Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Another reference that you should be aware of, but are not. Xers; what can I say? You guys are out of the loop.

I thought that crap looked familiar.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

I KNOW that I am God, and so are YOU.

<shaking my head>
Behold, Eck!

Originally Posted by E(ri)ck

Consciousness means you know that you know.

Nice one, Socrates.


Prince

PS: E(ri)ck, I'm receiving a message via 'telepathy' from another
poster, who in turn is receiving a message from ............. Uranus!!!

Hold on a sec ... ok, it's coming through ... right ... about ... now.
And, here it is!(!)

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

I thought that crap looked familiar.



<shaking my head>
Behold, Eck!



Nice one, Socrates.


Prince

PS: E(ri)ck, I'm receiving a message from via 'telepathy' from another
poster, who in turn is receiving a message from ............. Uranus!!!

Hold on a sec ... ok, it's coming through ... right ... about ... now.
And, here it is!(!):

I don't know why the sarcasm, but yes you got the ref, hu hu hu

Well, I guess Vandal is right; you can put the elements in any order you want; but some orders have a nicer rhythm to them

And you can also sing it in the original order too! The order that Vandal hates because it shows that it corresponds to esoteric chakra mysticism! That means I love it

Eric,

Any comment on the fact that you cited Wikipedia in an attempt to "prove me wrong?"

Have you found a YouTube video about the boson field you claim exists?

How about one that explains how protons, neutrons and electrons are made of leptons?

Got one that tells the tale of electrons traveling at the speed of light?

Or are just going to keep pretending that you have somehow demonstrated some deep level of knowledge about chemistry?

You do realize that ignoring my questions will not make them go away.

Originally Posted by Vandal-72

Eric,

Any comment on the fact that you cited Wikipedia in an attempt to "prove me wrong?"

Have you found a YouTube video about the boson field you claim exists?

How about one that explains how protons, neutrons and electrons are made of leptons?

Got one that tells the tale of electrons traveling at the speed of light?

Or are just going to keep pretending that you have somehow demonstrated some deep level of knowledge about chemistry?

You do realize that ignoring my questions will not make them go away.

Your questions do not exist.

You never provide answers; only insults and claims of how much more you know than anyone else.

You are a disgrace to your profession.

Here is a site that discusses leptons.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...es/lepton.html

Mass:

The mass of an object is a fundamental property of the object; a numerical measure of its inertia; a fundamental measure of the amount of matter in the object. Definitions of mass often seem circular because it is such a fundamental quantity that it is hard to define in terms of something else. All mechanical quantities can be defined in terms of mass, length, and time. The usual symbol for mass is m and its SI unit is the kilogram. While the mass is normally considered to be an unchanging property of an object, at speeds approaching the speed of light one must consider the increase in the relativistic mass.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mass.html

Notice in this paragraph that they admit that the definition of mass is circular, and that the definition applies to "mechanical quantities" (IOW, relating to how we analyze to use things and make machines (mechanisms)). The notion of "an object" is also not analyzed, showing the need for philosophy to understand such assumed concepts as that.

They often refer to "mass at rest" in these articles, although there is no such thing. This notion of mass at rest seems (to me) related to the "particle" that appears at the collapse of the wave function at measurement. IOW, in a sense, we create the "mass." We make it appear as such with our observations.

One source I read says that electrons travel at varying speeds. Resistance slows down their speed in a current, but the speed of the electrons is slower than the speed of the current.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

I don't know why the sarcasm, ...

Hey, don't blame me; I'm just the messenger.

Originally Posted by Eric

... but yes you got the ref, ...

Yeah, but did you get my reference(s)?


Prince

PS:

Originally Posted by Eric

... hu hu hu

Meow, meow, meow!

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Your questions do not exist.

No. You quoted them in your response and then promptly ignored them.

You never provide answers; only insults and claims of how much more you know than anyone else.

No. I often don't provide answers because it is a way to demonstrate that you are only pretending to understand things. I never claimed to know more than anyone else, just you.

You are a disgrace to your profession.

My teacher of the year award, annual job reviews and hundreds of letters from graduated students at university seem to indicate otherwise.

Here is a site that discusses leptons.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...es/lepton.html

In post #1734 of this thread, you claimed that protons, neutrons and electrons were made up of leptons. Are you now trying to admit that you were wrong and didn't understand the science involved or is this some attempt to try and change the subject?

Mass:

The mass of an object is a fundamental property of the object; a numerical measure of its inertia; a fundamental measure of the amount of matter in the object. Definitions of mass often seem circular because it is such a fundamental quantity that it is hard to define in terms of something else. All mechanical quantities can be defined in terms of mass, length, and time. The usual symbol for mass is m and its SI unit is the kilogram. While the mass is normally considered to be an unchanging property of an object, at speeds approaching the speed of light one must consider the increase in the relativistic mass.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mass.html

Notice in this paragraph that they admit that the definition of mass is circular, and that the definition applies to "mechanical quantities" (IOW, relating to how we analyze to use things and make machines (mechanisms)).

I highlighted the relevant portions of the text you quoted and what you claim it says. Can you see the difference between the two?

The notion of "an object" is also not analyzed, showing the need for philosophy to understand such assumed concepts as that.

So, one paragraph is supposed to supply the formal definitions and descriptions of every single term they use? You really are a fruit bat.

They often refer to "mass at rest" in these articles, although there is no such thing.

You are pretending again. Rest mass is also called invariant mass and is the mass of a system or particle that is the same for all reference frames in regards to special relativity. For particle physics you can use this equation to define the rest mass of a particle like the electron.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/3/e...54613a53ee.png

This notion of mass at rest seems (to me) related to the "particle" that appears at the collapse of the wave function at measurement.

In other words, your complete lack of knowledge of special relativity leads you to think you understand this better than you really do.

IOW, in a sense, we create the "mass." We make it appear as such with our observations.

Nope.

One source I read says that electrons travel at varying speeds. Resistance slows down their speed in a current, but the speed of the electrons is slower than the speed of the current.

Are you trying to admit that you were wrong about electrons traveling at the speed of light? Because I don't see an actual admission. I just see you trying to change the subject.

BTW: You didn't even try to change the subject in regards to your claim about there being a boson field? Why is that?

Originally Posted by Vandal-72

I often don't provide answers because it is a way to demonstrate that you are only pretending to understand things. I never claimed to know more than anyone else, just you.

IOW, you are useless.

My teacher of the year award, annual job reviews and hundreds of letters from graduated students at university seem to indicate otherwise.

I wouldn't put it past you to lie about these things, just as you lie about most everything else in your posts here. Such as your claim that you only think you know more than me.

In post #1734 of this thread, you claimed that protons, neutrons and electrons were made up of leptons. Are you now trying to admit that you were wrong and didn't understand the science involved or is this some attempt to try and change the subject?

I made no such claim.

I highlighted the relevant portions of the text you quoted and what you claim it says. Can you see the difference between the two?

Can you see the similarity? No need for an answer.

So, one paragraph is supposed to supply the formal definitions and descriptions of every single term they use? You really are a fruit bat.

Show me a paragraph where they DO analyze that term "object."

You are pretending again. Rest mass is also called invariant mass and is the mass of a system or particle that is the same for all reference frames in regards to special relativity. For particle physics you can use this equation to define the rest mass of a particle like the electron.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/3/e...54613a53ee.png

Nonsense. Nothing is ever at rest; period.

Are you trying to admit that you were wrong about electrons traveling at the speed of light? Because I don't see an actual admission. I just see you trying to change the subject.

It looks like I was wrong about that. No thanks to you. I asked for info, and you only provide insults. But I also note that electron movement does not equal current movement.

BTW: You didn't even try to change the subject in regards to your claim about there being a boson field? Why is that?

It was not my claim, stupid.

The reference I posted referred to a "Higgs field"

Originally Posted by Vandal-72

Eric,

Any comment on the fact that you cited Wikipedia in an attempt to "prove me wrong?"

Have you found a YouTube video about the boson field you claim exists?

How about one that explains how protons, neutrons and electrons are made of leptons?

Got one that tells the tale of electrons traveling at the speed of light?

Or are just going to keep pretending that you have somehow demonstrated some deep level of knowledge about chemistry?

You do realize that ignoring my questions will not make them go away.

Oh, you forget. Eric knows all. His tarot cards told him so.

Case in point is water treatment. I do it for a living and have for years, yet Eric thinks he understands the field better than me, despite never having worked a day in it in his life.

Good Luck explaining things that require higher cognitive abilities to Eric.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Blasphemy!!!

Well, I am from a "violent honor" portion of the country, what did you expect?

Just to clarify my position more solidly on that pesky 2nd Amendment, I own guns, will use them if needed and carry conceal with permit daily.
I also am an avid gardener, and firm believer in one should take care of themselves and prep for this fact accordingly.

I do not subscribe to the theory of just call 911, I believe in defending myself and will. I have before and always will.

Originally Posted by Vandal-72

Just to show Eric how many different ways we can choose to draw the periodic table:

Pretty good. I think you can just use colors for the symbols to convey the group like some actual periodic tables do.

Originally Posted by Vandal-72

Eric,How about one that explains how protons, neutrons and electrons are made of leptons?

I missed that one. Now, as I understand things, electrons are of the class, leptons , not made of "them".Next, if he claims protons and neutrons are made of leptons, then he's stupid. I do believe the answer to that one would be quarks.

Got one that tells the tale of electrons traveling at the speed of light?

I am aware of this one. Eric needs to fess up and admit he's wrong here.

Or are just going to keep pretending that you have somehow demonstrated some deep level of knowledge about chemistry?

It's amusing. Just imagine an image of Eric stepping in some cow shit and cleaning his shoes by sticking them in his mouth to clean them.

You do realize that ignoring my questions will not make them go away.

I do. I also remember the wonderful post about element #119. Actually, I think element #120 would be a better bet. Usually, but not always, atoms with an even number of protons are more stable. An obvious exception is bismuth #83, and polonium #84.

What is amazing is that anyone would even read any of the shit that vandal posts. That you do, is very dissappointing. You ought to know better. There is no worse creep on this site. His words are ten times more grating than the heavy metal 3T music you listen to.

Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

I missed that one. Now, as I understand things, electrons are of the class, leptons , not made of "them".Next, if he claims protons and neutrons are made of leptons, then he's stupid.

You are really, really stupid if you believe what vandal says that I said. He simply doesn't read. Maybe I ought to put you on my ignore list if you crank shit like that out. That is really, really stupid!

I do believe the answer to that one would be quarks.I am aware of this one. Eric needs to fess up and admit he's wrong here.It's amusing. Just imagine an image of Eric stepping in some cow shit and cleaning his shoes by sticking them in his mouth to clean them.I do.

Now that's what YOU need to do anytime you take any of vandal's total shit seriously. To attribute truth to any of his statements about me, is more stupid than the worst Republican, and worse than George W Bush.

I also remember the wonderful post about element #119. Actually, I think element #120 would be a better bet. Usually, but not always, atoms with an even number of protons are more stable. An obvious exception is bismuth #83, and polonium #84.

Total nonsense and you know it.

Originally Posted by Danilynn

Oh, you forget. Eric knows all. His tarot cards told him so.

Case in point is water treatment. I do it for a living and have for years, yet Eric thinks he understands the field better than me, despite never having worked a day in it in his life.

Good Luck explaining things that require higher cognitive abilities to Eric.

What are you doing on this thread? YOu are almost as bad as Vandal. Nothing matters to you except to get us all to be sympathetic to your endless sufferings and self congratulations.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Blasphemy!!!

And you too, rani. You are just another creep who has nothing to say about anything. You are little above apollonian. A total troll. On my ignore list you go.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

What is amazing is that anyone would even read any of the shit that vandal posts.

I enjoy reading subtle snark. Yeah, I know, just call it a weakness. My inner Xer beckons at times.

That you do, is very disappointing. You ought to know better. There is no worse creep on this site. His words are ten times more grating than the heavy metal 3T music you listen to.

Appolian was. I put him/her on my ignore list before you did. It really takes a lot to make my ignore list. I just have appolian and katsung47 on mine. Katsung is there, not out of malice on his part, just bad signal to noise ratio. OTOH, Apollian was just mean spirited to other posters which also makes for bad signal to noise ratio.

You are really, really stupid if you believe what vandal says that I said. He simply doesn't read.

I think he's entertaining. Maybe he got that teacher's award for being an engaging instructor.

Maybe I ought to put you on my ignore list if you crank shit like that out. That is really, really stupid!

Wow, well at least you can have a full set of Xer's that way. It could also mean birds of a feather, flock together.



[I pulled up Firefox since Chrome won't let me do images.]

Now that's what YOU need to do anytime you take any of vandal's total shit seriously.

It matches the stuff I learned in Chem I, Chem II, and *Organic Chem I.

To attribute truth to any of his statements about me, is more stupid than the worst Republican, and worse than George W Bush.

Good shark jumping there.

Total nonsense and you know it.

No it isn't I put forth a perfectly rational reason why I think element #120 will get discovered / synthesized before element #119. I even put forth 1 exception to the rule. I knew this, but here's the scoop.

Originally Posted by Pbrower2a

As soon as Element 119 (perhaps more likely 120) is discovered there will be some element, however transitory in its existence, with 8 electron shells. There are now 118 known elements, most of the heaviest synthetic.

Obviously, I agree with Pbrower2a as well. He's got the odd/even thing down.
That means what I said is not nonsense. So, are you gonna fess up on that electron thingie?

*Organic Chem I. After first test, I came to class and the classroom was half empty. Weird . I got an "A".

And you too, rani. You are just another creep who has nothing to say about anything. You are little above apollonian. A total troll. On my ignore list you go.

Dr. The Rani as well? So... Here's the plan.
1. Eric puts Rags and Dr. The Rani on ignore.
2. Vandal is on ignore, but Eric unginores him a lot.
3. POC sorta jumped in with a snark post. Cats are like that. They just show up at the darndest times.

I propose that if we all get put on ignore, that we visit your website and snark something or other that's on it.

EDIT

Originally Posted by danillyn

h, you forget. Eric knows all. His tarot cards told him so.

Case in point is water treatment. I do it for a living and have for years, yet Eric thinks he understands the field better than me, despite never having worked a day in it in his life.

Good Luck explaining things that require higher cognitive abilities to Eric.

Does the above also qualify as a put on ignore post? Be sure to put Bronco80 on it also. He's from Idaho, just like Vanal. That should suffice.

Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

Obviously, I agree with Pbrower2a as well. He's got the odd/even thing down.
That means what I said is not nonsense. So, are you gonna fess up on that electron thingie?

Speculating about elements 119 and 120 is not science; it's just nonsense. And I've fessed up all I'm gonna fess up about that thingie, and if vandal wants me to fess up, then that is totally irrelevant. If you read his posts and mine, it is totally clear he is making charges up against me out of thin air.

Dr. The Rani as well? So... Here's the plan.
1. Eric puts Rags and Dr. The Rani on ignore.
2. Vandal is on ignore, but Eric unginores him a lot.
3. POC sorta jumped in with a snark post. Cats are like that. They just show up at the darndest times.

The Rani deserves to be on ignore; all she ever does is try to prove she's a psychiatrist by trying to correct our behavior, even though it never needs correcting. She never makes any point about the theory, or any issue. She never listens to any points anyone makes. I've had it with her. And I'm going to redouble my efforts to ignore vandal's posts. They never go away, but it's up to YOU and others not to be sucked in by his nonsense, and not get on the anti-Eric bandwagon like other trolls such as The Rani, Danilynn and Odin do. Oh poor, poor Danilynn. People feel so sorry for her, but she's just a mean-spirited and deluded fool. I will go back to not clicking on her posts too. She's already on my ignore list, and will stay there. And btw, anyone who gets on an anti-Eric bandwagon, might get put on my ignore list too.

I'm sorry I was tough on you in my last post, but it frustrates me that a troll like vandal gets listened to, and I don't. He is not much better than apollonian, and sooner or later you will discover that fact. And yes, I should have ignored apollonian earlier than I did; that's to your credit. I should not click on and read Vandal's posts either. What can I say? Sometimes I am indulgent.

If you want to listen to me, and show that you can read and understand something I say, anything; then try looking within and feeling your chakras. Realize there is more to your life than what you can see outside yourself or measure on a brain scan. Don't knock those who have a different opinion on such things than stupid vandal.

I propose that if we all get put on ignore, that we visit your website and snark something or other that's on it.

I still only have about 10 people on my list; some of whom seem to be gone now. I only started my list a few years ago, and I've been posting here longer than anyone else now; since 1997 in fact.

I doubt few people here will be interested in my web site. Thanks (I think) for being interested (a little; I don't want to make any claims about your "interest" in my web site; but at least you know it's there and have visited it, although you obviously don't understand it yet).

Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

EDIT

Does the above also qualify as a put on ignore post? Be sure to put Bronco80 on it also. He's from Idaho, just like Vanal. That should suffice.

She already is on my list; I was guilty of clicking on her post. Sometimes you can see the posts that trolls like Danilynn make, because other people are fool enough to quote them. No, I will not put Bronco on ignore; I like his posts. I don't care where Vandal is from. ANY place would be better off without him; planet Earth would be better off without him.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Speculating about elements 119 and 120 is not science; it's just nonsense.

This statement alone makes it abundantly clear that you really, really don't understand what science is.

And I've fessed up all I'm gonna fess up about that thingie, and if vandal wants me to fess up, then that is totally irrelevant. If you read his posts and mine, it is totally clear he is making charges up against me out of thin air.

Eric's words from post #1734: Subatomic means within atoms. Within atoms, are protons, neutrons and a "cloud" of electrons. Then, within these are smaller subatomic phenomena called quarks and leptons and others. If memory serves, they are as small compared to protons as protons are to atoms. And they apparently only get mass when they pass through the boson field, according to my most materialist post I made above. So does your course deal with these new discoveries?

The Rani deserves to be on ignore; all she ever does is try to prove she's a psychiatrist by trying to correct our behavior, even though it never needs correcting. She never makes any point about the theory, or any issue. She never listens to any points anyone makes. I've had it with her. And I'm going to redouble my efforts to ignore vandal's posts.

Yeah, never heard that before. Your massive ego will never allow you to pass up an opportunity to "prove vandal wrong" despite the likelihood that you'll just step in it again.

They never go away, but it's up to YOU and others not to be sucked in by his nonsense, and not get on the anti-Eric bandwagon like other trolls such as The Rani, Danilynn and Odin do. Oh poor, poor Danilynn. People feel so sorry for her, but she's just a mean-spirited and deluded fool. I will go back to not clicking on her posts too. She's already on my ignore list, and will stay there. And btw, anyone who gets on an anti-Eric bandwagon, might get put on my ignore list too.

I'm sorry I was tough on you in my last post, but it frustrates me that a troll like vandal gets listened to, and I don't.

Others listen to you. It's just that they find your statements to not be congruent with actual science.

He is not much better than apollonian, and sooner or later you will discover that fact. And yes, I should have ignored apollonian earlier than I did; that's to your credit. I should not click on and read Vandal's posts either. What can I say? Sometimes I am indulgent.

Massive ego.

If you want to listen to me, and show that you can read and understand something I say, anything; then try looking within and feeling your chakras. Realize there is more to your life than what you can see outside yourself or measure on a brain scan. Don't knock those who have a different opinion on such things than stupid vandal.

Having your own personal belief and philosophy is not a problem. The problem comes when you try to claim that some aspect of scientific research validates your personal wishes. That abuse of science will not stand unopposed in my sight.

I still only have about 10 people on my list; some of whom seem to be gone now. I only started my list a few years ago, and I've been posting here longer than anyone else now; since 1997 in fact.

I doubt few people here will be interested in my web site. Thanks (I think) for being interested (a little; I don't want to make any claims about your "interest" in my web site; but at least you know it's there and have visited it, although you obviously don't understand it yet).

It's standard operating procedure for crackpots to have their own websites.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

IOW, you are useless.

I see. My only "use" here is to provide you with information. I'm not supposed to challenge you to defend your ideas or claims?

You've spent far too much time buried in the echo chambers of the New Age community.

I wouldn't put it past you to lie about these things, just as you lie about most everything else in your posts here. Such as your claim that you only think you know more than me.

I haven't lied and deep down you know it.

I made no such claim.

How many times are you going to require me to quote your own words from post #1734?

Eric: Subatomic means within atoms. Within atoms, are protons, neutrons and a "cloud" of electrons. Then, within these are smaller subatomic phenomena called quarks and leptons and others. If memory serves, they are as small compared to protons as protons are to atoms. And they apparently only get mass when they pass through the boson field, according to my most materialist post I made above. So does your course deal with these new discoveries?

You claimed that leptons were within protons, neutrons and electrons.

Can you see the similarity? No need for an answer.

Do the words seems and is mean the same thing?

Show me a paragraph where they DO analyze that term "object."

Hyperphysics site's definition of a free particle.

Nonsense. Nothing is ever at rest; period.

Do you even comprehend what the term reference frame means? Or should we add Galilean relativity to the long list of things you claim to understand but really don't.

It looks like I was wrong about that. No thanks to you. I asked for info, and you only provide insults.

Actually, I provided both. I linked to several web pages and a couple of videos that directly addressed your bullshit.

But I also note that electron movement does not equal current movement.

Totally irrelevant to your claim that an electron can move at the speed of light. Your admission also destroys your claim that there are no such things as laws in physics, only "tendencies."

It was not my claim, stupid.

The reference I posted referred to a "Higgs field"

The Higgs field and the boson field are not the same thing. I even noted that in my initial response.
Because you don't really understand what the terms Higgs field, Higgs particle and Higgs boson mean, you ended up mushing them altogether and creating the nonsensical term boson field. If you would stop trying to pretend you are knowledgable, you wouldn't end up looking like an ass all the time.

A boson is a particle and can not be a field. A strong enough perturbation of the Higgs field will occasionally produce a Higgs particle. That was the primary goal of the Large Hadron Collider experiments at CERN over the last couple of years.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

What are you doing on this thread? YOu are almost as bad as Vandal. Nothing matters to you except to get us all to be sympathetic to your endless sufferings and self congratulations.

Go play with your tarot. I was talking to vandal.

Also, not "suffering".
But believe what you want, if it helps you sleep better to look down on me.

Originally Posted by Danilynn

Oh, you forget. Eric knows all. His tarot cards told him so.

Case in point is water treatment. I do it for a living and have for years, yet Eric thinks he understands the field better than me, despite never having worked a day in it in his life.

Good Luck explaining things that require higher cognitive abilities to Eric.

Just to remind you, I take great offense at this post. I don't know what to do about it, but it is reprehensible.

Originally Posted by The Rani

It must be God's time of the month.

I think it's "time of the year". God is big, remember. That time is called "Ramadan". This year it's June 28-July 28.

Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

I think it's "time of the year". God is big, remember. That time is called "Ramadan". This year it's June 28-July 28.

God is big all the time. Just because some people don't know what and who God is, does not affect God, anymore than the weather is changed because you don't look up in the sky or read weather reports.

But a true understanding of God threatens both fundie scientists (e.g. Vandal), and fundie religionists (e.g. Danilynn), as well as snarky cynical Gen Xers (e.g. The Rani), that they go crazy when anyone even mentions Him and His true nature. That's why Christ was murdered.

But God is obvious to anyone who looks within. That does not change just because some people have lost or misplaced that ability. That does not change just because some people resort to ridicule to conceal the fact, or string up the messengers.