Old 10-24-2019, 10:10 AM   #256
hertz vanrental
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,733
Quote:
colpat wrote View Post
Yes, the First Law of Thermodynamics, "matter can neither be created nor destroyed, only changed in form." The Second Law of Thermodynamics, "the change in form results change from order to disorder.
I'm assuming that you didn't read the research carried out by Fermi Lab, otherwise you wouldn't have stated that the creation of a matter/anti-matter particle pair from nothing violates the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics. It does't by the way. Why didn't you read the research by the way? If you intend to take part in such discussions, I do wish that you would make yourself aware of the salient facts. Otherwise you just look plain dumb.

Do I sound like a fuckin' people person?
hertz vanrental is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2019, 10:54 AM   #257
colpat
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Cyril, OK
Posts: 112
Your assumption is just a bit off the mark. I was directly involved in the establishment of Fermi Lab, Batavia, Illinois, in 1967. In Feb I1955, along with another young Lt. were recognized as the free world's foremost electromagnetic wave propagation experts. Fermi Lab changed the form of matter, and entropy was the result.
colpat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2019, 11:20 AM   #258
hertz vanrental
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,733
Quote:
colpat wrote View Post
Your assumption is just a bit off the mark. I was directly involved in the establishment of Fermi Lab, Batavia, Illinois, in 1967. In Feb I1955, along with another young Lt. were recognized as the free world's foremost electromagnetic wave propagation experts. Fermi Lab changed the form of matter, and entropy was the result.

I didn't ask whether you were involved in Fermi Lab. I asked if you had read the research relating to Fermi Lab's research into the spontaneous creation of a matter/anti-matter particle pair from nothing. If you have read and understood it, why do you infer that the spontaneous creation of a matter/anti-matter particle pair from nothing violates the First and Second of Thermodynamics?

Do I sound like a fuckin' people person?
hertz vanrental is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2019, 11:57 AM   #259
colpat
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Cyril, OK
Posts: 112
I was involved in doing the research. My input early on before 1967 was proving the foundation formulae E=MC2 was accurate in only three conditions. Using a simple analogy of a squirrel in a hollow log, I developed the formula for universality. Because of my participation in Fermi Lab USA, I was a consultant for Fermi Lab Bern.
colpat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2019, 12:08 PM   #260
hertz vanrental
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,733
Quote:
colpat wrote View Post
I was involved in doing the research. My input early on before 1967 was proving the foundation formulae E=MC2 was accurate in only three conditions. Using a simple analogy of a squirrel in a hollow log, I developed the formula for universality. Because of my participation in Fermi Lab USA, I was a consultant for Fermi Lab Bern.
FFS !!!!

For the second, and hopefully last, time, I didn't ask whether (or how) you were involved in Fermi Lab. I asked if you had read the research relating to Fermi Lab's research into the spontaneous creation of a matter/anti-matter particle pair from nothing. If you have read and understood it, why do you infer that the spontaneous creation of a matter/anti-matter particle pair from nothing violates the First and Second laws of Thermodynamics?

Do I sound like a fuckin' people person?

Last edited by hertz vanrental; 10-24-2019 at 12:31 PM.
hertz vanrental is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2019, 12:57 PM   #261
colpat
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Cyril, OK
Posts: 112
Yes, I have read, studied, and applied the Fermi Lab research. No, the FL did not falsify their report. The Fermi report used the invalid E=MC2 formula, which made their findings questionable.
colpat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2019, 01:27 PM   #262
hertz vanrental
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,733
Quote:
colpat wrote View Post
Yes, I have read, studied, and applied the Fermi Lab research. No, the FL did not falsify their report. The Fermi report used the invalid E=MC2 formula, which made their findings questionable.
The validity (or invalidity) of E=MC2 is not germane to our discussion relating to the spontaneous creation of a matter/anti-matter particle pair. The fact remains that the spontaneous creation was first observed by Fermi Lab. Therefore, for the third time of asking, on what basis do you claim that this violates the First and Second laws of Thermodynamics?

Do I sound like a fuckin' people person?
hertz vanrental is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2019, 02:09 PM   #263
colpat
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Cyril, OK
Posts: 112
The "fact" has never been a fact, and it is only a theory. The notion of particle pairs is highly doubtful. The First Law of Thermodynamics still stands.
colpat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2019, 12:58 AM   #264
hertz vanrental
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,733
Quote:
colpat wrote View Post
The "fact" has never been a fact, and it is only a theory. The notion of particle pairs is highly doubtful. The First Law of Thermodynamics still stands.
The spontaneously-created matter/anti-matter particle pairs have been observed by Fermi Lab, Read the research. Because the spontaneously created particles occur in matter/anti-matter particle pairs, the laws of Thermodynamics are not violated.

Oh, are you a christard or an atheist?

Do I sound like a fuckin' people person?
hertz vanrental is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2019, 08:10 AM   #265
Smellyoldgit
Stinkin' Mod
 
Smellyoldgit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Britland
Posts: 13,591
Oh, how I've missed the diligent wisdom of the Jesus Junkies!
Quote:
cowpat wrote View Post
The problem logically is "if an invention is natural and an inventor is above natural, then god would exist as a supernatural being.
If an invention is natural, it does not follow that an inventor is above natural (whatever the fuck that means!).
Your god only exists as a figment of your imagination - there only to provide answers whilst scientists work on providing real, natural explanations.

Stop the Holy See men!
Smellyoldgit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2019, 08:42 AM   #266
colpat
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Cyril, OK
Posts: 112
I am a christard. A theory derived from observation is not a fact. After peer review, it was determined to be questionable. https://phys.org/news/2011-06-fermilab-particle.html
colpat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2019, 08:53 AM   #267
colpat
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Cyril, OK
Posts: 112
The universal law of cause and effect demands an inventor for invention. What think ye?
colpat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2019, 09:04 AM   #268
hertz vanrental
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,733
Quote:
colpat wrote View Post
I am a christard. A theory derived from observation is not a fact. After peer review, it was determined to be questionable. https://phys.org/news/2011-06-fermilab-particle.html
I've never heard of a christard referring to himself as a christard, that's a first for me.

I am not referring to the FermiLab claim of the creation of a new particle when a proton collides with an anti-proton (phys.org/news/2011-06-fermilab-particle.html). I am referring to the FermiLab claim that matter/anti-matter particle pairs are created from NOTHING.

A proton and an anti-proton, individually, are not NOTHING. They are SOMETHING.

Now, FFS, go away and read about the creation of SOMETHING from NOTHING and then get back to me.

Do I sound like a fuckin' people person?
hertz vanrental is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2019, 09:10 AM   #269
hertz vanrental
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,733
Quote:
colpat wrote View Post
The universal law of cause and effect demands an inventor for invention. What think ye?
No.

The law of cause and effect demands that an effect has a CAUSE, NOT an inventor. FFS!!

What think ye?

Do I sound like a fuckin' people person?
hertz vanrental is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2019, 10:09 AM   #270
colpat
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Cyril, OK
Posts: 112
I thought, "I've never heard of a christard referring to himself as a christard, that's a first for me." was a binary choice.
The statement, "A proton and an anti-proton, individually, are NOTHING. They are SOMETHING." is correct in the sense that Something is an educated guess based on questionable research, a figment of the imagination.
colpat is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:28 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin - Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2000 - , Raving Atheists [dot] com frequency-supranational frequency-supranational