The Non-Existent Newsreader :-)

37 views
Skip to first unread message

ClutterFreak

unread,
Apr 23, 2021, 5:06:08 AMApr 23
to
In a usenet forum that people interested in physics frequent, a few
tools should be available. One is of course ability to type text and
show that text to others. But discussing physics is more than typing
poetry for each other or writing anecdotes and reminiscences from
decades earlier. Or worse, throwing links at each other, which
essentially shoots the reader out of the discussion and into somewhere
else on the wide world of internet. I think this lack of additional
tools that physics discussions need has eventually caused those who knew
some physics and had interest in it to gradually leave, and the forum be
left filled with idle talk or wacky nonsense and pure crap. If you can't
effectively talk physics, crap will eventually replace it.

Tools we need:

1- We need to have an easy way to type clearly readable formulas and
math in general for each other, using familiar notations. Without it no
discussion of physics would go beyond unproven nonsense blabber.

Do you guys remember Mathcad 2 ? It worked on DOS OS and out of what was
available on your funky screen of those years it could create and depict
sufficiently readable and convenient formulas for any discussion or
explanation of a physics problem and/or concept. Couldn't someone
implement that capability in usenet messages? The software, by the way,
is now free to download from internet. Is considered freeware (back in
late 1980s I paid more than $200 for a 2nd hand copy of it plus a manual).

2- We need to show graphs to each other. Writing math and physics
equations doesn't do all the job. Visual checking of results are often
needed. Both 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional graphs.

Mathcad 2 did that also nicely. It could even solve many equations for
us itself. Even some differential equations. And it created the graphs
to show results in a nice visual way using what little was available on
monitors of those years. I think there should be a way to include this
capability inside usenet messages, so message be sent along the
necessary information added by Mathcad, then when message is downloaded
by readers, their newsreaders would show the message as well as using
the Mathcad additional information accompanying the message to create
identical results on readers' screen. All that's required seems to me is
a newsreader that has Mathcad 2 built into it.

Can't this be done? I mean after all these decades, why someone hasn't
taken the trouble of creating a newsreader that has the free Mathcad 2
built into it? Should the entire usenet just blabber texts and nothing
else? If it started by military's money, why should it continue like a
bland limited military tool of some sort? Decades after decades!

3- We need a way to show pictures! How can one discuss physics without
showing a picture of something?? This ability should also be built into
the right newsreader.


4- Often we need to show animation of movements and changes in
configuration of something in our physics messages. And sometimes clips
of videos. I think this ability should also be built into the newsreader.

To close this talk, we need a "physics newsreader" to become available
that can bring its Mathcad 2 up and let the user create all the texts,
formulas, equations, and graphs that he needs, then add to it any
animations, pictures, and/or videos that helps, then convert the whole
package into a file that news-servers around the world can handle just
like text; and vice versa, receive the news server messages and convert
them to what Mathcad and other features in the newsreader can process
for the reader. Is it asking too much? No. Does that newsreader turn all
scientific newsgroups alive, active, informative, and fruitful? Yes. Can
schools and universities put it into good use? Absolutely.

Clutterfreak Incarnate



--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Jim Pennino

unread,
Apr 23, 2021, 12:01:08 PMApr 23
to
ClutterFreak <clutterfre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In a usenet forum that people interested in physics frequent,

What forum would that be?

>a few
> tools should be available. One is of course ability to type text and
> show that text to others.

You do understand that USENET is by definition ASCII based?

> But discussing physics is more than typing
> poetry for each other or writing anecdotes and reminiscences from
> decades earlier.

You do understand that USENET has always allowed uuencoded attachements
and real news readers, i.e. those not written by Relf, support them?

> To close this talk, we need a "physics newsreader" to become available
> that can bring its Mathcad 2 up

Sounds like a GIANT opportunity to hack a system to me.

Jeff-Relf.Me

unread,
Apr 23, 2021, 1:03:41 PMApr 23
to
iPhone idiocy.

Jeff-Relf.Me

unread,
Apr 23, 2021, 1:17:14 PMApr 23
to
If you don't have a modern NewsReader/NewsServer combo,
like BlockNews.NET, Mozilla Thunderbird ( which is hard to configure )
and/or Google groups ( which can't be configured ),
then you might've missed:

https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/k-3h5MVSIkA/m/iarC7MxYEQAJ

DFS

unread,
Apr 23, 2021, 1:25:38 PMApr 23
to
In TBird all I had to do was click a dropdown and 'allow content from
i.giphy.com' and I see the animated .gif.

You almost got run over.


Jackson Sprat

unread,
Apr 23, 2021, 1:39:00 PMApr 23
to
I did not 'miss' it. My news client is set to not automatically download that kind of crap which is out of place on Usenet.
Better you just provide a hyperlink in a text message. Stop being rude and contrary to accepted Usenet protocols.

My client graciously provided the following:

"Agent has blocked the images in this HTML message. Press Ctrl+Enter to download the images. Right-click here for more options.

Thank you, Agent.

Jeff-Relf.Me

unread,
Apr 23, 2021, 2:23:20 PMApr 23
to
I don't know of this .mp4 video will show on Google Groups are not.

<video><source type="video/mp4" src="https://i.imgur.com/47zPNc0.mp4" Alt="New School vs Old School."></video>

Jackson Sprat

unread,
Apr 23, 2021, 2:28:18 PMApr 23
to
I looked; it shows.

Jeff-Relf.Me

unread,
Apr 23, 2021, 2:38:48 PMApr 23
to
Oops, that was my fault.  Trying again.  .mp4 video.

<video></video>

Jeff-Relf.Me

unread,
Apr 23, 2021, 2:41:13 PMApr 23
to
Trying again.  .mp4 video.


Jeff-Relf.Me

unread,
Apr 23, 2021, 2:53:36 PMApr 23
to
Try #4.  .mp4 video.


ClutterFreak

unread,
Apr 23, 2021, 3:17:26 PMApr 23
to
That just caters to teenage pregnant girls. Physicists have other needs.

A simple example:
Write me the equation for self-inductance of a current loop (the
so-called "L"), then write the relation for so-called emf
("electromotive force") generated by that L, then write the relation for
the current generated by this same emf. Now let current in the circuit
start from zero and get to I. Graph the current vs time and show it to us.

Does your candy-bar pussy-laden newsreader let you do that? Or is it
just for teenage pussies busy popping out more of themselves like
roaches while munching on candy bars? Jeff! That crude ancient mathcad 2
could do it in a jiffy if you knew your physics and knew how to use
mathcad. Don't give me the cro-magnon.

Jeff-Relf.Me

unread,
Apr 23, 2021, 3:35:50 PMApr 23
to
Last Try.  .mp4 video.

Crazy Russian

Jeff-Relf.Me

unread,
Apr 23, 2021, 3:44:35 PMApr 23
to
Steve:
> you probably won't get any video tag to work.

Yes, Google Groups doesn't support <video> tags.

https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/k-3h5MVSIkA/m/kqqGbBphEQAJ
Jeff-R...@Apr.23--0.35pm.Seattle.2021

Google Groups' "Show Original" no longer works, I noticed.

Jim Pennino

unread,
Apr 23, 2021, 4:01:09 PMApr 23
to
ClutterFreak <clutterfre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/23/2021 12:17 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
>> If you don't have a modern NewsReader/NewsServer combo,
>> like BlockNews.NET, Mozilla Thunderbird ( which is hard to configure )
>> and/or Google groups ( which can't be configured ),
>> then you might've missed:
>>
>> https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/k-3h5MVSIkA/m/iarC7MxYEQAJ
>>
>
>
>
> That just caters to teenage pregnant girls. Physicists have other needs.
>
> A simple example:
> Write me the equation for self-inductance of a current loop (the
> so-called "L"),

Since a google search shows about 3,000,000 hits for self inductance
formula, what would be the point, particularly when most of the readers
here are baffled by an equation as simple as F=ma?

And if you have invented blazing, new science not to be found on google,
USENET would not be the appropriate place to announce it.


<snip>

Arindam Banerjee

unread,
Apr 23, 2021, 7:35:33 PMApr 23
to
On Saturday, 24 April 2021 at 03:03:41 UTC+10, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
>
Nothing

whodat

unread,
Apr 23, 2021, 9:36:01 PMApr 23
to
On 4/23/2021 6:35 PM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
> On Saturday, 24 April 2021 at 03:03:41 UTC+10, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
>>
> Nothing
>
Why don't you leave Jeff alone, he makes more sense than you do.

rbowman

unread,
Apr 24, 2021, 1:13:38 PMApr 24
to
On 04/23/2021 01:35 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
> Last Try. .mp4 video.
>
> Crazy Russian
>
>

That one has the video arrow but doesn't play. Nice balalaika.

DFS

unread,
Apr 24, 2021, 1:24:00 PMApr 24
to
On 4/24/2021 1:13 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On 04/23/2021 01:35 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
>> Last Try.  .mp4 video.
>>
>> Crazy Russian
>>
>>
>
> That one has the video arrow but doesn't play.
Played for me, in TBird Windows (v 78.10)


> Nice balalaika.


I didn't know what a balalaika looked or sounded like.

This balalaika jam: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvWWVub9cc4

reminded me of a mandolin, and the best use of a mandolin in a rock song
is, of course:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88b0OYxdtyM


ClutterFreak

unread,
Apr 24, 2021, 3:19:33 PMApr 24
to
The trend is to tailor it for Americans of today, which are quite
stupefied compared to last generations. In fact the trend itself has
come about and enforced by the stupefied today Americans.

Sign of the times.

Best thing Jews did to stupefy Americans was to leave matters in the
hands of "engineers." Engineers are by nature not the smartest but more
like the smart alecks of the societies. Modern human who can think
physics can always manipulate them. I can make an engineer go fuck
himself :) Let alone other ventures and plots and intrigues one could
achieve playing with them. Jews in the entertainment industry depict
them as "minions." :) They're both "mini" compared to them and do their
"menial" jobs for them. Hence the "minion." That's what an "engineer"
is compared to modern human.

Sergio

unread,
Apr 24, 2021, 5:12:21 PMApr 24
to
so minion, are you looking for a new Master ?

Arindam Banerjee

unread,
Apr 24, 2021, 6:47:27 PMApr 24
to
- flush -

whodat

unread,
Apr 24, 2021, 7:50:19 PMApr 24
to
On 4/24/2021 5:47 PM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
> - flush -
>

See?

rbowman

unread,
Apr 24, 2021, 8:04:17 PMApr 24
to
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6pPP2kfHzU

My wife brought me a prima balalaika from the USSR but it was wall
hanger grade. The Soviets really pushed the instrument since they saw it
as a folk instrument of the proletariat.

'Prima' in this case refers to the size. Sort of like a violin, cello,
etch there are 4 common sizes, with the contrabass being the granddaddy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtAWkLxXWTo

It is sort of like a mandolin in not having much sustain.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHMpzGqqMpo


I'm a finger picker and not a strummer. I never could get the action
down. It might have something to do with being left handed and not
having the necessary right hand control.



Arindam Banerjee

unread,
Apr 24, 2021, 8:37:03 PMApr 24
to
- flush -

whodat

unread,
Apr 24, 2021, 11:07:29 PMApr 24
to
Restring it for use by a left handed individual.

That is done with all sorts of instruments.

rbowman

unread,
Apr 25, 2021, 1:08:05 AMApr 25
to
On 04/24/2021 09:07 PM, whodat wrote:
>
>
> Restring it for use by a left handed individual.
>
> That is done with all sorts of instruments.

That always seemed awkward to me. There are some things I've always done
right handed like shooting a rifle.

Restringing a banjo wouldn't work too well unless I went the Elizbeth
Cotten route.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pUdUX5Gagc

Albert King, Dick Dale, and some others also played like that.

ClutterFreak

unread,
Apr 29, 2021, 10:25:10 PM (10 days ago) Apr 29
to
On 4/23/2021 4:05 AM, ClutterFreak wrote:
> In a usenet forum that people interested in physics frequent, a few
> tools should be available. One is of course ability to type text and
> show that text to others. But discussing physics is more than typing
> poetry for each other or writing anecdotes and reminiscences from
> decades earlier. Or worse, throwing links at each other, which
> essentially shoots the reader out of the discussion and into somewhere
> else on the wide world of internet. I think this lack of additional
> tools that physics discussions need has eventually caused those who knew
> some physics and had interest in it to gradually leave, and the forum be
> left filled with idle talk or wacky nonsense and pure crap. If you can't
> effectively talk physics, crap will eventually replace it.
>
> Tools we need:
>
> 1- We need to have an easy way to type clearly readable formulas and
> math in general for each other, using familiar notations. Without it no
> discussion of physics would go beyond unproven nonsense blabber.
>
> Do you guys remember Mathcad 2 ? It worked on DOS OS and out of what was
> available on your funky screen of those years it could create and depict
> sufficiently readable and convenient formulas for any discussion or
> explanation of a physics problem and/or concept. Couldn't someone
> implement that capability in usenet messages? The software, by the way,
> is now free to download from internet. Is considered freeware (back in
> late 1980s I paid more than $200 for a 2nd hand copy of it plus a manual).
>
> 2- We need to show graphs to each other. Writing math and physics
> equations doesn't do all the job. Visual checking of results are often
> needed. Both 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional graphs.
>
> Mathcad 2 did that also nicely. It could even solve many equations for
> us itself. Even some differential equations. And it created the graphs
> to show results in a nice visual way using what little was available on
> monitors of those years. I think there should be a way to include this
> capability inside usenet messages, so message be sent along the
> necessary information added by Mathcad, then when message is downloaded
> by readers, their newsreaders would show the message as well as using
> the Mathcad additional information accompanying the message to create
> identical results on readers' screen. All that's required seems to me is
> a newsreader that has Mathcad 2 built into it.
>
> Can't this be done? I mean after all these decades, why someone hasn't
> taken the trouble of creating a newsreader that has the free Mathcad 2
> built into it? Should the entire usenet just blabber texts and nothing
> else? If it started by military's money, why should it continue like a
> bland limited military tool of some sort? Decades after decades!
>
> 3- We need a way to show pictures! How can one discuss physics without
> showing a picture of something?? This ability should also be built into
> the right newsreader.
>
>
> 4- Often we need to show animation of movements and changes in
> configuration of something in our physics messages. And sometimes clips
> of videos. I think this ability should also be built into the newsreader.
>
> To close this talk, we need a "physics newsreader" to become available
> that can bring its Mathcad 2 up and let the user create all the texts,
> formulas, equations, and graphs that he needs, then add to it any
> animations, pictures, and/or videos that helps, then convert the whole
> package into a file that news-servers around the world can handle just
> like text; and vice versa, receive the news server messages and convert
> them to what Mathcad and other features in the newsreader can process
> for the reader. Is it asking too much? No. Does that newsreader turn all
> scientific newsgroups alive, active, informative, and fruitful? Yes. Can
> schools and universities put it into good use? Absolutely.
>
> Clutterfreak Incarnate
>
>
>


The only free version is Mathcad 2, the DOS version. You can get it
from: http://www.winworldpc.com together with anything DOS you'll ever
need. I remember it worked fast on DOS machines, but when you use it
inside a virtual DOS environment on your win10 it slows down
considerably. But still usable for casual inquiries and even light
computations. It's just a jewel of a software, kudos to those forgotten
fine old men up there in MA.

Using it requires a period of learning. That's why its users manual was
I think %90 of the price of the package (even in a consignment 2nd hand
store) back in late 1980s. But a physics major does it in a jiffy before
enjoying the heck out of the software.

