafts,
> other than the expected atmospheric pressure increase that�s obvious
> and somewhat minor (<42% increase per 3.5 km depth unless you plan on
> artificially cooling that column of air in order to get a 100%
> increase per 3.5 km), there�s hardly any other significant geology
> pressures for our physiology to contend with, including while swimming
> or scuba diving in those deep underground lakes or aquifers, and
> there�s certainly not any big increase in gravity (if anything it only
> measurably increases ever so slightly), and there�s certainly no
> objective way of telling if the inner core is merely that of a dense
> shell that�s hollow inside, or not.
<irrelevant snipped>
1)
Non related items, Guthie. Caves and mine shafts are cavities in
the crust. The only pressure that would be evident there would be
atmospheric. The pressure inside the Channel tube is relatively
the same as that on the surface, as well as that inside of a sub at
great depth. The pressure on the walls of the caves/mine shafts,
or sub, is much greater. Since they are solids that pressure is
contained by the structure of their substance and does not flow as
with a liquid.
However, if the pressure is great enough the structure of either will
fail. A cave will collapse and a sub will implode. Increase the
pressure sufficiently and the friction will cause any solid to lose the
molecular bonds that make it a solid.
2)
A gas does not behave like a liquid or a solid. Nor does a liquid
behave like a solid.
3)
What happens to a can of air that is immersed to a depth of 3.5km
in water? Now, drill a hole that deep in ice. Place the can down there
and slowly fill with water, letting the water freeze 1mm at a time. What
then happens to that can?
Koobee Wublee
> "Koobee Wublee" <koobee.wub...@gmail.com> wrote
> I understand that you regard these historic things as serious matters.
> To me however, having left academia, ever since I freed myself from
> the slavery of post-docing, these events have become very entertaining
> tid-bits worth enjoying with laughs... ahahahaha
>
> When and if fancy strikes I may wanna take up and discuss with you
> some issues about the nature of Black holes. A case can be made
> for their nature to be a very different animal then the popular
> Schwartzschild solution (which was propose IIRC century earlier
> by B. Pascal). Here are my notions about it. You do the math on it
> (make a new thread):
> <http://tinyurl.com/ykf356z> Barycenters Black Holes / Ghez.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/3f25ece8394b7228?hl=en
Koobee Wublee
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
>
> Hey look at that, the anti-Einstein echo chamber found a sounding board.
Why would anyone hate Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the
liar?
<shrug>
Why would Gisse a college dropout worship Einstein the nitwit, the
plagiarist, and the liar?
Answer:
Because Gisse the college dropout is also a nitwit, a plagiarist, and
a liar.
<shrug>
Peter Webb
If you don't understand Relativity, you probably don't understand much of
the physics of the last 100 years, as SR is pretty much woven into most of
it, including QM.
Indeed, if you don't believe that the speed of light is independent of the
speed of the transmitting and receiving object, then you don't believe in
Maxwell's equations either. These date from 1873, so that pushes back the
last physics that you "believe in" to 137 years ago.
Fortunately, all the wonders of modern technology which depend on Maxwell's
equations, SR, and QM appear to work just fine, even though you don't
believe they should. For example, particle accelerators, computers, mobile
phones, WiFi, TV and radio broadcasts, interferometers, spectrometers, GPS,
radio telescopes, and TVs all appear to work just fine, even though
according to you they shouldn't.
There are also people who believe the world is flat. Fortunately this
doesn't stop people flying around the world. Similarly, even though you
believe that SR is wrong, it doesn't stop people from accelerating particles
close to the speed of light and noting the fact they behave *exactly* as
predicted by SR.
As I have said before, there are many excellent books on SR designed for the
physics beginner, and these often involve only high-school mathematics.
Assuming you have a basic knowledge of algebra, some of these are almost
certainly within your ability to read and understand.
If there is anything in these books you don't understand, then I am sure
that people in this group will help you as they help others.
HTH
Peter Webb
Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHzbKrg2HIw&feature=related
QED and richard feynman part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8O_yQHxQos&feature=related
QED and richard feynman part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7F8upU0rqbA&feature=related
--
Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
Best Regards!
"Peter Webb" <webbf...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> kirjoitti
viestiss�:4aeb80bf$0$17749$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
BradGuth
3.5 km isn't gong very deep, and that still doesn't tell us how much
of Earth's interior is hollow or displaced by some kinds of low
density fluids.
Obviously the interior is not of a uniform density, nor is it getting
uniformly compressed, as otherwise there wouldn't be those 500 km deep
quakes.
The objectively deep Russian drilling at 12+ km doesn't agree with
your analogy. It's as though the inner layer of our crust (say from 6
to 10 km depth) is extremely dense, though below that mark it gets
less dense (and they still do not know why).
~ BG
BradGuth
> "BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:27da353b-147c-4ed3...@i12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Your objective proof that that our Selene/moon crust is 100% solid, as
is everything inside of that?
Before you bother, your obfuscation is noted.
~ BG
Just Me
Like, 'steeling" for "steal"? Does it really get that dumb? In a
science newsgroup, no less? When you're too stupid to spell at that
elementary level it ony tells ya the guy is too stupid to read
anything above that level. Hence the kind of "thinking" he does.
I'll give him a "Zionist/Jewish policy". Let this hair-on-fire Ernst
Rohm in his little Nazi boots go to Gaza and join up with Hamas. Then
let the IDF give him the "Zionist/Jewish policy" right close up and
personal. :-)
Where is my closest IDF recruiter?
--
JM http://doo-dads.blogspot.com/
Nightcrawler
"BradGuth" <brad...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:2cf120ed-57fb-4b43...@x5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> Your objective proof that that our Selene/moon crust is 100% solid, as
> is everything inside of that?
>
> Before you bother, your obfuscation is noted.
Obfuscation? We were talking about the Earth, not the moon.
Care to try again?
Nightcrawler
"BradGuth" <brad...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:05e0d78e-9094-4987...@x5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> 3.5 km isn't gong very deep, and that still doesn't tell us how much
> of Earth's interior is hollow or displaced by some kinds of low
> density fluids.
That depth is rather shallow. As for hollow, I'd say that below the
crust/mantle zone you won't find any voids.
> Obviously the interior is not of a uniform density, nor is it getting
> uniformly compressed,
That's a given since the mantle/crust is not uniform in composition.
Nor does the crust have uniform weight distribution by itself, or with
water/ice covering major portions of the crust. Add in hot spots
and you get regions that have completely different characteristics
to other regions. In fact, each volcanic area on the planet has a
unique finger print to its area. A volcanologists can tell you what
volcanic sample came from which volcano.
Slap on some ice ages to change the weight distribution, then
remove that distribution, and things get a bit funny. The planet
is still popping out the kinks from the last ice age. That's why
you don't see a huge rise in sea levels when the ice melts, because
the land rises and the oceans sink.
> The objectively deep Russian drilling at 12+ km doesn't agree with
> your analogy. It's as though the inner layer of our crust (say from 6
> to 10 km depth) is extremely dense, though below that mark it gets
> less dense (and they still do not know why).
7 miles is still rather shallow. That location was chosen because of
the nature of the region. Regardless, to think that the crust, or mantle,
is uniform is in error. One need only look at the different types of
volcanoes and there lava flows to figure this out. What's under the
crust may be considered "liquid", but it does not behave like a
liquid in a pure sense. Things don't diffuse readily in a material
that is like taffy.
BradGuth
Why didn't you just say that you agreed with me?
~ BG
BradGuth
> "BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:2cf120ed-57fb-4b43...@x5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> > Your objective proof that that our Selene/moon crust is 100% solid, as
> > is everything inside of that?
>
> > Before you bother, your obfuscation is noted.
>
> Obfuscation? We were talking about the Earth, not the moon.
>
> Care to try again?
Under the relatively thin crust of Earth, who knows what goes on?
How much thorium, uranium, radium and so on is in there?
How much of Earth's core is hydrogen and helium?
According to Russian deep drilling, at 10+ km it's not of higher
density as they go deeper. What gives?
~ BG
BradGuth
You've forgotten to mention his being a twice arrested "wife beater"
as well as a drug induced "Satan worshiper", because that’s exactly
what their Zionist/Jewish policy includes and approves of, as well as
slave ownership and apparently body snatchings for live organ
harvesting, along with their kosher approved SEC and its Ponzi Madoff
types that have no remorse about stealing from God, their own kind, or
their putting dark-skinned folks on a stick, and more recently
excessively irradiating 100,000 dark-skinned Jewish kids.
~ BG
BURT
How do we know for certain the chemical make up of the Earths
interior?
Taking into account that there is a large window for the gravitational
constant.
Mitch Raemsch
Peter Webb
You've forgotten to mention his being a twice arrested "wife beater"
as well as a drug induced "Satan worshiper", because that�s exactly
what their Zionist/Jewish policy includes and approves of, as well as
slave ownership and apparently body snatchings for live organ
harvesting, along with their kosher approved SEC and its Ponzi Madoff
types that have no remorse about stealing from God, their own kind, or
their putting dark-skinned folks on a stick, and more recently
excessively irradiating 100,000 dark-skinned Jewish kids.
______________________________
So Einstein harvested organs, owned slaves and worshipped Satan while on
drugs?
Are you sure Einstein didn't also eat Christian babies for dinner? I can see
no authoritative source which rules this out, so its probably true. Jews
love eating Christian babies.
BradGuth
Good point. At least thus far, we know zilch of what's inside.
>
> Taking into account that there is a large window for the gravitational
> constant.
>
> Mitch Raemsch
Everything is at risk of being revised, though some more so than
others.
~ BG
Peter Webb
"BURT" <macro...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:06dac951-fe68-4cdb...@h14g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
________________________________
There are several ways. We know the earth's average density. We know what
happens to shock waves moving through the earth, for both compressional and
shear waves, so we can reverse engineer this signals (much as what happens
in CAT scanning) to determine the nature of the propogating material. We
have geophysical evidence derived from movements of the earth's magnetic
field. We also have a lot of physics which provides us with reasonably good
estimates of pressure and temperature as a function of depth.
HTH
Mitch Raemsch
Nightcrawler
"BradGuth" <brad...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1773a97c-d205-4dfb...@f18g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> Under the relatively thin crust of Earth, who knows what goes on?
>
> How much thorium, uranium, radium and so on is in there?
>
> How much of Earth's core is hydrogen and helium?
>
> According to Russian deep drilling, at 10+ km it's not of higher
> density as they go deeper. What gives?
>
> ~ BG
Some of these questions may be answered, some not.
Here's some primer:
http://publications.iodp.org/scientific_prospectus/304_305/index.html
off of the main page of:
http://www.iodp.org/scientific-publications/
hanson
"BradGuth" <brad...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 29, 9:20 am, "hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote:
> ahahahaha.... "BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> who is clearly
> and without any doubt the unkosher stuff on used TP wrote:
>
> > Koobee Wublee <koobee.wub...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> "hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote:
>
> hanson wrote:
> > > Usenet accounts about Albert's vile and dark side go back a
> > > decade, by n' large in response to poster Stephen Speicher,
> > > a grossly fanatical & virulent Einstein Dingleberry who provoked
> > > Christopher Jon Bjerknes to do research and write a book about
> > > Einstein's kinky kikeism.
>
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > Thanks for the recent history.
>
> hanson wrote:
> > > To most Jews Einstein's unsavory character is no surprise and
> > > neither is the fact that Einstein's popularity was a promotional
> > > product by the Zionists during the Weimar Republic years.
> > > Albert did fit and was used by the Zio's agenda and they even
> > > proposed to him to become and be the 1st PM of Israel... ahahaha...
>
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > Einstein was a nitwit. What do you expect to do when given such a
> > responsibility?
>
> hanson wrote:
> > > Einstein chickened out. He had too much baggage that would have
> > > been vetted and vented ... ahaha... like the dirty little secret that
> > > it
> > > was NOT Albert Einstein himself, but his first Christian wife Mileva
> > > Maric, who conceived, constructed/mathed & authored the 1905
> > > paper about Relativity.
>
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > Given Mileva being so much intelligent than Einstein the nitwit, the
> > plagiarist, and the liar, the possibility of that Mileva being the
> > original authors of Einstein�s 1905 papers is very high indeed.
>
> hanson wrote:
> > > Allegedly she nagged him to publish her manuscript under his name
> > > because in 1905 women belonged into the kitchen but not into the
> > > intellectual realm of physics. He reluctantly and grudgingly did..
> > > But Albert did not include a single footnote, ref, citation nor any
> > > acknowledgments... Freudian slippage or deliberately... ahahaha...
>
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > She should have fought her way out to publish that under her name just
> > like Misner.
>
> hanson wrote:
> > > There was, early in 2004, a full hour long TV documentary over this,
> > > wherein many physics scholars spoke out about how Albert published
> > > the intellectual SR property created by his non-Jewish wife, & then
> > > how he dumped her when he became famous.
> > > The kicker really is that after Einstein got his promotion into
> > > "fame",
> > > by the Zios, and he divorced Mileva, he signed over all the money
> > > from his Nobel prize to her... as "hush money"... ahahaha... an event
> > > which Einstein brushed away with his corny humor, him saying:
>
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > A tell-tale sign.
>
> hanson wrote:
> > > "The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources".
>
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > That phrase is all over the internet now. Mr. Stachel whose job
> > depends on promoting a nitwit, a plagiarist, and a liar into godhood
> > would naturally try to erase any references to that quote.
>
> hanson wrote:
> > > That secret source was Mileva of course. So, to Einstein's credit it
> > > must be said that he himself confessed and admitted to his scum
> > > behavior and paid for it with Hush money to his Ex-wife when he
> > > assigned all the monies he received from the (future) Nobel price to
> > > his ex-wife Mileva.
>
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > Don�t forget that the Lorentz transform was logically inconsistent
> > ever since day one when Larmor wrote it down. More than a decade
> > earlier, Voigt tossed the Lorentz transform into the trashbin in favor
> > of the Voigt transform.
>
> hanson wrote:
> > > <http://tinyurl.com/yjmfyxa> on Einstein's hush money
>
> > > <http://tinyurl.com/o74vbr> on Einstein guilt and confessions
>
> > > <http://tinyurl.com/yfqwm5v> Kolker vs Christopher Jon Bjerknes
>
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > I thought Mr. Kolker has much integrity than that. Attacking Mr.
> > Bjerkness�s dick size and suggesting Mr. Bjerkness sleeping with his
> > grandmother reflects how desperate Einstein Dinglberries are. Thanks
> > for bringing up history into perspective.
>
> hanson wrote:
> > > Like in all personality cults... and physics is no exception, the
> > > Prophet's most fanatical and loud disciple come from outside his
> > > own ilk. This is reflected in that the most vociferous and hysterical
> > > comments in defense and in favor of Einstein do come from the
> > > brainwashed Goyim, = non-Jews, aka Einstein Dingleberries, who
> > > stammer in horror "You lie!!'.. against anybody who portrays their
> > > hero in an unfavorable light... ahahaha...
> > > Thanks for the laughs, guys, ....ahahahaha... ahahahahanson
>
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > This is actually no laughing matter. The bottom line is that Einstein
> > was a nitwit, plagiarist, and a liar. The stupid things that were
> > credited to him were junk. That really reflects the intellectual
> > might of the self-styled physicists. <shrug and sigh>
>
> > For example, they talk about black holes to make them feel important
> > in their accomplishments, and yet upon scrutinizes of the subjects
> > involved, we know that the mathematics that have created black holes
> > was itself totally man-made in nature. On top of that, there are an
> > infinite number of solutions to the field equations that are static,
> > spherically symmetric, and asymptotically flat. Among them, most of
> > these solutions do not predict black holes. In doing so, the self-
> > styled physicists have failed to justify why the Schwarzschild metric
> > is more realistic than the Schwarzschild�s original metric. Without
> > thinking, Professor Draper tried to bull$hit boundary conditions in
> > selecting which metric is more realistic than the others but failed
> > embarrassingly so.
>
> > Einstein Dingleberries seem to have no shame. <shrug>
>
> unkosher excrement Brad Guth cremented & wrote:
> Contributor "hanson" is unfortunately worth something less than used
> toilet paper, but then many Einstein lovers and haters give a great
> deal of credit to such TP, as long as it's kosher TP to begin with.
> Unfortunately, you can never tell which side "hanson" is on, even
> though this time he/she/they seem to be on our side of sharing the
> whole truth and nothing but the truth.
> ~ BG
>
> hanson wrote:
> ahahahaha... why & what about did you crank yourself, Brad?...
> Your really sound like the unkosher stuff on used TP... ahaha...
> But thanks for the laughs... ahahaha... AHAHAH...
>
> Koobee Wublee, I understand that you regard these historic
> things as serious matters. To me however, having left academia,
> ever since I freed myself from the slavery of post-docing, these
> events have become very entertaining tid-bits worth reading in
> the locus where one extrudes Guthballs and enjoys the feeling.
> Remember, taking a good shit is worth half a fuck...
> ahahahaha... Take care KW... hanson
>
> PS:
> When and if fancy strikes I may wanna take up and discuss
> with you some issues about the nature of Black holes. A
> case can be made for their nature to be a very different
> animal then the popular Schwartzschild solution (which
> was propose IIRC century earlier by B. Pascal). Here are
> my notions about it. You do the math on it (make a new thread):
> <http://tinyurl.com/ykf356z> Barycenters Black Holes / Ghez.
>
Brad Guth wrote:
>Your black holes of something other than horrific mass is
unfortunately what I've been arguing for nearly a decade. I happen to
favor positrons/antimatter surrounded by those 1e100 photons/atom or
conceivably per positron. However, the BHB (black hole barycenter)
notion is one I hadn't thought much about.
>
The absolute vacuum of a stellar or galactic formed barycenter may not
allow photons to pass through. Therefore it could be the absolute
lack of mass that we perceive as a black hole. This too I'd argued
some years ago, having suggested that it takes at least a few (say
1e3) atoms per km3 in order for photons to function, whereas below
that threshold is where photons fail to migrate.
>
hanson wrote:
ahahahaha... So, you saw that decades ago. What happend?... ahaha
Brad, I am NOT talking about any "horrific mass" anywhere... ahahaha...
As usual you just lament about things that do not fit into any larger
framework of physics. You just produce bullsherations like you constantly
do. That is not physics at all. Take your silly "positrons/antimatter
surrounded by those 1e100 photons/atom or conceivably per positron"
is a typical example of your loud-mouthing phantasms... ahahahaha..
>
If you insist to take that route, then very first, tackle the problem where
all this "positrons/antimatter" comes from, and explain the mechanism
that sifts it out of the mix of matter/antimatter. Empirically, it is known
that there is a ratio of, IIRC, 10^7 - 10^10 more matter then antimatter
in nature. Intuitively and as per symmetry considerations (Emily Noether)
that ratio should be ~ 1:1. So first show which of the currently known
laws are broken, that make it possible to produce this lop-sided ratio.
hanson
>
KW, I shall be back with you, on topic of the issue here, in a few
days, after I stop laughing about Brad and a few other posters'
notions. Take care KW. -- hanson
BradGuth
> "BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1773a97c-d205-4dfb...@f18g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Perhaps my topics are making some of these folks think twice.
I'm interested in what makes a planet or its moon tick. Obviously the
Sirius star system has something to do with various aspects of our
environment, our Selene/moon, Venus and much more.
~ BG
BradGuth
<webbfam...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> "BURT" <macromi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Deeper drillings and/or small probes sent past the lower crust will
begin to tell us how close our previous physics and science analogy
has been.
~ BG
Nightcrawler
"BradGuth" <brad...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ad8939ab-0d50-4e6c...@i4g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
> I'm interested in what makes a planet or its moon tick. Obviously the
> Sirius star system has something to do with various aspects of our
> environment, our Selene/moon, Venus and much more.
I don't see how this leap in logic can be made.
BradGuth
> "BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:ad8939ab-0d50-4e6c...@i4g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
> > I'm interested in what makes a planet or its moon tick. Obviously the
> > Sirius star system has something to do with various aspects of our
> > environment, our Selene/moon, Venus and much more.
>
> I don't see how this leap in logic can be made.
It's perhaps called "Gravitomagnetism and the Newtonian Law of
Gravity"
Are you suggesting that the "Newtonian Law of Gravity" is bogus?
Are you suggesting a nearby nova is nothing to take seriously?
Are you suggesting a relatively nearby 12.5e6 Ms molecular cloud is
insignificant?
~ BG
Nightcrawler
"BradGuth" <brad...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:d717a1dc-3ee5-4769...@g1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
> It's perhaps called "Gravitomagnetism and the Newtonian Law of
> Gravity"
>
> Are you suggesting that the "Newtonian Law of Gravity" is bogus?
>
> Are you suggesting a nearby nova is nothing to take seriously?
>
> Are you suggesting a relatively nearby 12.5e6 Ms molecular cloud is
> insignificant?
I'll just say that jumping from earth to Sirius is quite a leap.
BradGuth
> "BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:d717a1dc-3ee5-4769...@g1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
What if Sirius was at times nearby, such as within 1 ly or even 0.1
ly?
How else did terrestrial diatoms thrive?
~ BG
spudnik
depends upon how you define the word,
that is more powerful than its anagram(s)!
> that sifts it out of the mix of matter/antimatter. Empirically, it is known
> that there is a ratio of, IIRC, 10^7 - 10^10 more matter then antimatter
thus:
you're implying that "Heawood's mistaken proof" was actually correct,
iff you've proven the four-color theorem?
> It's always possible to give triangle numbers so that all vertices have a vertex number of 0. It's Heawood's equivalent formulation of the 4 color theorem ( Heawood's vertex character on the dual of a cubic map).
>
> But does there exist a proof or disproof for the following statement:
> Given all the 2^(2v-4) combinations of triangle numbers, then any set of v-2 vertex numbers has all the 3^(v-2) different combinations of vertex numbers if the two missing vertices are adjacent?
--McSudan Crusades for carbon credits!?!
spudnik
> (make a new thread):
> <http://tinyurl.com/ykf356z> Barycenters Black Holes / Ghez.
thus:
Double-A
> Pressure accrues.
> The deeper you go the higher the pressure and temperature.
>
> What could produce “ reduced pressure and/or lower density ”
> at the center of the earth ?
At the center of the Earth it's like you are in a vice that has
tightened on you to terrific pressure. Only difference is that the
pressure is from all sides equally, so there is no direction for your
brains to squirt out!
Double-A
Sam Wormley
Plus... it's so hot, you can hardly think!
BradGuth
However, at near zero gravity (say within a 1% volume of Earth as
representing its inner most core where gravity is less than 0.1%)
whereas the center most zone of dead center is actually zero or even
reverse gravity (meaning you'd oscillate or vibrate within this final
sphere), how can there be pressure?
~ BG
HVAC
"Sam Wormley" <swor...@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:Zr_Hm.119906$la3.108169@attbi_s22...
>
> At the center of the Earth it's like you are in a vice that has
> tightened on you to terrific pressure. Only difference is that the
> pressure is from all sides equally, so there is no direction for your
> brains to squirt out!
>
> Double-A
Plus... it's so hot, you can hardly think!
Ya, but it's a DRY heat.....
Double-A
If your head were clamped in a vice that was tightening, what would
you care about gravity? Get the point?
Double-A
BradGuth
At near zero gravity, where's all that pressure coming from?
How much does lead or any other element weigh at zero gravity?
~ BG
Double-A
The pressure is coming from the mass on all sides of you that IS
feeling gravity and is all pushing inwards, each side attracting the
opposite side.
Double-A
BradGuth
However, an eggshell would likely protect you, because the vast bulk
of whatever is surrounding yourself is being pulled outwards unless
you yourself represented more density than anything else (thus you'd
be representing gravity).
If the core substance were that of hydrogen and helium?
~ BG
Darla
news:8398584a-b8da-4e4c...@o10g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 30, 12:30 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 30, 9:07 am, "Nightcrawler" <Dirtyde...@dirtcheap.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in
> > > On Oct 29, 7:10 pm, _@Jeff_Relf.Seattle.inValid wrote:
> > >> Brad�Guth's �hollow earth� theory is insane. Pressure accrues.
> > >> Imagine the pressure you'd feel at the bottom of the Mariana Trench.
>
> > >> The center of earth is like that but, instead of water,
> > >> you have zetta�tons of blazing�hot steel pressing down on you.
>
> > > It's just a theory, although hollow is relative.
>
> > Hollow is defined, not relative.
>
> > > How about a reduced pressure and/or lower density interior?
>
> > The pressure at the center is created through compression, not
> > gravitational attraction AT THE CORE, rather the matter trying to get
> > TO/THRU the core via the resultant vector created by ALL of the matter
> > of the earth, not just at the core.
>
> > However, do to this compression the matter at the core will have a
> > higher specific density, thus a bit more gravity than the same material
> > would have without a large mass trying to press through equally from
> > all sides.
>
> That�s really odd, because in deep underground caves or mine shafts,
> other than the expected atmospheric pressure increase that�s obvious
> and somewhat minor (<42% increase per 3.5 km depth unless you plan on
> artificially cooling that column of air in order to get a 100%
> increase per 3.5 km), there�s hardly any other significant geology
> pressures for our physiology to contend with, including while swimming
> or scuba diving in those deep underground lakes or aquifers, and
> there�s certainly not any big increase in gravity (if anything it only
> measurably increases ever so slightly), and there�s certainly no
> objective way of telling if the inner core is merely that of a dense
> shell that�s hollow inside, or not.
> http://nopr.niscair.res.in/bitstream/123456789/2506/1/IJRSP%2037(1)%2...
The fact that gravity increases measurably in deep caves/mines tells
you that the interior of the Earth is denser than the rock above you.
Otherwise gravity would have already begun to decrease.
Double-A
My dearest Double-A!
The centerline gravity Has begun to decrease.
It's the downward semi-lateral crust density that increases a bit more
quickly than that centerline decrease that causes the increase in net
gravitational force as one goes deeper into the crust.
For a time.
Measuring devices used so far have no way of distinguishing the semi-lateral
forces from the centerline force, so they measure the net force as having
increased.
There is, of course, a semi-lateral force at the surface which, if separated
from the centerline force, would be found to be at minimum, and it increases
quickly as spelunkers and divers explore to deeper levels.
At a glance, it may seem that the semi-lateral forces cancel.
That is only true if they are 180 degrees out of phase.
There are infinite directions of pull that are less than 180 degrees out of
phase.
The downward semi-laterals do eventually get cancelled more and more by the
upward forces.
One must go extremely deep before the net decrease would begin to establish
itself.
What you call "gravity" must be the greatest fun for all of you!
You must try to imagine the real vectorial forces upon you and shy away from
Newton's centerline-only gravitational image.
Such an imagication is quite limiting.
The sky is a "limit", and it stretches out in infinite directions.
So why not the ground also?
Is the Earth not infinite vectorisations within a finite boundary?
--
Darla
Henry Wilson DSc
Earth is slowly rotating so centrifugal force is insufficiet to obercome
gratvity near the centre. But what about a very rapidly spinning neutron
star?
It could easily be hollow.
There is no gravity field inside homogeneous shell.
Henry Wilson...www.scisite.info/index.htm
Einstein...World's greatest SciFi writer..
Alan Morgan
Henry Wilson DSc <H@..> wrote:
>Earth is slowly rotating so centrifugal force is insufficiet to obercome
>gratvity near the centre. But what about a very rapidly spinning neutron
>star?
>
>It could easily be hollow.
No, I'm pretty sure it couldn't. It couldn't spin fast enough without
tearing itself apart and it would cease to be a neutron star long before
it got to that point.
I guess "It could easily" means "I have absolutely no idea what I'm talking
about and the mathematics is completely beyond me, but I'm going to wave my
hands rapidly and guess that it could".
Alan
--
Defendit numerus
Androcles
"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
news:5sa1f5lm6ollp6vjm...@4ax.com...
Nobody thinks the Earth is hollow, and he doesn't read my posts.
Nobody is drunk, the only thing that is hollow is his cask of cheap
red wine.
> There is no gravity field inside homogeneous shell.
So the entire universe could be enclosed in such a shell and
we'd never know it. But what would be outside it?
Sam Wormley
>
> Earth is slowly rotating so centrifugal force is insufficiet to obercome
> gratvity near the centre. But what about a very rapidly spinning neutron
> star?
>
> It could easily be hollow.
No Henry, Henri--the centrifugal force from the perspective
of a rotating coordinate system goes to zero at the core.
Henry Wilson DSc
I know that.
It could never become hollow if it was solid....but how do you know it was ever
solid?
On the other hand, there could have been a massive explosion at the centre that
created a giant cavity but wasn't strong enough to blow the whole thing apart.
See! I'm full of good ideas Wormey......
Henry Wilson DSc
Morgan) wrote:
>In article <5sa1f5lm6ollp6vjm...@4ax.com>,
>Henry Wilson DSc <H@..> wrote:
>
>>Earth is slowly rotating so centrifugal force is insufficiet to obercome
>>gratvity near the centre. But what about a very rapidly spinning neutron
>>star?
>>
>>It could easily be hollow.
>
>No, I'm pretty sure it couldn't. It couldn't spin fast enough without
>tearing itself apart and it would cease to be a neutron star long before
>it got to that point.
It might become a tennis ball instead
>I guess "It could easily" means "I have absolutely no idea what I'm talking
>about and the mathematics is completely beyond me, but I'm going to wave my
>hands rapidly and guess that it could".
>
>Alan
Henry Wilson DSc
wrote:
>
>"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
>news:5sa1f5lm6ollp6vjm...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 13:11:56 -0800 (PST), BradGuth <brad...@gmail.com>
>>>However, an eggshell would likely protect you, because the vast bulk
>>>of whatever is surrounding yourself is being pulled outwards unless
>>>you yourself represented more density than anything else (thus you'd
>>>be representing gravity).
>>>
>>>If the core substance were that of hydrogen and helium?
>>>
>>> ~ BG
>>
>> Earth is slowly rotating so centrifugal force is insufficiet to obercome
>> gratvity near the centre. But what about a very rapidly spinning
>> neutron
>> star?
>>
>> It could easily be hollow.
>
>Nobody thinks the Earth is hollow, and he doesn't read my posts.
>Nobody is drunk, the only thing that is hollow is his cask of cheap
>red wine.
I suppose you will now include "Wilson says the Earth is hollow" in your list
of misquotes? ...you know, the ones that are going to see you done for
defamation...
>> There is no gravity field inside homogeneous shell.
>
>So the entire universe could be enclosed in such a shell and
>we'd never know it. But what would be outside it?
inverse space. x = 1/X
BradGuth
> "Double-A" <double...@hush.com> wrote in message
That's certainly a whole lot better way of saying it, though still
complex and as you say, it's not going to be limited to all that
Newtonian centerline-only gravitational stuff as we travel inward
(below the crust). It must be nearly as complex and/or downright
interesting for that of our Selene/moon interior, that’s no longer
fluid under that extremely thick and substantially mineral saturated
crust, other than encountering a few layers or geode pockets of
mineral brines.
What’s at the residual hot core of our Selene/moon?
What’s the approximate age of our moon?
~ BG
Androcles
"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 22:30:42 -0000, "Androcles"
> <Headm...@Hogwarts.physics_p>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
>>news:5sa1f5lm6ollp6vjm...@4ax.com...
>>> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 13:11:56 -0800 (PST), BradGuth <brad...@gmail.com>
>
>>>>However, an eggshell would likely protect you, because the vast bulk
>>>>of whatever is surrounding yourself is being pulled outwards unless
>>>>you yourself represented more density than anything else (thus you'd
>>>>be representing gravity).
>>>>
>>>>If the core substance were that of hydrogen and helium?
>>>>
>>>> ~ BG
>>>
>>> Earth is slowly rotating so centrifugal force is insufficiet to obercome
>>> gratvity near the centre. But what about a very rapidly spinning
>>> neutron
>>> star?
>>>
>>> It could easily be hollow.
>>
>>Nobody thinks the Earth is hollow, and he doesn't read my posts.
>>Nobody is drunk, the only thing that is hollow is his cask of cheap
>>red wine.
>
> I suppose you will now include "Wilson says the Earth is hollow" in your
> list
> of misquotes? ...you know, the ones that are going to see you done for
> defamation...
The nobody Wilson reads my posts... any time you want to
sue, go ahead, Google has the archives. Oh, and err... "suppose"
all you want to, even in civil cases a modicum of proof is required.
A preponderance of the evidence is good enough, only in criminal
cases do you need proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Since I have proof absolute that you said
"There is no doppler shift in BaTh." -- Wilson
http://tinyurl.com/2rk695
you won't have a leg to stand on.
>>> There is no gravity field inside homogeneous shell.
>>
>>So the entire universe could be enclosed in such a shell and
>>we'd never know it. But what would be outside it?
>
> inverse space. x = 1/X
Not the question I asked.
Tom Potter
"Peter Webb" <webbf...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:4aebd4c0$0$6096$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
>
> You've forgotten to mention his being a twice arrested "wife beater"
> as well as a drug induced "Satan worshiper", because that's exactly
> what their Zionist/Jewish policy includes and approves of, as well as
> slave ownership and apparently body snatchings for live organ
> harvesting, along with their kosher approved SEC and its Ponzi Madoff
> types that have no remorse about stealing from God, their own kind, or
> their putting dark-skinned folks on a stick, and more recently
> excessively irradiating 100,000 dark-skinned Jewish kids.
>
> ______________________________
> So Einstein harvested organs, owned slaves and worshipped Satan while on
> drugs?
Of course, Einstein did make some great contributions to mankind.
The URL below describes Einstein's greatest invention in detail.
Considering how intently the Mass Media,
and GTR Guru's on the public dole,
hyped and hypes Einstein's General Relativity,
a model that uses rubber clocks and rulers
to waste time, money and minds
on such pursuits as time travel, worm holes,
gravitons, warping through space, etc.
as mankind's greatest intellectual achievement,
comparing Einstein's greatest invention to
Edison's inventions that gave man
audio and video recording,
electrical power generation and distribution systems
with generators, motors, meters, lamps, heaters, etc.
and the Watson, Crick DNA model
that is used every day to improve health,
fight crime, design better food crops, etc.
brings one's thoughts back to reality.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=zRpsAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&dq=albert+einstein#PPA1,M1
No doubt, Einstein, like Maddock, Marx,
the Biblical authors, Ayn Rand, Uncle Al, etc.
was a master words smith,
but when one measures his works by
their positive benefits to mankind,
one realizes that:
A mind is a terrible thing to waste.
--
Tom Potter
http://tdp1001.spaces.live.com
http://www.tompotter.us/misc.html
http://webspace.webring.com/people/st/tdp1001
http://notsocrazyideas.blogspot.com
http://tdp1001.wiki.zoho.com
-----------------------------------------------
Sam Wormley
> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 22:58:11 GMT, Sam Wormley <swor...@mchsi.com> wrote:
>
>> Henry Wilson DSc wrote:
>>
>>> Earth is slowly rotating so centrifugal force is insufficiet to obercome
>>> gratvity near the centre. But what about a very rapidly spinning neutron
>>> star?
>>>
>>> It could easily be hollow.
>> No Henry, Henri--the centrifugal force from the perspective
>> of a rotating coordinate system goes to zero at the core.
>
> I know that.
>
> It could never become hollow if it was solid....but how do you know it was ever
> solid?
It's a force called gravity--look it up!
Henry Wilson DSc
wrote:
>
>"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
>news:aoj1f596g3p7lhnf7...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 22:30:42 -0000, "Androcles"
>>>
>>>Nobody thinks the Earth is hollow, and he doesn't read my posts.
>>>Nobody is drunk, the only thing that is hollow is his cask of cheap
>>>red wine.
>>
>> I suppose you will now include "Wilson says the Earth is hollow" in your
>> list
>> of misquotes? ...you know, the ones that are going to see you done for
>> defamation...
>
>The nobody Wilson reads my posts... any time you want to
>sue, go ahead, Google has the archives. Oh, and err... "suppose"
>all you want to, even in civil cases a modicum of proof is required.
>A preponderance of the evidence is good enough, only in criminal
>cases do you need proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
>Since I have proof absolute that you said
> "There is no doppler shift in BaTh." -- Wilson
> http://tinyurl.com/2rk695
>you won't have a leg to stand on.
We were talking about doppler shift at the source.
there isn't any in BaTh.
You'd better get a good lawyer.
>>>> There is no gravity field inside homogeneous shell.
>>>
>>>So the entire universe could be enclosed in such a shell and
>>>we'd never know it. But what would be outside it?
>>
>> inverse space. x = 1/X
>
>Not the question I asked.
No but its a good answer anyway.
Henry Wilson DSc
What are the required conditions for spinning matter to condense into a HOLLOW
ball rather than a solid one?
BradGuth
>
> >> Henry Wilson DSc wrote:
>
> >>> Earth is slowly rotating so centrifugal force is insufficiet to obercome
> >>> gratvity near the centre. But what about a very rapidly spinning neutron
> >>> star?
>
> >>> It could easily be hollow.
> >> No Henry, Henri--the centrifugal force from the perspective
> >> of a rotating coordinate system goes to zero at the core.
>
> > I know that.
>
> > It could never become hollow if it was solid....but how do you know it was ever
> > solid?
>
> It's a force called gravity--look it up!
Ever heard of helium? (where the hell do you think it comes from?)
Ever heard of CO2, methane and radon gas?
What happens when a 500 Mt chemical or nuclear reactions take place at
500+ km deep?
~ BG
Androcles
"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
Only for a drunk.
Henry Wilson DSc
wrote:
>
>"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
>news:lru1f5t6m6j2e4ho8...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 01:15:22 -0000, "Androcles"
>>>The nobody Wilson reads my posts... any time you want to
>>>sue, go ahead, Google has the archives. Oh, and err... "suppose"
>>>all you want to, even in civil cases a modicum of proof is required.
>>>A preponderance of the evidence is good enough, only in criminal
>>>cases do you need proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
>>>Since I have proof absolute that you said
>>> "There is no doppler shift in BaTh." -- Wilson
>>> http://tinyurl.com/2rk695
>>>you won't have a leg to stand on.
>>
>> We were talking about doppler shift at the source.
>> there isn't any in BaTh.
>>
>> You'd better get a good lawyer.
>
>"There is no doppler shift in BaTh." -- Wilson
> http://tinyurl.com/2rk695
>
>
>
>>
>>>>>> There is no gravity field inside homogeneous shell.
>>>>>
>>>>>So the entire universe could be enclosed in such a shell and
>>>>>we'd never know it. But what would be outside it?
>>>>
>>>> inverse space. x = 1/X
>>>
>>>Not the question I asked.
>>
>> No but its a good answer anyway.
>>
>Only for a drunk.
It explains infinity. Space is inverse, It goes to zero when X = infinity..
Androcles
"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message
We mathematicians say division by zero is undefined.
a = b, given.
a^2 = ab, multiplying both sides by a.
a^2-b^2 = ab-b^2, subtracting b^2 from both sides.
(a+b)(a-b) = b(a-b), factorising.
a+b = b, dividing both sides by (a-b).
b+b = b, because a = b, given.
2b = b, because b+b = 2b
2 = 1, dividing both sides by b.
Since 2b = b, proven, it follows a = 2b
and we can prove all numbers = 1, so all numbers are equal
but some are more equal than others. No infinity involved.
Don Stockbauer
> "Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in messagenews:osi2f5labhciqgut1...@4ax.com...
>
> > On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 05:35:45 -0000, "Androcles"
But constructivistic Reality proves they're not.
BradGuth
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 05:35:45 -0000, "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics_p>
Reverse space or anti-matter space is always less than zero.
~ BG
Alan Morgan
Henry Wilson DSc <H@..> wrote:
I can't imagine that it would ever do that. The equator of the object can
be spinning fast enough to resist gravity, but the north and south poles
will be subject to gravity and collapse inwards. A rapidly spinning object
will deform into a disk (assuming it doesn't fly apart first), not an
empty shell.
Alan
--
Defendit numerus