T:___is a thing. |-(∃!{})⇒({}≡{})⇒({}={})⇒({}⇒{})⇒({}:{}⇒{})⇒(∃{} ⇒∃{} )⇒({}>>{})⇒({}∈{

[hertz vanrental]

HumbleBeauty wrote

I claim to be more of an expert in chemistry than you, re; strawman fallacy

You claim a lot for someone who has problems with grammar (that I've had to correct in your posts), maths (that you admitted to publically), logic (which is obvious to all and sundry given that you believe that there is an infinite amount of energy in a finite amount of space and that you misinterpret zero point energy) and, of course, your sanity.

[hertz vanrental]

Come on butt wee, I don't have all fuckin' day. I have work to do and money to earn, and not an 'expert' $8 an hour either

Come on, little boy, what great pearls of wisdom or revelation do you wish to impart unto us? We wait with bated breath.

Come on, get on with it.

[Kinich Ahau]

HumbleBeauty wrote

I ran a power plant for two an a half years doing chemistry everyday on the boilers. $24/hour

I also did chemistry for an environmental testing lab for six months. $8/hour I got to do my own chemistry experiments for free... making potassium L-ascorbate.

Translation: My mum gave me a chemistry set for Christmas.

[hertz vanrental]

Kinich Ahau wrote

Translation: My mum gave me a chemistry set for Christmas.

[hertz vanrental]

HumbleBeauty wrote

... I got to do my own chemistry experiments for free... making potassium L-ascorbate.

Yes, there's a chiral centre at C1 on potassium ascorbate - which is why you refer to the L-ascorbate enantiomer as opposed to the D-ascorbate enantiomer. Having said that, I prefer the R and S to the D and L nomenclature, but hey ho.

[Hobotronic2037]

HumbleBeauty wrote

your not an expert in physics so I will forgive you.

Your (sic) not an expert in anything, obviously. You prove it more with every illogical post. You also prove Pope’s axiom that “a little learning is a dangerous thing.”

Except you’re not really dangerous at all.

Unless you count the risk of me dying laughing at your inane horseshit.

[hertz vanrental]

HumbleBeauty wrote

your not an expert in physics so I will forgive you.

It's YOU'RE not and expert NOT YOUR not an expert you illiterate imbecile.

FFS, go do grammar 101.

Twat

[hertz vanrental]

Well. It looks like bumble butt wee has done a runner. What a fuckin' imbecile. Infinite amounts of energy from finite amounts of space. I ask you.

[HumbleBeauty]

hertz vanrental wrote

Infinite amounts of energy from finite amounts of space. I ask you.

take any random spot between the moon and earth

in every direction there is radiation flowing, both in and out of the spot

what is the intensity of converged star light in that spot?

as the convergence goes to zero volume the intensity goes to infinity

now consider the infinite many spots that would make up a golf ball where our infinite intensity spot is just one of those spots

QED


baby baby, I love you so, ooo ooo

[hertz vanrental]

[quote=

as the convergence goes to zero volume the intensity goes to infinity[/QUOTE]

An there. right there, bumble but wee, is an issue which amplifies your complete and utter lack of understanding.

In a theoretical world, you are correct and therefore the concentration of energy would tend to infinity as the volume tends to zero.

In the real world, the world that I live in, but obviously not you, the volume doesn't tend to zero. It is limited by the Planck length. Didn't you learn anything in Physics ffs?

Where a volume is limited by the Planck length, it CANNOT tend to zero and therefore the energy cannot become infinite.

Heisenberg taught us that and, in fact, found that the effect occurred before we approached the Planck length.

So, you useless dolt, before you utter your horse shit again in this venerable place, go do physics 101.

Another epic fail.

[hertz vanrental]

HumbleBeauty wrote

take any random spot between the moon and earth

in every direction there is radiation flowing, both in and out of the spot

what is the intensity of converged star light in that spot?

as the convergence goes to zero volume the intensity goes to infinity

now consider the infinite many spots that would make up a golf ball where our infinite intensity spot is just one of those spots

QED


baby baby, I love you so, ooo ooo

Oh, in a previous post, I said that there was a chiral centre on C1 on Potassium Ascorbate. Of course, the chiral centre is on C4 and NOT C1. It was a deliberate mistake to see if you knew what you were talking about. You obviously weren't you useless piece of excrement.

Yet another epic fail.

Fuck me, you are useless.

[hertz vanrental]

HumbleBeauty wrote

take any random spot between the moon and earth

Now fuck off there and don't come back, you illiterate twat.

[hertz vanrental]

HumbleBeauty wrote

take any random spot between the moon and earth

in every direction there is radiation flowing, both in and out of the spot

what is the intensity of converged star light in that spot?

as the convergence goes to zero volume the intensity goes to infinity

now consider the infinite many spots that would make up a golf ball where our infinite intensity spot is just one of those spots

QED


baby baby, I love you so, ooo ooo

Further to my previous post on this subject, there are 2 other considerations:

1. Let's, for the purposes of this argument, ignore the Planck length. As long as the volume is not zero, the intensity of the energy is not infinite. As the volume starts to approach zero, the intensity begins to approach infinity. If the volume is zero, you argue that the intensity becomes infinite. BULL SHIT. If the volume becomes zero, the point ceases to exist and the energy intensity becomes zero because one can only have an energy intensity at a point provided that the point actually exists.

QED, fucktard.

2. You love me so, do you? You are a sex pest - just like the christard android IQ 6 (an erstwhile member of this forum). You have already published a supposed letter from one of your sexual partners. Why? This isn't a sex forum. Is that why you're here, to have a sexual relationship, you fuckin' wierdo?

[HumbleBeauty]

hertz vanrental wrote

you are correct and therefore the concentration of energy would tend to infinity as the volume tends to zero.

subquantum physics exists if there is a continuum

refraction would be just one phenomena of the subquantum realm

[hertz vanrental]

HumbleBeauty wrote

subquantum physics exists if there is a continuum

refraction would be just one phenomena of the subquantum realm

Irrelevant bull shit.

If the volume is zero, the point does not exist and the concentration of energy is zero. It therefore CANNOT be infinite as posited by you.

Another epic fail.

We have now established that you are neither physicist not chemist.

How's your possession going, btw? I almost wet myself reading your possession post.