I don't want to get a DOS machine again just for that although the
thought of it is tempting. Better perhaps to blow some of the earned
dogecoin money and get the current version! Mathcad Prime 7. On dogecoin
I'm already up about $2500, but this last version could be way more
expensive than that!

They have divided Mathcad versatility and power into many separate
libraries, sold separately, I think about $600 each. Each library deals
with a specific area of physics. This might suit "engineers" who stick
their heads into their own asses and stay there happy for the rest of
their lives, but might not be a good development for physics majors.
Especially the free spirited ones playing with it for personal reasons
and inquiries and as a hobby.

That jewel of a software, mathcad 2.5 for DOS, light yet comprehensive,
everything in one, might work well enough for a hobbyist. But requires a
fast DOS machine. Yet one more computer. So I'm undecided.

ClutterFreak

unread,
Apr 30, 2021, 10:03:59 PM (9 days ago) Apr 30
to
There are other software that are around for scientific expressions and
communication of them. I'm just not familiar with them. Some of them are
free as well! They're good candidates for getting incorporated into a
free newsreader, giving it a mighty tool to communicate equations,
derivations, examples, and all sorts of physics conjectures and/or solid
theories and laws as well as variety of graphs depicting them.

This distinctive stench of "military" style utility and outlook in the
makeup of sci.physics, I suspect is the result of the epidemic of
"engineers" packed in that. Physicists need something better while
"house-maids" need nothing more than present to carry out their
function: blabber nonsense. "Cooks" need nothing more than this. Ask Jim
Pennino! He's a cook as far as a physics major is concerned. His only
use for a physics major. A house-maid. He happens to be a good cook too
according to his own claims.


Swear to GOD I have no use for this man in or out of sci.physics but to
have him shut up and cook for me :-) Lol. I'm being %100 honest.

So these "engineers" have favored the present state of sci.physics for
decades and resist parting with such limited facility.

But why the notion of "military"? Cause military is the right place for
engineers and engineer type dorks. That's why. Engineers will have to
shut up and just take orders :-) Will have to be what they are.
House-maids. Only then they become useful things to have around. A
physicist, when needed (i.e. in wars!) puts their confused oblivious
asses into use and these little shits cannot say _one_word_ about what
they're told. When Morse was doing his operations research for the
Atlantic scene thousands of engineers stopped opening their traps and
began following ORDERS from this physicist.

Yes, only in an active military role, when actually deployed, these
"engineers" function as they should. Outside military they're just smart
aleck nuisance. Cause they can open their mouths and fill up the space
anywhere their dicks take them.

And sci.physics is one spot in usenet expanse where "engineers" do not
belong.

This forum should be shaped by physicists not others. We need the tools
I mentioned above. We need them to speculate with them and start from
0 step conjectures and use them to go all the way, step by step, to more
and more reformed and realistic useful stuff to spend our time
discussing them. But why? This is something an "engineer" or "chemist"
doesn't understand. So read below.

For a physicist a forum like this can fulfill an important existing
demand because physics is not a subject like other scientific
disciplines and fields. In other fields, when they get to a dead end
they still have physics to resort to and find their answers, while in
physics there's no other field to go! When you are at a dead end, that's
it. You'll only have your own head and other physicists'. No "engineer"
or "Chemist" or "janitor" for that matter can come to your help! So an
active and functioning sci.physics should be there in such cases to go
to to discuss and contact other physicists. You can't take your
first-step conjectures to formal physics seminars and conferences, can
you? So this demand exists and is not fulfilled yet.

Give us the tools so we could take our needs to sci.physics! Develop
them, express them, derive , calculate, and present them for others to
see. And for others to express their own responses, their own
derivations and calculations, and a way to present them back. These
activities requires the tools I mentioned in this thread.

Arindam Banerjee

unread,
May 1, 2021, 4:57:21 AM (8 days ago) May 1
to
Physicists of our time are worse than cockroaches. Engineers have to kick them out of reckoning and redefine physics on the lines I have set, for marvellous gains.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages