CPL.Luke Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 However, I have discovered otherwise. Once the Big Bang was accepted by the Pomo elite, over much objection, about eight years after Einstein’s death, until the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) proved its ludicrousness, I had no credibility. First I had to prove that all Pomo theory was little more than superstition. on the contrary inflation theory (a big bang variant) fits the data quite well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 It is not my site. It is: http://www.physicsmathforums.com. A Physics' date=' Math, Astroromy, Philosophy website . . . much as this forum. I do very much enjoy the Renaissance spirit of Dr. Elliot McGucken's site. (If for no other reason than that he was permanently banned with Brunardot from Physics Forum.)[/quote'] Given that it has only 602 posts, I wouldn't really think that you could get much credibility from there. Not enough people to criticize you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted September 17, 2005 Author Share Posted September 17, 2005 and at least two of the like five people there(including Proof of One) were banned from PF.....makes you think,doesn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 POO, in that case submit a paper (well thought out and presentable with ALL the little details easily over looked) to New Scientist, it`s Not peer reviewed but DOES have a large reader base and within that section of readership will be a subsection of notable Peers! if you have anything of substance you WILL BE notified! and it need not cost you thousands either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proof of One Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 thank you for proving my point. you have zero evidence.....good day.May your day be as good. Suffer a fool; until . . . ........the fool won't suffer you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proof of One Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 POO' date=' in that case submit a paper (well thought out and presentable with ALL the little details easily over looked) to New Scientist, it`s Not peer reviewed but DOES have a large reader base and within that section of readership will be a subsection of notable Peers!if you have anything of substance you WILL BE notified! and it need not cost you thousands either [/quote']Thank you. Obviously, you have noted something that I have overlooked. The expense was not so much peer revue related. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proof of One Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 and at least two of the like five people there(including Proof of One) were banned from PF.....makes you think,doesn't it?It does make me think about Intellectual Inquiry. And, such thought stokes my admiration for the courage and curiosity of this site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proof of One Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 Given that it has only 602 posts, I wouldn't really think that you could get much credibility from there. Not enough people to criticize you.That's why I am here . . . and elsewhere. I do believe that if you will build a field, they will come ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proof of One Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 on the contrary inflation theory (a big bang variant) fits the data quite well.Obviously, you know little of Inflation Theory as proposed by Alan Guth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 Quintuple posts aren't appreciated. That's what the "Edit" button is for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted September 17, 2005 Author Share Posted September 17, 2005 and he wonders why there are so many views.....they're mostly him! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proof of One Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 That doesn't answer the question. I also "studied at Cornell," but that doesn't mean I got a degree there or was even a registered student (and I didn't and wasn't). Where did you get your degrees?I was on a full, five year scholaeship (including living expenses) in a most elite program. My Curriculum Vitae was abruptly interrupted. Subsequently, I went from the deck of the New Jersey to the DMZ in Korea for an extended period of time. You would have had to live in the McCarthy era to understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 That's why I am here . . . and elsewhere. I do believe that if you will build a field' date=' they will come [i']![/i] I hope by that statement that your not considering my "help" or ideas as an approval of this theory, it isn`t, I don`t understand the conventional accepted theorems let alone a different one when it comes to Physics, I`m just looking at it logicaly, if I HAD such an idea I was so convinced about, THESE are the sort of things I would do, and so I`m merely presenting ideas to you. this is NOT an acceptance of your idea, it`s an Acceptance of You, as a user here, and I`m duty bound to help and assist where possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proof of One Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 and he wonders why there are so many views.....they're mostly him!Views are never increased when I visit the site. 259 views (as of this post) is no big deal anyway. Now almost 280 a little while after your post. It is a bit of a "deal" when you consider the time involved. Note: "Trsvelling faster than light..."