"pretty much everything ..."

[The Starmaker]

Scientists agree if the results are confirmed, that it would force a fundamental rethink of the laws of physics.

John Ellis, a theoretical physicist, said Einstein�s theory underlies �pretty much everything in modern physics�.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/8783011/Speed-of-light-broken-at-CERN-scientists-claim.html

Come on already, ..the only people who believe in the 'speed of light' is you-know-who...

If you hear the words "Trust us, we're scientist", run the other way.

The Starmaker

[The Starmaker]

since the 'c' is the speed of light in E=Mc2, then change it to...d.

How do I come up with this stuff?

[Jon Schild]

What would happen, genius, is that the equation would become invalid.
You wouldn't change anything to anything.

And that's IF the observation turns out to be valid. Which it may, but
probably won't.

[be...@iwaynet.net]

On 9/23/2011 1:51 PM, The Starmaker wrote:


> If you hear the words "Trust us, we're scientist", run the other way.

Of course most of us already know that "trust us" from the gummint is
time to hang on to your wallet! But most of the public still mistakenly
trusts scientists thinking they are sane, apolitical, and trustworthy.

History show a different viewpoint. It's not just the hideous scam of
AGW that has tarnished scientists, but simple facts such as the decision
to go ahead with testing an atom bomb even though there was felt to be a
chance that bomb might ignite the atmosphere and burn the entire planet
to a cinder. Oh it gets better. Then "they" decided to set off atomic
bombs in the Van Allen belts creating enormous unnatural radiation there
that will last for centuries. (Could THAT be the true cause of AGW?) And
the kicker is they did it in blatant violation of existing test ban
treaties at the time. In fact, ALL the atomic testing by "scientists"
has DOUBLED the background radiation on the Earth. But no problem: They
soothingly told us all that radiation has no effect below a certain
level. All scientists agreed on that...well except the ones honestly
looking into the problem. And those discovered that there is NO SAFE
LEVEL of radiation! Twice the background means TWICE the incidence of
cancer. Period. Thanks, "scientists"! Tell us what to do. We really
"trust" you all!

Maybe Pol Pot DID have the right idea for "intellectuals"?

[PD]

Well, it doesn't take more than an 8-year-old mind, obviously.

[The Starmaker]

"..may, but probably won't."? You guys got yourself covered both ways, don't you...a con job.

[Wayne Throop]

: The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com>
: If you hear the words "Trust us, we're scientist", run the other way.

Or anybody else, for that matter.
For example, "trust me, uranium doesn't come from supernovas".
At least scientists don't ask you to *trust* them about the
uranium; they'll tell you why they came to their conclusion.
At length.

: since the 'c' is the speed of light in E=Mc2, then change it to...d.

: How do I come up with this stuff?

I'm pretty sure you just make it up randomly.
Certainly not arrived at by reason, or sense.

[The Starmaker]

"reason, or sense"? "or"? Don't reason and sense mean the same thing?

[Wayne Throop]

: The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com>
: Don't reason and sense mean the same thing?

No.

[PD]

I've seen 1-year-olds babble for hours. Is it an accomplishment?

[Howard Brazee]

On Fri, 23 Sep 2011 17:01:14 -0400, "BJA...@teranews.com"
<be...@iwaynet.net> wrote:

>> If you hear the words "Trust us, we're scientist", run the other way.
>
>Of course most of us already know that "trust us" from the gummint is
>time to hang on to your wallet! But most of the public still mistakenly
>trusts scientists thinking they are sane, apolitical, and trustworthy.
>
>History show a different viewpoint.

Unless we compare them to anybody else.

--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."

- James Madison

[The Starmaker]

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/09/23/faster-than-light-particles-may-be-physics-revolution/?test=faces
why would i want to travel to the past, i already know what happen..
i just need that couple of seconds in the future before the horse hits the finish line.
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/09/23/faster-than-light-particles-may-be-physics-revolution/?test=faces
Nothing travels faster than the speed of light because nobody knows what the speed is..

the minute they come up with a number...they're wrong.

God does not play with numbers.


The Starmaker

[thepinkpantsuit]

On Sep 23, 5:36 pm, thro...@sheol.org (Wayne Throop) wrote:
> : The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com>

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/25/opinion/25Rattner.html

Just give it up. You've lost credibility.

[JRStern]

On Fri, 23 Sep 2011 14:38:18 -0600, Jon Schild <j...@xmission.com>
wrote:

E = MC2 + z

Actually who knows, the equation might still stand in any of a dozen
ways.

But from what little I've heard of the experiment, I'm skeptical it
will stand up anyways.

J.

[Wolf Norman]

On Sep 24, 12:22 am, PD <thedraperfam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/23/2011 4:53 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>
>
>
> > Wayne Throop wrote:
>

> >> : The Starmaker<starma...@ix.netcom.com>

> >> : If you hear the words "Trust us, we're scientist", run the other way.
>
> >> Or anybody else, for that matter.
> >> For example, "trust me, uranium doesn't come from supernovas".
> >> At least scientists don't ask you to *trust* them about the
> >> uranium; they'll tell you why they came to their conclusion.
> >> At length.
>
> >> : since the 'c' is the speed of light in E=Mc2, then change it to...d.
> >> : How do I come up with this stuff?
>
> >> I'm pretty sure you just make it up randomly.
> >> Certainly not arrived at by reason, or sense.
>
> > "reason, or sense"? "or"? Don't reason and sense mean the same thing?
>
> I've seen 1-year-olds babble for hours. Is it an accomplishment?

are you afraid to disagree???

thanks

[Alen]

On Sep 24, 12:42 pm, JRStern <JRSt...@foobar.invalid> wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Sep 2011 14:38:18 -0600, Jon Schild <j...@xmission.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On 9/23/2011 1:48 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> >> The Starmaker wrote:
>
> >>> Scientists agree if the results are confirmed, that it would force a fundamental rethink of the laws of physics.
>
> >>> John Ellis, a theoretical physicist, said Einstein’s theory underlies “pretty much everything in modern physics”.

> >>>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/8783011/Speed-of-ligh...

>
> >>> Come on already, ..the only people who believe in the 'speed of light' is you-know-who...
>
> >>> If you hear the words "Trust us, we're scientist", run the other way.
>
> >>> The Starmaker
>
> >> since the 'c' is the speed of light in E=Mc2, then change it to...d.
>
> >> How do I come up with this stuff?
>
> >What would happen, genius, is that the equation would become invalid.
> >You wouldn't change anything to anything.
>
> E = MC2 + z
>
> Actually who knows, the equation might still stand in any of a dozen
> ways.
>
> But from what little I've heard of the experiment, I'm skeptical it
> will stand up anyways.
>
> J.

What will definitely end is Minkowski spacetime,
but not necessarily SR as a whole

Alen

[The Starmaker]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/22/science-light-idUSL5E7KM4CW20110922

Okay, here's the dope..
Eienstein was just not wrong about somethings..
he was wrong about everything!
I think he conned everyone..
he sure made a whole buch of yous believe he dad nothing
to do with the bomb. That's a major con in my book!

But this E=Mc2 is wrong! That means anything to do
the speed of light is wrong...throw out all your textbooks
in the garbage can, ..eveything in it is wrong.

That means the Light Year is wrong. That means the universe is
younger than the earth, or maybe the earth was born just a
couple of minutes afterwards..somebody must have a baby picture of it somewhere.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/22/science-light-idUSL5E7KM4CW20110922

Here's my advise, don't go to school. Drop out now.

Become a rock star.

Sell drugs on the streets..

Kill a cop...

but do something productive instead of
looking for wormholes..

Me, I practice how to remove a bra hinge under two seconds.

The Starmaker

Finding could overturn laws of physics
* Scientists confident measurements correct
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/22/science-light-idUSL5E7KM4CW20110922

You know...
Einstein didn't know
the atom bomb he created was
going to be sooooo big..
he thought it would be just
a small explosion.

He wasn't very good in math.


Here is what Einstein thought of his Atom Bomb in his own words:

"A single bomb of this type, might very well destroy
the whole port together with some of the surrounding territory."

Yours very truly,
signature
(Albert Einstein)



Now I gotta go home and throw out all my light bulbs!

[JRStern]

On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 09:07:00 -0700 (PDT), Alen <al...@westserv.net.au>
wrote:

>> But from what little I've heard of the experiment, I'm skeptical it
>> will stand up anyways.
>

>What will definitely end is Minkowski spacetime,
>but not necessarily SR as a whole

They'll find their experimental setup error and the whole claim will
go, "never mind".

J.

[Alen]

Well, yes, I did intend my remark to be
conditional on the results not being due
to some measurement inaccuracy, or
whatever, which they may eventually find
and correct.

Alen

[The Starmaker]

In otherwords, to make it simple..

the 'c' = the speed of light in E=Mc2.

c = about 186000 miles per second

the bigger the number in 'c', the Bigger the Bomb.


Albert Einstien could have blown up the whole entire planet if he got the number wrong, which he did.


He could have destroyed a whole planet just because he hated a few german people..or maybe all of them.

These people are dangerous.

With their ...numbers.

Luckly I could only count up to ten..

How many people in the world even know how to spell 11?

[Wayne Throop]

: The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com>
: Albert Einstien could have blown up the whole entire planet if he got

: the number wrong, which he did.

Except of course for the fact that Einstein didn't calculate any
numbers for the Manhattan project, nor do any design work whatsoever
on any nuclear weapons. Nor was the famous "E=mc^2" equation of any
relevance in calculating nuclear yields; it could have been used to
get an estimate, but it wasn't used in any practical sense, since the
energy of individual fission events could be and was directly measured.

So basically, absolutely no way Einstein "could have blown up" anything.

[The Starmaker]

Is that your picture?
http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/5144/fotolia2226525subscript.jpg

[PD]

You post to science fiction groups and television groups.
But I think you confuse good science fiction with tawdry propaganda and
conspiracy theory tracts. And of course the conspiracy theory nutjobs
are the ones that say that everyone else has their heads in the sand.

[The Starmaker]

Why are you trying to protect Albert Einstien, do you have a poster of him in your room?
http://simgesiir.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/einstein-1.jpg

[PD]

There is nothing to protect. His contributions stand on their own,
having been validated and therefore adopted throughout science and
technology. Slandering a dead man is also a pointless exercise. Do you
think that making up propaganda about him will have any impact
whatsoever on what he added to our knowledge?

Do you think that saying that Isaac Newton dressed up in pink pinafores
would change anything at all about Newtonian mechanics?

[The Starmaker]

here is a quote from Newsweek magazine...

"had I known that the Germans would not succeed in developing an atomic bomb, I would have done nothing." -Albert Einstein


How would he 'had I known'? What con statement is that? If he was able to look into the future...? Crystal ball??
Oh, I forgot, you people call it...accurate predictions. Give me a break.

[The Starmaker]

Here is a picture of Szliard asking Einstein, "How do I make this thing go BOOOOOOM!!!?
http://www.yurock.net/wp-content/gallery/albert/albert_einstein_39.jpg

[thepinkpantsuit]

On Sep 26, 4:32 pm, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Wayne Throop wrote:
>

> > : The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com>

That picture is much more flattering. I think he's digging for corn
oil.

[The Starmaker]

got home and my light bulb went out..

http://online.wsj.com/video/opinion-what-if-einstein-wrong/3DF68360-868F-4770-A7E5-38319282E846.html

[The Starmaker]

Correction: Einstein didn't want to kill a few german people, ...he wanted to kill *all* of them. That's a fact.

[The Starmaker]

what most people are not aware of...
albert einstein was already developing the atom bomb even before
the manhatan projected even existed. You don't actually think he was going to
wait around for the u.s. to come around..
he would have given it to the russians..but maybe he did.

[PD]

On 9/27/2011 2:48 PM, The Starmaker wrote:

> what most people are not aware of...
> albert einstein was already developing the atom bomb even before
> the manhatan projected even existed. You don't actually think he was going to
> wait around for the u.s. to come around..
> he would have given it to the russians..but maybe he did.

There is something to be said about spamming trolls.
There is something further to be said about spamming trolls who reply to
themselves. Speaking just to hear yourself speak is an interesting
disorder. Fuck off, Starmaker. You're a useless toilet-paper noisemaker.

[Wayne Throop]

: The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com>
: what most people are not aware of... albert einstein was already

: developing the atom bomb even before the manhatan projected even
: existed.

Mostly they're not aware of it, because you made it up,
and in reality, he wasn't.

[Wayne Throop]

: The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com>

: Einstein didn't want to kill a few german people,
: ...he wanted to kill *all* of them. That's a fact.

For values of "fact" equal to "Starmaker made it up
entirely from his own imagination and nothing else".

[The Starmaker]

"imagination"?

“The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination.” Albert Einstein quotes
“Imagination is everything. It is the preview of life's coming attractions.” Albert Einstein quotes
“Logic will get you from A to B. Imagination will take you everywhere.” Albert Einstein quotes
“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand,
while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.” Albert Einstein quotes



Wayne, you seem to lack...imaginatio



And now
a little quote
from the man himself...(while he was thinking of bombing them all)



"The Germans as an entire people are responsible for the mass murders and must be punished as a people if there
is justice in the world..." Albert Einstein

[The Starmaker]

I don't expect you to know ...everything.

[Wayne Throop]

: The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com>
: Wayne, you seem to lack...imaginatio

Not at all, I just like to avoid calling things I imagine
without any substantive evidence "facts".

: "The Germans as an entire people are responsible for the mass murders

: and must be punished as a people if there is justice in the world..."

Note "punish", not "kill". For just one obvious inadequacy of that as
evidence for "Einstein wanted to kill all germans".

[Wayne Throop]

::: what most people are not aware of... albert einstein was already

::: developing the atom bomb even before the manhatan projected even
::: existed.

:: Mostly they're not aware of it, because you made it up,
:: and in reality, he wasn't.

: The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com>
: I don't expect you to know ...everything.

What a coincidence. I don't expect you to know ...anything.

Case in point, Einstein didn't develop any aspects of the bomb,
either before, during, or after the manhattan project.
His interaction with bomb design began and ended with
the famous letter to Roosevelt. WHich is to say, there
was no "development" done by Einstein at all.

Which you really ought to know by now.
But for some reason you act as if you still don't.

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

Compared to YOU? Wayne's omniscient, omnipotent, and omnicompetent.

You're omniignorant, omniincompetent, and omniimpotent.

--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
http://seawasp.livejournal.com

[The Starmaker]

So what is the punishment for 'mass murder', ...death! Or in your mind,
two weeks probation and community service.


It rains here so much I need a hat when I walk into these newsgroups...

[Marvin the Martian]

On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 15:38:39 -0700, The Starmaker wrote:


> "The Germans as an entire people are responsible for the mass murders
> and must be punished as a people if there
> is justice in the world..." Albert Einstein

I'll be damned. I didn't believe this so I searched and I found this
quote on a JEWISH website.

"The Germans as an entire people are responsible for the mass murders and

must be punished as a people if there is justice in the world and if the
consciousness of collective responsibility in the nations is not to
perish from the earth entirely. Behind the Nazi party stands the German
people, who elected Hitler after he had in his book and in his speeches
made his shameful intentions clear beyond the possibility of
misunderstanding."

Humm. Since the Marxist murdered 20 million people, where's the Einstein
quotes on that?

[Marvin the Martian]

How do you punish genocide?

[Marvin the Martian]

AFAIK, Einstein had nothing to do with the atom bomb except for
recommending to FDR it be developed.

I would like to see a reference that he worked on the problem.

[thepinkpantsuit]

On Sep 27, 7:20 pm, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"

<seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
> On 9/27/11 6:40 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>
> > Wayne Throop wrote:
>

> >> : The Starmaker<starma...@ix.netcom.com>

> >> : what most people are not aware of...  albert einstein was already
> >> : developing the atom bomb even before the manhatan projected even
> >> : existed.
>
> >> Mostly they're not aware of it, because you made it up,
> >> and in reality, he wasn't.
>
> > I don't expect you to know ...everything.
>
>         Compared to YOU? Wayne's omniscient, omnipotent, and omnicompetent.

You're kidding, right?

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

No. Admittedly, compared to Starfaker, there are Speak-And-Spell
machines that look like they have godlike intelligence.

When Starfaker demonstrates any intelligence or coherence at all, I'll
reconsider that position. As far as I can tell, he's either a loon who
crosses _John_Winston_ with Robert McElwaine, or a troll who posts
random stupid assertions about stuff he knows nothing about because he
literally has nothing better to do; he even frequently follows up to
himself -- probably because he has to answer the voices in his head.

Of course, you know this.

[Bill Snyder]

Of course it does. Consider that pisspantsuit has replied to its
own messages 5 times on a couple of occasions, which argues that
its voices may be even louder and/or more insistent.

--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank]

[thepinkpantsuit]

> Bill Snyder  [This space unintentionally left blank]- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Bill, I think you have a fascination with, um, urine.

[thepinkpantsuit]

> Bill, I think you have a fascination with, um, urine.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Urine my thoughts, Bill.

[snicker]

[thepinkpantsuit]

> [snicker]- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

And I think urine to me.

That's what two? Are you counting?

[thepinkpantsuit]

> That's what two? Are you counting?- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

On topic: Bill? Anything land on uranis lately?!

Four. One more to go.

[thepinkpantsuit]

> Four. One more to go.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Why do they call it constellation instead of prostellation?

There, five. Wouldn't want to cheat you.

[jim]

On Sep 27, 10:07 pm, Marvin the Martian <mar...@ontomars.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 23:02:49 +0000, Wayne Throop wrote:
> > ::: what most people are not aware of...  albert einstein was already
> > ::: developing the atom bomb even before the manhatan projected even :::
> > existed.
>
> > :: Mostly they're not aware of it, because you made it up, :: and in
> > reality, he wasn't.
>

> > : The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> : I don't expect you to know

> > ...everything.
>
> > What a coincidence.  I don't expect you to know ...anything.
>
> > Case in point, Einstein didn't develop any aspects of the bomb, either
> > before, during, or after the manhattan project. His interaction with
> > bomb design began and ended with the famous letter to Roosevelt.  WHich
> > is to say, there was no "development" done by Einstein at all.
>
> > Which you really ought to know by now. But for some reason you act as if
> > you still don't.
>
> AFAIK, Einstein had nothing to do with the atom bomb except for
> recommending to FDR it be developed.
>
> I would like to see a reference that he worked on the problem.

Well, you'll never find that. The people who know how the miliitary
explosives cranks work
had already started working on modern rocket technology, and modern
signal processing.

And the people who know how metals work, had also already starting
working on modern robots.

[Bill Snyder]

And so we see that in addition to its other mental deficiencies,
the creature can't count to five. (But in its head, the voices
one and all are shouting "Hurray," and the mail server is crashing
from the sheer volume of the lurkers' supportive missives . . .)

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

I was thinking that Starfaker and Pinkpants were actually the same person.

[thepinkpantsuit]

On Sep 27, 11:43 pm, Bill Snyder <bsny...@airmail.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 20:16:26 -0700 (PDT), thepinkpantsuit
>

> <editoriale...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Sep 27, 11:11 pm, thepinkpantsuit <editoriale...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On Sep 27, 11:02 pm, thepinkpantsuit <editoriale...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> > On Sep 27, 11:01 pm, thepinkpantsuit <editoriale...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > On Sep 27, 10:57 pm, thepinkpantsuit <editoriale...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > > On Sep 27, 10:48 pm, Bill Snyder <bsny...@airmail.net> wrote:
> >There, five. Wouldn't want to cheat you.
>
> And so we see that in addition to its other mental deficiencies,
> the creature can't count to five.  (But in its head, the voices
> one and all are shouting "Hurray," and the mail server is crashing
> from the sheer volume of the lurkers' supportive missives . . .)
>
> --
> Bill Snyder  [This space unintentionally left blank]

Why should I count, when you'll obsessively do it for me?

[thepinkpantsuit]

On Sep 27, 11:59 pm, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"

<seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
> On 9/27/11 10:48 PM, Bill Snyder wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 22:43:05 -0400, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"

> > <seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com>  wrote:

> Website:http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:http://seawasp.livejournal.com- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Ya know, with a nick like Sea Wasp and the psuedonym Ryk E. Spoor you
should be the last person throwing stones. Just sayin'.

[The Starmaker]

http://tinyurl.com/5wmbbz4
http://books.google.com/books?id=Ndl9OAeE8woC&pg=PA41&dq=%22Even+before+the+Manhattan+Project+was+launched,+Leo+would+visit+him+once+every+week+or+ten+days+to+discuss+his+work+on+the+uranium+experiment.%22&hl=en&ei=MK6CTq_ADtDZiALi__n5DA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22Even%20before%20the%20Manhattan%20Project%20was%20launched%2C%20Leo%20would%20visit%20him%20once%20every%20week%20or%20ten%20days%20to%20discuss%20his%20work%20on%20the%20uranium%20experiment.%22&f=false


Einstein was hired on a consultant basis to solve the problem of how to
separate isotopes sharing common properties.
Einstein was glad of the opportunity to contribute to the effort,
although this involvement was minimal from
the greater perspective of the Manhattan project, and Einstein was not
provided any information as
to what was going on beyond his specific involvement.
he professor on his own, based on personal conversations with
colleagues, surmised that the concept drawn from his equation,
http://www.helium.com/items/1158383-einstein-atomic-bomb-manhattan-project/print

http://vault.fbi.gov/Albert%20Einstein

...anyway
he is wrong about the speed of light.

There is only one person left on the planet that believes Einstein is
still right, and that is PD.

It's like watching 12 Angry Men on TV.

The Starmaker

[Wayne Throop]

: The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com>
: Einstein was hired on a consultant basis to solve the problem of how

: to separate isotopes sharing common properties.

In other words, according to your own link,
he did not work on bomb design.

Good of you to admit it.

[Wayne Throop]

: thepinkpantsuit <editor...@yahoo.com>
: Ya know, with a nick like Sea Wasp and the psuedonym Ryk E. Spoor you

: should be the last person throwing stones. Just sayin'.

What makes you think it's a pseudonym?

[Bill Snyder]

On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:47:46 GMT, thr...@sheol.org (Wayne Throop)
wrote:

"Think" is really not a word that has any relevance to these critters.

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

Ryk E. Spoor is my real name, and the Sea Wasp is probably older than
you are; I've been known by that name online since 1977 and possibly
more people still know me as Sea Wasp than know my real name.

[thepinkpantsuit]

On Sep 28, 10:30 am, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"

> >> Website:http://www.grandcentralarena.comBlog:http://seawasp.livejournal.com-Hide quoted text -

>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > Ya know, with a nick like Sea Wasp and the psuedonym Ryk E. Spoor you
> > should be the last person throwing stones. Just sayin'.
>
>         Ryk E. Spoor is my real name, and the Sea Wasp is probably older than
> you are; I've been known by that name online since 1977 and possibly
> more people still know me as Sea Wasp than know my real name.
>
> --
>                       Sea Wasp
>                         /^\
>                         ;;;    

> Website:http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:http://seawasp.livejournal.com- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Real, huh? That's quite an interesting name. Kinda like an alien rock
star.

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

SSSHHH! Don't let the secret out! I retired here to avoid my groupies.

[thepinkpantsuit]

On Sep 28, 12:16 pm, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"

> >>>> Website:http://www.grandcentralarena.comBlog:http://seawasp.livejournal.com-Hidequoted text -

>
> >>>> - Show quoted text -
>
> >>> Ya know, with a nick like Sea Wasp and the psuedonym Ryk E. Spoor you
> >>> should be the last person throwing stones. Just sayin'.
>
> >>          Ryk E. Spoor is my real name, and the Sea Wasp is probably older than
> >> you are; I've been known by that name online since 1977 and possibly
> >> more people still know me as Sea Wasp than know my real name.
>
> >> --
> >>                        Sea Wasp
> >>                          /^\
> >>                          ;;;
> >> Website:http://www.grandcentralarena.comBlog:http://seawasp.livejournal.com-Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>

> > Real, huh? That's quite an interesting name. Kinda like an alien rock
> > star.
>
>         SSSHHH! Don't let the secret out! I retired here to avoid my groupies.
>
> --
>                       Sea Wasp
>                         /^\
>                         ;;;    

> Website:http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:http://seawasp.livejournal.com- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Your secret is safe with me. That is one of the coolest real names.

[The Starmaker]

"Even+before+the+Manhattan+Project+was+launched,+Leo+would+visit+him+once+every+week+or+ten+days+to+discuss+his+work+on+the+uranium+experiment.
uranium+experiment. translate to..The Atom Bomb.


http://tinyurl.com/5wmbbz4

http://books.google.com/books?id=Ndl9OAeE8woC&pg=PA41&dq=%22Even+before+the+Manhattan+Project+was+launched,+Leo+would+visit+him+once+every+week+or+ten+days+to+discuss+his+work+on+the+uranium+experiment.%22&hl=en&ei=MK6CTq_ADtDZiALi__n5DA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22Even%20before%20the%20Manhattan%20Project%20was%20launched%2C%20Leo%20would%20visit%20him%20once%20every%20week%20or%20ten%20days%20to%20discuss%20his%20work%20on%20the%20uranium%20experiment.%22&f=false


You gotta picture of Einstein in your wallet too?

[The Starmaker]

his mother gave him golden showers..

[The Starmaker]

This girl is amazing with words, I'm gonna hire her!

[The Starmaker]

Why are you still using 'stealth marketing' in my threads? Haven't you
ever heard of The World Wide Web?

[The Starmaker]

The Starmaker wrote:
>
> Scientists agree if the results are confirmed, that it would force a fundamental rethink of the laws of physics.
>
> John Ellis, a theoretical physicist, said Einstein’s theory underlies “pretty much everything in modern physics”.
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/8783011/Speed-of-light-broken-at-CERN-scientists-claim.html
>
> Come on already, ..the only people who believe in the 'speed of light' is you-know-who...
>
> If you hear the words "Trust us, we're scientist", run the other way.
>
> The Starmaker


Okay, here is the deal...

for those of yous who don't understand..

“pretty much everything in modern physics” translate to

the party is over.

Now, to translate in the 'scientific community' lingo..

“pretty much everything in modern physics” means...

The principle which 'relativity' is based on..
The Speed Of Light...is,
incorrect.

Which makes..
The Theory of Relativity
incorrect.

It's incontrovertible.


The Starmaker


Now, I have a Prescription Murder: Michale Jackson case I have to attend to...
if I don't do something quick about it, Conrad Murray will get away with Murder.

[Wayne Throop]

:: In other words, according to your own link, he did not work on bomb

:: design. Good of you to admit it.

: The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com>
: "Even+before+the+Manhattan+Project+was+launched,+Leo+would+visit+him+
: once+every+week+or+ten+days+to+discuss+his+work+on+the+uranium+experiment.

Rigt. Isotope separation, as your reference makes clear.
Not bomb design. Good of you to admit it.

[Wayne Throop]

: The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com>
: Why are you still using 'stealth marketing' in my threads?

: Haven't you ever heard of The World Wide Web?

"Your threads". Hilarious. Haven't you ever hesard of usenet newsgroups?

[Wayne Throop]

: The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com>
: for those of yous who don't understand..

: "pretty much everything in modern physics"
: translate to the party is over.

Fire your translator. Whoever or whatever it is is incompetent.

[thepinkpantsuit]

> This girl is amazing with words, I'm gonna hire her!- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Who's in analysis?

Urine analysis.

Ooo.

Ahahahaha. When do I start?!

[GO-HERE .NL]

On Sep 23, 7:51 pm, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Scientists agree if the results are confirmed, that it would force a fundamental rethink of the laws of physics.
>

> John Ellis, a theoretical physicist, said Einstein s theory underlies pretty much everything in modern physics .http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/8783011/Speed-of-ligh...

>
> Come on already, ..the only people who believe in the 'speed of light' is you-know-who...
>
> If you hear the words "Trust us, we're scientist", run the other way.
>
> The Starmaker

Surly the need to start running arises at "Trust us..."

Reasonably smart people would start running at "....Einstein s
theory..."

The slightly less bright would take of at "telegraph.co.uk" or right
at "telegraph" while giggling at mental image of said device.

A reasonably smart person from London would take off at "John Ellis"

Personally I was tempted to start running at "Scientists
agree..."(read "you") then again at "...theoretical physicist..." or
at least the picture of me running away was highly vivid.... then it
didn't happen.

It was the "forced thinking" that kept me interested. Imagine if there
would be such a thing?! A formula to induce the ability of thought
into random solids. We cant even do this with over-engineered silicon
jet. The idea to use a biological carrier for the phenomenon is down
right revolutionary.

Then take it to the next level and have it do "rethinking". This is
where a previously reasonable AI can turn into a complete pile of shit
(plateau)

I suggest in stead of sacrificing the old entity by having it doubt
everything it knows we can have each of the following editions
evaluate the data while initially downloading it. Additionally we
could create an artificial environment where desirable features are
motivated and the undesirable ones are killed off.

When this method reaches the same plateau we would have to reproduce
it in parallel. When Osiris fails us we create Christianity. (Same
product different sticker) When Christianity doesn't do the job we
create science. (Same product different sticker) Somewhere along the
road we created Democracy (oe ah ie hah!) and sado-capitalism.

When the thought enabled objects assimilate into one giant train of
thought and the train fails we just create new ones until we have a
train that makes it over the hill.

unsurprisingly it is already happening.

http://www.khanacademy.org/

It took making a few billion homepages but we finally have a dude who
got it right.

Or even more funny.

http://www.dailytech.com/Sesame+Street+Adds+MathScienceEngineering+to+Educational+Lessons/article22865.htm

Eventually they will have their own Osiris and their own set of
asserted realities.

Lies will be told, profit will be made, people will die.

Same product different sticker.


____
http://go-here.nl

[Marvin the Martian]

Well... I gotta admit, Einstein may have known the principles involved in
making a atomic bomb - given the people he associated with and their
efforts to get him to sign their letter to FDR to support a Atom bomb
program. So, he would probably figure out a uranium enrichment program
was atomic bomb based.

But if he did, he sure as hell did a crappy job of it, given that the
first methods at isotope seperation didn't work well at all. :-D
Interesting tidbit of history.

[The Starmaker]

"their efforts"? Who is "their"? There were no 'their's...no one try to get
him to sign a letter, ...he just needed help with the 'draft' of the letter.
Those are his words, signed sealed, delivered...
http://hypertextbook.com/eworld/einstein.shtml

The Starmaker

but i understand...the 'scientific community' don't want *blood* on their hands..

[Marvin the Martian]

On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 16:55:37 -0700, The Starmaker wrote:


> "their efforts"? Who is "their"? There were no 'their's...no one try to
> get him to sign a letter, ...he just needed help with the 'draft' of the
> letter. Those are his words, signed sealed, delivered...
> http://hypertextbook.com/eworld/einstein.shtml

http://www.dannen.com/ae-fdr.html

"They" are Szilard, Sachs, Wigner et al.

You thought it was Einstein's idea to write this letter? He was a
pacifist.

[Wayne Throop]

: The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com>
: but i understand...the 'scientific community'

: don't want *blood* on their hands.

Yeah, the motivation for supposing some scientists other than Einstein
ghost-wrote the letter is because scientists don't want blood on their
hands. So instead of implicating one scientist, implicate a whole
committee of them. Egad, brilliant Holmes. However did you deduce
that motive?

[The Starmaker]

Well, I'm not going to ask the question "Who invented the atomic
bomb?"..
because it's against the law to ask that question.

[GO-HERE .NL]

On Sep 29, 6:51 pm, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Wayne Throop wrote:
>

> > : The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com>

Walter Russell developed his own Periodic Chart of the Elements and
was the first to define the trans-uranium elements--the elements
eventually used (and abused) to create nuclear energy and the atomic
bomb.

[The Starmaker]

atomic bomb...then nuclear energy, in that order.

[PD]

On 9/29/2011 5:45 PM, The Starmaker wrote:

>>
>> Walter Russell developed his own Periodic Chart of the Elements and
>> was the first to define the trans-uranium elements--the elements
>> eventually used (and abused) to create nuclear energy and the atomic
>> bomb.
>
>
> atomic bomb...then nuclear energy, in that order.

Spear first... then scalpel, in that order.

Oh hell, this means some iron age guy is going to have to get blasted by
Luddite spammers who use technology to loathe technology.

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

Wrong. The first nuclear reactor was constructed some years before the
first atomic bomb. Stagg Field, Chicago, 1942. Or, if you want to count
NATURAL fission reactions, about a billion or two years ago in Africa.
(Natural FUSION reactions, of course, go to the ignition of the first
stars).

You can't get *ANYTHING* right, can you?

[The Starmaker]

you got salt water in your eyes..

"to create nuclear energy", not to create nuclear reactor.

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

Nuclear reactors produce energy. Nuclear energy. Again, you can't get
*ANYTHING* right, can you?

[The Starmaker]

1942? Do you live in a fish bowl? The Manhatan Project was 1939!

The 'developement' of the atomic bomb.

*That* nuclear reactor in 1942 'is' the first development of the atom bomb...the release of nuclear energy from an atom.

Go back into your....pond. Your sea of wasps...


The Starfishmaker

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

Yes, which at that point had done nothing.

>
> The 'developement' of the atomic bomb.
>
> *That* nuclear reactor in 1942 'is' the first development of

Nuclear energy.

Once it had been demonstrated that you could controllably release the
energy of the atom, you could then proceed to the development of:


> the atom bomb...


Again, can you get ANYTHING right?

[The Starmaker]

that Stagg Field, Chicago, 1942 The first nuclear reactor you pointed out was first used to test...the atomb bomb, by
the guy from The Manhatan Project.

First came the bomb, then..as the poster meant to say

"used (and abused)"

"used" is the operative word, meaning 'positive use', you know..which didn't happen untill after the bomb.

First abused, then used.

Get off of yourselves already...you don't make a better world with Science. You make a better world by
opening a door for a girl. If every guy opens the door for a girl, you have a better world.

The Starmaker

Making a better world.

[PD]

On 9/30/2011 1:00 PM, The Starmaker wrote:

>
> Get off of yourselves already...you don't make a better world with Science. You make a better world by
> opening a door for a girl. If every guy opens the door for a girl, you have a better world.
>
> The Starmaker
>
> Making a better world.

Condemning and halting science because science has been used
destructively would be a strategy that should also then be applied
equally to
* free market commerce, which leads to abuse
* politics, which leads to abuse
* religion, which leads to abuse
* free speech, which leads to abuse
* private property, which leads to abuse
* trial by jury, which leads to abuse
* televised news, which leads to abuse
* public access to the internet, which leads to abuse

The fact that you USE science in order to condemn it is what pegs the
Hypocrisy Meter.

If you have complaints about how science is used, then become active in
making science more of a force for good, rather than condemning it as a
whole.

[Wayne Throop]

: The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com>
: 1942? Do you live in a fish bowl? The Manhatan Project was 1939!

:
: The 'developement' of the atomic bomb.

Fermi getting a sustained nuclear chain reaction was before any actual
development on explosive nuclear devices of any kind whatsoever.
And in fact was pretty much necessary before going on with any
such development.

So, reactor first. Bomb later.

[The Starmaker]

Yes, reactor first, then bomb.

On July 4, 1934 Leo Szilard filed a patent application for the atomic bomb.

1942: Enrico Fermi, Leo Szilard and their colleagues achieve a successful,
controlled chain reaction in a squash court underneath the football grandstand of the University of Chicago’s Stagg Field.
It lays the groundwork for the first atomic bombs.

[jim]

On Sep 29, 6:53 pm, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"

But, that's also the reason the people who actually understand
thereafter discovered
Hydrogen Bombs, rather than just building uranium bombs.

Just like the people who understand electronics also built
Artificial Satellites, Orbital Solar Energy,
Atomic Clocks, and Lasers rather than just building transistors.

The people who understand computer programming also discovered
nanotubes, and Holographics
rather than just discovering PC boards.

[Wayne Throop]

: The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com>
: The first nuclear reactor you pointed out was first used to test...the
: atomb bomb,

No. It was used to verify that a chain reaction could be done.
It's a fairly direct extension of earlier induced fission experiments.
And neither were "bomb development". Indeed, Fermi wasn't really
a prominent bomb developer at all

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enrico_Fermi
"I remember very vividly the first month, January, 1939, that I
started working at the Pupin Laboratories because things began
happening very fast. In that period, Niels Bohr was on a lecture
engagement at the Princeton University and I remember one afternoon
Willis Lamb came back very excited and said that Bohr had leaked out
great news. The great news that had leaked out was the discovery of
fission and at least the outline of its interpretation. Then,
somewhat later that same month, there was a meeting in Washington
where the possible importance of the newly discovered phenomenon of
fission was first discussed in semi-jocular earnest as a possible
source of nuclear power."
In August 1939 Le Szil rd prepared and Albert Einstein signed the
famous letter warning President Franklin D. Roosevelt of the
probability that the Nazis were planning to build an atomic bomb.

First power. Then boom. Even just as a matter of theory.
Even doubly so as a matter of "development".

And indeed, Fermi, other than acting as a general consultant,
didn't do "bomb development" as such, and nobody did much "bomb development"
until after the italian navigator landed in the new world.

[Wayne Throop]

: The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com>
: On July 4, 1934 Leo Szilard filed a patent application for the atomic
: bomb.

But hadn't done any bomb development yet.

As an illustration, Feynman was approached by General Atomics (iirc
from his essays) because he had the patent on nuclear powered aircraft,
and they were starting to try to think about developing one. Feynman's
patent was based on him saying to a legal eagle at Los Alamos, roughly
"you could use nuclear power for lots of stuff, ships, trains, planes,
whatever". So patents got filed for "use of nuclear power to propel"
several different things.

In short, a patent isn't evidence of development.

And no, you don't have to sit in the patent office waiting room with
a working model, like in the cliche, either.

[The Starmaker]

Wayne Throop wrote:
>
> : The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com>
> : On July 4, 1934 Leo Szilard filed a patent application for the atomic
> : bomb.
>
> But hadn't done any bomb development yet.

Maybe you don't know the definition of the word...development.

Patening it, is.. part of the development process.
First you think, E=Mc2, then you patent it, then you get some radium, then you blow up the germans.

>
> As an illustration, Feynman was approached by General Atomics (iirc
> from his essays) because he had the patent on nuclear powered aircraft,
> and they were starting to try to think about developing one. Feynman's
> patent was based on him saying to a legal eagle at Los Alamos, roughly
> "you could use nuclear power for lots of stuff, ships, trains, planes,
> whatever". So patents got filed for "use of nuclear power to propel"
> several different things.

Leo Szilard filed patents because he just needed money..

>
> In short, a patent isn't evidence of development.

your brain hasn't develop yet..it's still in baby mode.

>
> And no, you don't have to sit in the patent office waiting room with
> a working model, like in the cliche, either.

I get the feeling Leo Szilard must have known somebody who worked at the patent office...
I wonder where he got the idea of an atom bomb..

[jim]

Or, more simply.
These AI idiots not only deserve to program C++, they deserve to
own AT&T Stock.

[Wayne Throop]

: The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com>
: Patening it, is.. part of the development process.

Not if you could get a patent by decorating "you could propel
a plane with nuclear energy" with some legalese. And you could.
Patents are not now, and never have been, a part of development.



Wayne Throop thr...@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw

[jim]

Most of that is because science cranks still can't understand that
there
other knds of Tensors, other than 2nd Order Tensors.

The cranks can't understand that DNA is not evolution, but Stem
Cells
and Cloning is evolution.

The idiots can't understand that Iphones, have a joint license
with 4G Networks.

They can't understand that Web Cams are actually downloaded
software, rather than cameras.

[Batman]

On Sep 23, 2:01 pm, "BJAC...@teranews.com" <b...@iwaynet.net> wrote:

> On 9/23/2011 1:51 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>
> > If you hear the words "Trust us, we're scientist", run the other way.
>

> Of course most of us already know that "trust us" from the gummint is
> time to hang on to your wallet! But most of the public still mistakenly
> trusts scientists thinking they are sane, apolitical, and trustworthy.
>
> History show a different viewpoint. It's not just the hideous scam of
> AGW that has tarnished scientists, but simple facts such as the decision
> to go ahead with testing an atom bomb even though there was felt to be a
> chance that bomb might ignite the atmosphere and burn the entire planet
> to a cinder. Oh it gets better. Then "they" decided to set off atomic
> bombs in the Van Allen belts creating enormous unnatural radiation there
> that will last for centuries. (Could THAT be the true cause of AGW?) And
> the kicker is they did it in blatant violation of existing test ban
> treaties at the time. In fact, ALL the atomic testing by "scientists"
> has DOUBLED the background radiation on the Earth. But no problem: They
> soothingly told us all that radiation has no effect below a certain
> level. All scientists agreed on that...well except the ones honestly
> looking into the problem. And those discovered that there is NO SAFE
> LEVEL of radiation! Twice the background means TWICE the incidence of
> cancer. Period.  Thanks, "scientists"! Tell us what to do. We really
> "trust" you all!
>
> Maybe Pol Pot DID have the right idea for "intellectuals"?

I thought we lived in the Marvel Universe, where radiation is good for
you?

-- Mike
http://my168project.com

[Batman]

On Sep 26, 9:49 am, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> The Starmaker wrote:
>
> > The Starmaker wrote:
>
> > > The Starmaker wrote:
>
> > > > Scientists agree if the results are confirmed, that it would force a fundamental rethink of the laws of physics.
>
> > > > John Ellis, a theoretical physicist, said Einstein’s theory underlies “pretty much everything in modern physics”.
> > > >http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/8783011/Speed-of-ligh...
>
> > > > Come on already, ..the only people who believe in the 'speed of light' is you-know-who...

>
> > > > If you hear the words "Trust us, we're scientist", run the other way.
>

> > > > The Starmaker
>
> > >http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/09/23/faster-than-light-particles...
> > > why would i want to travel to the past, i already know what happen..
> > > i just need that couple of seconds in the future before the horse hits the finish line.
> > >http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/09/23/faster-than-light-particles...
> > > Nothing travels faster than the speed of light because nobody knows what the speed is..
>
> > > the minute they come up with a number...they're wrong.
>
> > > God does not play with numbers.
>
> > > The Starmaker
>
> >http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/22/science-light-idUSL5E7KM4CW...
>
> > Okay, here's the dope..
> > Eienstein was just not wrong about somethings..
> > he was wrong about everything!
> > I think he conned everyone..
> > he sure made a whole buch of yous believe he dad nothing
> > to do with the bomb. That's a major con in my book!
>
> > But this E=Mc2 is wrong! That means anything to do
> > the speed of light is wrong...throw out all your textbooks
> > in the garbage can, ..eveything in it is wrong.
>
> > That means the Light Year is wrong. That means the universe is
> > younger than the earth, or maybe the earth was born just a
> > couple of minutes afterwards..somebody must have a baby picture of it somewhere.
>
> >http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/22/science-light-idUSL5E7KM4CW...
>
> > Here's my advise, don't go to school. Drop out now.
>
> > Become a rock star.
>
> > Sell drugs on the streets..
>
> > Kill a cop...
>
> > but do something productive instead of
> > looking for wormholes..
>
> > Me, I practice how to remove a bra hinge under two seconds.
>
> > The Starmaker
>
> > Finding could overturn laws of physics
> > * Scientists confident measurements correct
> >http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/22/science-light-idUSL5E7KM4CW...
>
> > You know...
> > Einstein didn't know
> > the atom bomb he created was
> > going to be sooooo big..
> > he thought it would be just
> > a small explosion.
>
> > He wasn't very good in math.
>
> > Here is what Einstein thought of his Atom Bomb in his own words:
>
> > "A single bomb of this type, might very well destroy
> > the whole port together with some of the surrounding territory."
>
> > Yours very truly,
> >                                              signature
> >                                            (Albert Einstein)
>
> In otherwords, to make it simple..
>
> the 'c' = the speed of light in E=Mc2.
>
> c = about 186000 miles per second
>
> the bigger the number in 'c', the Bigger the Bomb.
>
> Albert Einstien could have blown up the whole entire planet if he got the number wrong, which he did.
>
> He could have destroyed a whole planet just because he hated a few german people..or maybe all of them.
>
> These people are dangerous.
>
> With their ...numbers.
>
> Luckly I could only count up to ten..
>
> How many people in the world even know how to spell 11?

I guess that's what it's called, "theoretical physics...."

-- Mike
http://my168project.com