The insanity of Vergon


 Science > Physics > The insanity of Vergon

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 3 of 3

1
 

2
 

3
 
Topic: Science > Physics
User: "Golden Boar"
Date: 16 Sep 2006 01:33:05 PM
Object: The insanity of Vergon
Vergon belives that a photon has mass. He believes this because the
upper limit on photon mass from experimental evidence is about 1 *
10-54 kg.
He thinks that the upper limit on photon mass is the smallest mass
detected, whereas any sane person would say it means that a photon
could not have a mass greater than it's upper limit
This being the case, he then uses the equation m = h.f / c^2 and thinks
thats this is the mass of the photon.
He believes that the minimum frequency which a photon can have is 1 Hz,
which makes h.f / c^2 greater than the upper limit on photon mass, and
thereby proves that the photon has a mass of h.f / c^2.
Any sane person would realise that for an infinte number of values for
f, h.f / c^2 is greater than the upper limit on photon mass, and since
the upper limit is the largest value which could be associated with the
photon mass, then h.f / c^2 cannot possibly give the mass of the
photon.
This is even crazier than his insistance that Planck's constant is
massive.
.

User: ""

Title: Re: The insanity of Vergon 18 Sep 2006 02:48:01 AM
| My Groups | Help | My Account | Sign out
sci.physics.relativity - Reply to topic
From:

Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
Subject: Re: The insanity of Vergon
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 00:11:33 -0700
Golden Boar wrote:

wrote:

Golden Boar wrote:

Vergon belives that a photon has mass. He believes this because the
upper limit on photon mass from experimental evidence is about 1 *
10-54 kg.


VERGON

As usual you don't know your subject. That result was an ANOMOLOUS one
--- far off the curve. The place the curve was headed for -- and came
VERY close to was the one I had determined theoretically: 7.3720385 x
10^-48 gr.


Which coincidentally has the same value of h / c^2.


They (Nieto & Goldhaber) made an error. They thought they were looking
for the "mass of the photon" -- which has a great spread in energy and
mass. What they were really determining was the mass of the single e.m.
field. i.e., the coulomb field. See their article in the SCIENTIFIC
AMERICAN, May, 1976, entitled "The Mass of the Photon".

He thinks that the upper limit on photon mass is the smallest mass
detected, whereas any sane person would say it means that a photon
could not have a mass greater than it's upper limit


VERGON

If a photon (actually e.m. field) could not have a mass greater than
its upper limit, then
it must be below the upper limit --- and that's what the progression of
determined masses were. They kept getting smaller and smaller as the
technique was refined.


This being the case, he then uses the equation m = h.f / c^2 and thinks
thats this is the mass of the photon.


VERGON

Some guy named Einstein said the same thing in his second 1905 paper --
but then a blind dogmatist wouldn't know that.

Well, I know facts don't mean anything to you --- but.

E = mc^2 = (hf/c^2) c^2 = hf = energy of the photon.

Also, h/c^2 is the mass of one HZ (or 1f). And that times the f of the
photon
is the mass of the photon. But it doesn't stop there. That mass times
the frequency
of the electron, proton and neutron will give you the respective mass
of each.

Now in all your brilliance do you suppose that is a coincidense? Or do
you recognize
That this shows radiation and matter are composed of the same entity?

It also shows that radiation consists of matter and antimatter --
witness pair production.

I can't explain it any simpler to a moron.

He believes that the minimum frequency which a photon can have is 1 Hz,
which makes h.f / c^2 greater than the upper limit on photon mass, and
thereby proves that the photon has a mass of h.f / c^2.


VERGON

Like I have explained before, but you are too dense to grasp --- a
photon consists of multiple HZ (1 HZ = 1f). If the upper limit is for
one HZ (as it is) then obviously (to an intelligent person) a mass of
multiple HZ will be above the limit. I know that will strain your brain
cells but give it a try.


Any sane person would realize that for an infinte number of values for
f, h.f / c^2 is greater than the upper limit on photon mass, and since
the upper limit is the largest value which could be associated with the
photon mass, then h.f / c^2 cannot possibly give the mass of the
photon.

VERGON
Explained above.

This is even crazier than his insistance that Planck's constant is
massive.


VERGON

Either you went to a U that didn't teach dimensional analysis or you
played hooky (physically or mentally) when they did.

I'm not here to teach you basic physics so I suggest you bone up on it
yourself -- before shooting your mouth off and making a fool of
yourself.

In the meanwhile note that the unit of h is "action" which is the
Joule-second.

Look up the dimensions of the Joule and you will find M (that's M for
mass).


p.s.

Before you call your superiors insane, go check in with a psychiatrist,
Schmuck.

Also before you take on your superiors find out what the hell you're
talking abut.


Since you are so superior, then answer these questions.

What is the mass of a photon with a wavelength of 550 nm, according to
your theory?

VERGON
1.215545\-23 gram

According to your theory, Planck's constant has mass, so what is the
mass of Planck's constant, according to your theory?

VERGON
Since h is the lowest unit of energy (erg-second), h/c^2 =
7.3720385\-48 gr.

Keeping in mind that the upper limit on photon mass is about 1 *
10^-54, would do you conclude from the above answeering the above
questions?

VERGON
No wonder you are so screwed up. Informing you is like informing a hole
in the wall.
I informd you that that figure was anomolous -- WAY off the curve. Only
an idiot would quote that figure. The curve progressed over the years,
and refined procedures, to a quantity that was EXTREMELY close to mine.
(7.37\-48 gr.) So it is the upper limit of 1HZ.
Multiple HZ is the mass of the PHOTON and above the upper limit of the
single HZ --- which is one e.m. field.
I wouldn't call you insane --- or a nut. But you are wholly inadequate.
.
User: "Golden Boar"

Title: Re: The insanity of Vergon 18 Sep 2006 11:26:41 AM
wrote:

| My Groups | Help | My Account | Sign out

sci.physics.relativity - Reply to topic




From:

Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
Subject: Re: The insanity of Vergon
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 00:11:33 -0700


Golden Boar wrote:

wrote:

Golden Boar wrote:

Vergon belives that a photon has mass. He believes this because the
upper limit on photon mass from experimental evidence is about 1 *
10-54 kg.


VERGON

As usual you don't know your subject. That result was an ANOMOLOUS one
--- far off the curve. The place the curve was headed for -- and came
VERY close to was the one I had determined theoretically: 7.3720385 x
10^-48 gr.


Which coincidentally has the same value of h / c^2.


They (Nieto & Goldhaber) made an error. They thought they were looking
for the "mass of the photon" -- which has a great spread in energy and
mass. What they were really determining was the mass of the single e.m.
field. i.e., the coulomb field. See their article in the SCIENTIFIC
AMERICAN, May, 1976, entitled "The Mass of the Photon".

He thinks that the upper limit on photon mass is the smallest mass
detected, whereas any sane person would say it means that a photon
could not have a mass greater than it's upper limit


VERGON

If a photon (actually e.m. field) could not have a mass greater than
its upper limit, then
it must be below the upper limit --- and that's what the progression of
determined masses were. They kept getting smaller and smaller as the
technique was refined.


This being the case, he then uses the equation m = h.f / c^2 and thinks
thats this is the mass of the photon.


VERGON


Some guy named Einstein said the same thing in his second 1905 paper --
but then a blind dogmatist wouldn't know that.

Well, I know facts don't mean anything to you --- but.

E = mc^2 = (hf/c^2) c^2 = hf = energy of the photon.

Also, h/c^2 is the mass of one HZ (or 1f). And that times the f of the
photon
is the mass of the photon. But it doesn't stop there. That mass times
the frequency
of the electron, proton and neutron will give you the respective mass
of each.

Now in all your brilliance do you suppose that is a coincidense? Or do
you recognize
That this shows radiation and matter are composed of the same entity?

It also shows that radiation consists of matter and antimatter --
witness pair production.

I can't explain it any simpler to a moron.

He believes that the minimum frequency which a photon can have is 1 Hz,
which makes h.f / c^2 greater than the upper limit on photon mass, and
thereby proves that the photon has a mass of h.f / c^2.


VERGON

Like I have explained before, but you are too dense to grasp --- a
photon consists of multiple HZ (1 HZ = 1f). If the upper limit is for
one HZ (as it is) then obviously (to an intelligent person) a mass of
multiple HZ will be above the limit. I know that will strain your brain
cells but give it a try.


Any sane person would realize that for an infinte number of values for
f, h.f / c^2 is greater than the upper limit on photon mass, and since
the upper limit is the largest value which could be associated with the
photon mass, then h.f / c^2 cannot possibly give the mass of the
photon.


VERGON

Explained above.


This is even crazier than his insistance that Planck's constant is
massive.


VERGON

Either you went to a U that didn't teach dimensional analysis or you
played hooky (physically or mentally) when they did.

I'm not here to teach you basic physics so I suggest you bone up on it
yourself -- before shooting your mouth off and making a fool of
yourself.

In the meanwhile note that the unit of h is "action" which is the
Joule-second.

Look up the dimensions of the Joule and you will find M (that's M for
mass).


p.s.

Before you call your superiors insane, go check in with a psychiatrist,
Schmuck.

Also before you take on your superiors find out what the hell you're
talking abut.


Since you are so superior, then answer these questions.

What is the mass of a photon with a wavelength of 550 nm, according to
your theory?


VERGON

1.215545\-23 gram

You can't even do simple arithmetic.


According to your theory, Planck's constant has mass, so what is the
mass of Planck's constant, according to your theory?


VERGON

Since h is the lowest unit of energy (erg-second), h/c^2 =
7.3720385\-48 gr.

h / c^2 does not have units of kg.


Keeping in mind that the upper limit on photon mass is about 1 *
10^-54, would do you conclude from the above answeering the above
questions?


VERGON

No wonder you are so screwed up. Informing you is like informing a hole
in the wall.

That's because I don't accept *****.


I informd you that that figure was anomolous -- WAY off the curve. Only
an idiot would quote that figure. The curve progressed over the years,
and refined procedures, to a quantity that was EXTREMELY close to mine.
(7.37\-48 gr.) So it is the upper limit of 1HZ.
Multiple HZ is the mass of the PHOTON and above the upper limit of the
single HZ --- which is one e.m. field.

OK, the value listed at the Particle Data Group is 1 * 10^-52, is that
better?
And in none of the experiments, were they measuring the mass of a
photon with a frequency of 1 HZ.
If you think they were, then provide a reference which says so.
So given that the mass of the photon with a wavelength of 550 nm was
greater than the limit on photon mass, you conclude that the
experiments to determine the upper limit on photon mass, could only
have been determining the upper limit of a photon with a frequency of 1
HZ.
LOL, you truly are insane.


I wouldn't call you insane --- or a nut. But you are wholly inadequate.

.
User: ""

Title: Re: The insanity of Vergon 20 Sep 2006 12:06:17 AM
Golden Boar wrote:

wrote:

| My Groups | Help | My Account | Sign out

sci.physics.relativity - Reply to topic




From:

Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
Subject: Re: The insanity of Vergon
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 00:11:33 -0700


Golden Boar wrote:

wrote:

Golden Boar wrote:

Vergon belives that a photon has mass. He believes this because t=

he

upper limit on photon mass from experimental evidence is about 1 *
10-54 kg.


VERGON

As usual you don't know your subject. That result was an ANOMOLOUS =

one

--- far off the curve. The place the curve was headed for -- and ca=

me

VERY close to was the one I had determined theoretically: 7.372038=

5 x

10^-48 gr.


Which coincidentally has the same value of h / c^2.


They (Nieto & Goldhaber) made an error. They thought they were look=

ing

for the "mass of the photon" -- which has a great spread in energy =

and

mass. What they were really determining was the mass of the single =

e=2Em.

field. i.e., the coulomb field. See their article in the SCIENTIFIC
AMERICAN, May, 1976, entitled "The Mass of the Photon".

He thinks that the upper limit on photon mass is the smallest mass
detected, whereas any sane person would say it means that a photon
could not have a mass greater than it's upper limit


VERGON

If a photon (actually e.m. field) could not have a mass greater than
its upper limit, then
it must be below the upper limit --- and that's what the progressio=

n of

determined masses were. They kept getting smaller and smaller as the
technique was refined.


This being the case, he then uses the equation m =3D h.f / c^2 an=

d thinks

thats this is the mass of the photon.


VERGON


Some guy named Einstein said the same thing in his second 1905 paper --
but then a blind dogmatist wouldn't know that.

Well, I know facts don't mean anything to you --- but.

E =3D mc^2 =3D (hf/c^2) c^2 =3D hf =3D energy of the photon.

Also, h/c^2 is the mass of one HZ (or 1f). And that times the f of =

the

photon
is the mass of the photon. But it doesn't stop there. That mass tim=

es

the frequency
of the electron, proton and neutron will give you the respective ma=

ss

of each.

Now in all your brilliance do you suppose that is a coincidense? Or=

do

you recognize
That this shows radiation and matter are composed of the same entit=

y?


It also shows that radiation consists of matter and antimatter --
witness pair production.

I can't explain it any simpler to a moron.

He believes that the minimum frequency which a photon can have is=

1 Hz,

which makes h.f / c^2 greater than the upper limit on photon mass=

, and

thereby proves that the photon has a mass of h.f / c^2.


VERGON

Like I have explained before, but you are too dense to grasp --- a
photon consists of multiple HZ (1 HZ =3D 1f). If the upper limit i=

s for

one HZ (as it is) then obviously (to an intelligent person) a mass =

of

multiple HZ will be above the limit. I know that will strain your b=

rain

cells but give it a try.


Any sane person would realize that for an infinte number of value=

s for

f, h.f / c^2 is greater than the upper limit on photon mass, and =

since

the upper limit is the largest value which could be associated wi=

th the

photon mass, then h.f / c^2 cannot possibly give the mass of the
photon.


VERGON

Explained above.


This is even crazier than his insistance that Planck's constant is
massive.


VERGON

Either you went to a U that didn't teach dimensional analysis or you
played hooky (physically or mentally) when they did.

I'm not here to teach you basic physics so I suggest you bone up on=

it

yourself -- before shooting your mouth off and making a fool of
yourself.

In the meanwhile note that the unit of h is "action" which is the
Joule-second.

Look up the dimensions of the Joule and you will find M (that's M f=

or

mass).


p.s.

Before you call your superiors insane, go check in with a psychiatr=

ist,

Schmuck.

Also before you take on your superiors find out what the hell you're
talking abut.


Since you are so superior, then answer these questions.

What is the mass of a photon with a wavelength of 550 nm, according to
your theory?


VERGON

1.215545\-23 gram


You can't even do simple arithmetic.

VERGON
I had a long bad day --- and explained that when I posted the
correction.


According to your theory, Planck's constant has mass, so what is the
mass of Planck's constant, according to your theory?


VERGON

Since h is the lowest unit of energy (erg-second), h/c^2 =3D
7.3720385\-48 gr.


h / c^2 does not have units of kg.

VERGON
I use the cgs system --- wher h/c^2 has units of grams.
In the meantime for your education (which will never happen), here's
the encyclopedia:

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The joule (symbol: J) is the SI unit of energy, which is defined as the
potential to do work. The joule has base units of kg=B7m=B2/s=B2
VERGON
Oh, gee! Did I see Kg there? Oh my.
And while we're at it, all should notice that I make many telling
points in this post THAT YOU IGNORE AND DON'T ANSWER because they are
red hot pokers up your but and
PROVE YOU ARE WRONG, and don't know your butt from a hole in the ground
ENCYC CONT'D
=3D N=B7m. The base unit conversion can be remembered using the equation E
=3D mc2, where E is in joules, m is in kilograms, and c is the speed of
light in meters per second.


Keeping in mind that the upper limit on photon mass is about 1 *
10^-54, would do you conclude from the above answeering the above
questions?


VERGON

No wonder you are so screwed up. Informing you is like informing a hole
in the wall.


That's because I don't accept *****.

VERGON
No, you hand it out.


I informd you that that figure was anomolous -- WAY off the curve. Only
an idiot would quote that figure. The curve progressed over the years,
and refined procedures, to a quantity that was EXTREMELY close to mine.
(7.37\-48 gr.) So it is the upper limit of 1HZ.
Multiple HZ is the mass of the PHOTON and above the upper limit of the
single HZ --- which is one e.m. field.


OK, the value listed at the Particle Data Group is 1 * 10^-52, is that
better?

NO. I suggest you read Nieto & Goldhaber's detailed account of their
experiments in the Scientific American (reference above).

And in none of the experiments, were they measuring the mass of a
photon with a frequency of 1 HZ.

VERGON
I told you, dummy, they were measuring a single coulomb field -- that's
one HZ.
It was the measurement of a galactic field that you are quoting.

If you think they were, then provide a reference which says so.

VERGON
I did, above.

So given that the mass of the photon with a wavelength of 550 nm was
greater than the limit on photon mass, you conclude that the
experiments to determine the upper limit on photon mass, could only
have been determining the upper limit of a photon with a frequency of 1
HZ.

LOL, you truly are insane.


I wouldn't call you insane --- or a nut. But you are wholly inadequate.

INCIDENTALLY, I see there is no use proceeding further here. But I will
say this -- with all the nonsense (mostly from you) that has transpired
here, I have had a clarfication of my own theory that I will start a
new thread with. Any bull ***** from you will be ignored. If you want to
talk tech - and answer my points, ok.
.
User: "Golden Boar"

Title: Re: The insanity of Vergon 20 Sep 2006 12:50:02 AM
wrote:

Golden Boar wrote:

wrote:

| My Groups | Help | My Account | Sign out

sci.physics.relativity - Reply to topic




From:

Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
Subject: Re: The insanity of Vergon
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 00:11:33 -0700


Golden Boar wrote:

wrote:

Golden Boar wrote:

Vergon belives that a photon has mass. He believes this because=

the

upper limit on photon mass from experimental evidence is about =

1 *

10-54 kg.


VERGON

As usual you don't know your subject. That result was an ANOMOLOU=

S one

--- far off the curve. The place the curve was headed for -- and =

came

VERY close to was the one I had determined theoretically: 7.3720=

385 x

10^-48 gr.


Which coincidentally has the same value of h / c^2.


They (Nieto & Goldhaber) made an error. They thought they were lo=

oking

for the "mass of the photon" -- which has a great spread in energ=

y and

mass. What they were really determining was the mass of the singl=

e e.m.

field. i.e., the coulomb field. See their article in the SCIENTIF=

IC

AMERICAN, May, 1976, entitled "The Mass of the Photon".

He thinks that the upper limit on photon mass is the smallest m=

*****

detected, whereas any sane person would say it means that a pho=

ton

could not have a mass greater than it's upper limit


VERGON

If a photon (actually e.m. field) could not have a mass greater t=

han

its upper limit, then
it must be below the upper limit --- and that's what the progress=

ion of

determined masses were. They kept getting smaller and smaller as =

the

technique was refined.


This being the case, he then uses the equation m =3D h.f / c^2 =

and thinks

thats this is the mass of the photon.


VERGON


Some guy named Einstein said the same thing in his second 1905 paper =

--

but then a blind dogmatist wouldn't know that.

Well, I know facts don't mean anything to you --- but.

E =3D mc^2 =3D (hf/c^2) c^2 =3D hf =3D energy of the photon.

Also, h/c^2 is the mass of one HZ (or 1f). And that times the f o=

f the

photon
is the mass of the photon. But it doesn't stop there. That mass t=

imes

the frequency
of the electron, proton and neutron will give you the respective =

mass

of each.

Now in all your brilliance do you suppose that is a coincidense? =

Or do

you recognize
That this shows radiation and matter are composed of the same ent=

ity?


It also shows that radiation consists of matter and antimatter --
witness pair production.

I can't explain it any simpler to a moron.

He believes that the minimum frequency which a photon can have =

is 1 Hz,

which makes h.f / c^2 greater than the upper limit on photon ma=

ss, and

thereby proves that the photon has a mass of h.f / c^2.


VERGON

Like I have explained before, but you are too dense to grasp --- a
photon consists of multiple HZ (1 HZ =3D 1f). If the upper limit=

is for

one HZ (as it is) then obviously (to an intelligent person) a mas=

s of

multiple HZ will be above the limit. I know that will strain your=

brain

cells but give it a try.


Any sane person would realize that for an infinte number of val=

ues for

f, h.f / c^2 is greater than the upper limit on photon mass, an=

d since

the upper limit is the largest value which could be associated =

with the

photon mass, then h.f / c^2 cannot possibly give the mass of the
photon.


VERGON

Explained above.


This is even crazier than his insistance that Planck's constant=

is

massive.


VERGON

Either you went to a U that didn't teach dimensional analysis or =

you

played hooky (physically or mentally) when they did.

I'm not here to teach you basic physics so I suggest you bone up =

on it

yourself -- before shooting your mouth off and making a fool of
yourself.

In the meanwhile note that the unit of h is "action" which is the
Joule-second.

Look up the dimensions of the Joule and you will find M (that's M=

for

mass).


p.s.

Before you call your superiors insane, go check in with a psychia=

trist,

Schmuck.

Also before you take on your superiors find out what the hell you=

're

talking abut.


Since you are so superior, then answer these questions.

What is the mass of a photon with a wavelength of 550 nm, according=

to

your theory?


VERGON

1.215545\-23 gram


You can't even do simple arithmetic.


VERGON

I had a long bad day --- and explained that when I posted the
correction.



According to your theory, Planck's constant has mass, so what is the
mass of Planck's constant, according to your theory?


VERGON

Since h is the lowest unit of energy (erg-second), h/c^2 =3D
7.3720385\-48 gr.


h / c^2 does not have units of kg.


VERGON

I use the cgs system --- wher h/c^2 has units of grams.

h / c^2 does not have units of grams in the cgs system
h has units of g cm^2 s^-1
c has units of cm s^-1
h / c^2 has units of g s


In the meantime for your education (which will never happen), here's
the encyclopedia:

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



The joule (symbol: J) is the SI unit of energy, which is defined as the
potential to do work. The joule has base units of kg=B7m=B2/s=B2

VERGON

Oh, gee! Did I see Kg there? Oh my.

Big deal, it doesn't mean h is massive. Do you think h is a particle or
something?


And while we're at it, all should notice that I make many telling
points in this post THAT YOU IGNORE AND DON'T ANSWER because they are
red hot pokers up your but and
PROVE YOU ARE WRONG, and don't know your butt from a hole in the ground

ENCYC CONT'D

=3D N=B7m. The base unit conversion can be remembered using the equation E
=3D mc2, where E is in joules, m is in kilograms, and c is the speed of
light in meters per second.





Keeping in mind that the upper limit on photon mass is about 1 *
10^-54, would do you conclude from the above answeering the above
questions?


VERGON

No wonder you are so screwed up. Informing you is like informing a ho=

le

in the wall.


That's because I don't accept *****.


VERGON

No, you hand it out.



I informd you that that figure was anomolous -- WAY off the curve. On=

ly

an idiot would quote that figure. The curve progressed over the years,
and refined procedures, to a quantity that was EXTREMELY close to min=

e=2E

(7.37\-48 gr.) So it is the upper limit of 1HZ.
Multiple HZ is the mass of the PHOTON and above the upper limit of the
single HZ --- which is one e.m. field.


OK, the value listed at the Particle Data Group is 1 * 10^-52, is that
better?


NO. I suggest you read Nieto & Goldhaber's detailed account of their
experiments in the Scientific American (reference above).

I suggest you see the Particle Data Group listings which have been
provided to you and Porat many times.


And in none of the experiments, were they measuring the mass of a
photon with a frequency of 1 HZ.


VERGON

I told you, dummy, they were measuring a single coulomb field -- that's
one HZ.

What the hell do you mean by a single Coulomb field, and why the hell
would it have a frequency of 1 Hz?


It was the measurement of a galactic field that you are quoting.

And?




If you think they were, then provide a reference which says so.


VERGON

I did, above.

You have already been told many times that you misunderstood what that
paper was saying.





So given that the mass of the photon with a wavelength of 550 nm was
greater than the limit on photon mass, you conclude that the
experiments to determine the upper limit on photon mass, could only
have been determining the upper limit of a photon with a frequency of 1
HZ.

LOL, you truly are insane.


I wouldn't call you insane --- or a nut. But you are wholly inadequa=

te.



INCIDENTALLY, I see there is no use proceeding further here. But I will
say this -- with all the nonsense (mostly from you) that has transpired
here, I have had a clarfication of my own theory that I will start a
new thread with. Any bull ***** from you will be ignored. If you want to
talk tech - and answer my points, ok.

.



User: ""

Title: Re: The insanity of Vergon 18 Sep 2006 10:54:26 AM
wrote:

| My Groups | Help | My Account | Sign out

sci.physics.relativity - Reply to topic




From:

Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
Subject: Re: The insanity of Vergon
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 00:11:33 -0700

<snip>

Since you are so superior, then answer these questions.

What is the mass of a photon with a wavelength of 550 nm, according to
your theory?


VERGON

1.215545\-23 gram

ADDENDUM
Das vass a mishtake? No?
YAH.
That's what I get for working after a long hard day.
Also, I work in cgs scale not the mks.
So here is my revised figure:
4.018331 x 10^-33 GRAM.


According to your theory, Planck's constant has mass, so what is the
mass of Planck's constant, according to your theory?


VERGON

Since h is the lowest unit of energy (erg-second), h/c^2 =
7.3720385\-48 gr.

Keeping in mind that the upper limit on photon mass is about 1 *
10^-54, would do you conclude from the above answeering the above
questions?


VERGON

No wonder you are so screwed up. Informing you is like informing a hole
in the wall.

I informd you that that figure was anomolous -- WAY off the curve. Only
an idiot would quote that figure. The curve progressed over the years,
and refined procedures, to a quantity that was EXTREMELY close to mine.
(7.37\-48 gr.) So it is the upper limit of 1HZ.
Multiple HZ is the mass of the PHOTON and above the upper limit of the
single HZ --- which is one e.m. field.

I wouldn't call you insane --- or a nut. But you are wholly inadequate.

.


User: "G=EMC^2 Glazier"

Title: Re: The insanity of Vergon 17 Sep 2006 01:37:21 PM
Golden Lots of people believe the photon has mass. Asminov told the Sun
losses 11 million tons of mass each second in its radiating into space
photons. Go figure Bert
.
User: "Sorcerer"

Title: Re: The insanity of Vergon 17 Sep 2006 03:36:11 PM
"G=EMC^2 Glazier" <herbertglazier@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:4963-450D95E1-829@storefull-3331.bay.webtv.net...
| Golden Lots of people believe the photon has mass. Asminov told the Sun
| losses 11 million tons of mass each second in its radiating into space
| photons. Go figure Bert
Oh, silly boy. The mass is CONVERTED to energy.
Energy is like money, you work to get it, then you spend it.
You convert your labour into money, then you convert
the money into groceries. Then you eat, ***** and have to
work again. Energy is the currency of mass, not mass itself.
Having money in the bank is like potential energy, you
can spend it if you have it, or you can trade pounds for dollars.
Androcles
.

User: "hanson"

Title: Re: The insanity of Vergon 17 Sep 2006 02:17:07 PM
.....oye-weh-Zionist Glaser aka "G=EMC^2 Glazier", the bigot,
<herbertglazier @ webtv.net> pontificated in his message
news:4963-450D95E1-829@storefull-3331.bay.webtv.net...

Lots of people ...each second ...

[hanson]
ahahaha.... ahahahaha.... AHAHA... Herbie Herbie, Herbie,
.... would like to hear from you to start to explain to us why you
praise & adore Israel into high heaven, yet you are NOT able
or willing to give an even simple answer to the question
re: Israel, and instead you do scream more 'Heil Zion', usually
accompanied by your seeding & fomenting of more
Anti-Semitism with your nasty and extremely bigoted
comments instead of answering the simple question:
== What good or benefit has come in return to the American
taxpayers from Israel for all that tax money that came off the
tables from poor American families?"
== "...the USA, which is paying to Israel 3-7 Billion $$$US tax
money each year for the last 60 years & an equal $ amount
to the muslim *****-venters to placate and pacify them so that
they don't continue to kick Jew *****, does beg the question:
==== What are all these BILLIONS of US tax-payer dollars
buying the American public, besides continuous terrorism,
mayhem and war where Jews are being connected to or
involved in ?
------- answer that, oye-weh-Bert -----
PS: in one of your recent nasties, instead of you answering
the above, you said: "Why don't you go to Iran and protect
bin Larden." ... But Herbie, a much more pertinent comment
by you would have been why it is that that one of the "Ten most
Wanted" on the FBI list happens to be a TERRORIST JEW by
name of Adam Pearlman from Riverside, California, aka.
Adam Yahiye Gadahn who is Al Qaida's #3 chieftain. This Jew
turned Muslim threatened that LA and Melbourne will be the
next target of terrorist attacks and "much less compassionate"
then the London & Spain massacres were.. see: 09-12-05
abclocal.go.com/kabc/news/ 102904_nw_american_alQaeda.html
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/31400b26f8948943
.
User: "=?UTF-8?Q?Jeff=E2=80=A6Relf?="

Title: The real Devil_God of the Middle East. 17 Sep 2006 03:54:22 PM
Hi Ha_Ha_Hanson,
Collectively, the U.S. and its partners ( including the IMF ! ) are
The real Devil_God of the Middle East... making Allah and Jehovah look small.
Isreal and Saudi Arabia are under their thumb, controlling the region.
The U.S. and it's partners won WWII,
gaining control of the oil in the " Holy Land ".
They collect rent in the form of oil ( which they lust for like junkies ).
They lay down the law and evict ( or kill ) whoever they please.
.




  Page 3 of 3

1
 

2
 

3
 


Related Articles
 

NEWER
pg.1170     pg.648     pg.358     pg.197     pg.108     pg.59     pg.32     pg.17     pg.9     pg.5     pg.3     pg.1

OLDER