[/i'], the precursor of this Thread, quickly, more than quintupled in viewers after languishing for almost two months at 400 viewers; since PoO joined it is now more than 2600. Update: (A few hours later) Viewers of this Thread are now over 300. In a few more hours this thread' date=' Pulsoid Theory, will be on the first page of all Threads on this topic when the Threads are sorted in descending order of viewers. This interest is very encouraging; particularly, if you consider that it was accomplished in only a few hours longer than one week from when PoO joined the Thread. The views are now approaching 380; and, the Thread is quickly moving up the first page on this topic when the Threads are sorted in descending order of viewers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proof of One Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 I hope by that statement that your not considering my "help" or ideas as an approval of this theory' date=' it isn`t, I don`t understand the conventional accepted theorems let alone a different one when it comes to Physics, I`m just looking at it logicaly, if I HAD such an idea I was so convinced about, THESE are the sort of things I would do, and so I`m merely presenting ideas to you.this is NOT an acceptance of your idea, it`s an Acceptance of You, as a user here, and I`m duty bound to help and assist where possible.[/quote']I understand. I haven't forgotten your stated qualifications concerning the suject matter at hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proof of One Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 Quintuple posts aren't appreciated. That's what the "Edit" button is for. I don't understand the relevance of this statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted September 17, 2005 Author Share Posted September 17, 2005 I don't understand the relevance of this statement. it means don't post 8 hundred times in a row. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proof of One Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 it means don't post 8 hundred times in a row.I only post when a reply is required. I do not initiate any posts other than to explain to others or defend myself. Never would I take positions as you have; particularly concerning your limited experience concerning the matters of these dialogues.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted September 17, 2005 Author Share Posted September 17, 2005 I only post when a reply is required. I do not initiate any posts other than to explain to others or defend myself. Never would I take positions as you have; particularly concerning your limited experience concerning the matters of these dialogues.. tell me, what exactly is my experience? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proof of One Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 tell me, what exactly is my experience?You have done that nicely with your forum profile. What else needs to be known can be gleaned from your posts that are compiled at said profile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPL.Luke Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 proofof one what capn' was trying to say is that if you post once and immediatly find that you need to add more to your post you can hit the edit button and expand on your post. WE don't like people to double post here let alone post 5 times in a row. also I am quite familiar with inflation theory and know that it does in fact fit the data. I saw Alan Guth give a lecture at yale a few months back on it where he described the theory and showed how it fit the current observations of the universe. It is infact a modification of the big bang theory as it shows how the universe might have expanded from a small region of negative pressure into a large full scale universe. (negative pressure makes anti-gravity, sort of) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted September 17, 2005 Author Share Posted September 17, 2005 You have done that nicely with your forum profile. What else needs to be known can be gleaned from your posts that are compiled at said profile. so, looking at my profile, you seem to think that nuclear physicist is limited experience.....really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 you`re NOT a Nuclear Physicist yourdad, you`ve been accepted for employment by the navy in that dept, you`ve not even started yet and will prolly spend the next 6 months sweeping floors at a base there before even being looked at!, Stop Trolling! and don`t play Mr.Innocent either, you STARTED this thread to Troll the guy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted September 17, 2005 Author Share Posted September 17, 2005 you`re NOT a Nuclear Physicist yourdadhe didn't know that. he said he was judging by my profile you`ve been accepted for employment by the navy in that dept, you`ve not even started yet and will prolly spend the next 6 months sweeping floors at a base there before even being looked at!,um, no. wanna see my contract? and don`t play Mr.Innocent either, you STARTED this thread to Troll the guy! i started this thread to keep his spam out of other threads Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted September 17, 2005 Share Posted September 17, 2005 1)he didn't know that. he said he was judging by my profile 2) um' date=' no. wanna see my contract? 3) i started this thread to keep his spam out of other threads[/quote'] 1. I think he DID know, that`s why he called you on it. 2. I don`t have to you said just: "<yourdadonapogos> i am in the US Navy as well <yourdadonapogos> i'm just still in high school" so basicly you have a promise of a job later, but you`re not IN that job yet are you? 3. how, by trolling him somewhere else? that`s just as bad if not worse than the original problem you perceived! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts