Merged Onesimpleprinciple predicting the flow of Dark?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pixie of key said:
Did Aristoteles tell that one atom be later same size what visible universe is now etc.?

Did Aristoteles tell that this expanding movement / energy what expanding nucleus of atoms have now, changing with time and finally expanding nucleus of atoms are same, but that expanding movement / energy is other expanding movemdnt / energy what now?

i think, Aristoteles never found out that all stuff expanding all a time, also light snd ssme time expanding concentrstions recycling expanding movement / energy whit each other!

EternalOne
Click to expand...

So,
Daylightstar said:
What makes you accept that atoms exist, Pixie of key?
Click to expand...
 
Pixie of key said:
Did Aristoteles tell that one atom be later same size what visible universe is now etc.?

Did Aristoteles tell that this expanding movement / energy what expanding nucleus of atoms have now, changing with time and finally expanding nucleus of atoms are same, but that expanding movement / energy is other expanding movemdnt / energy what now?

i think, Aristoteles never found out that all stuff expanding all a time, also light snd ssme time expanding concentrstions recycling expanding movement / energy whit each other!

EternalOne
Click to expand...

No, Aristotle made sense.
 
Is it possible that Pixie of key misread "atom" as "fairy"?
I mean, if you just look at how little effort Pixie of key makes with spelling and with understanding ....
 
Last edited:
Daylightstar said:
Is it possible that Pixie of key misread "atom" as "fairy"?
I mean, if you just look at how little effort Pixie of key makes with spelling and with understanding ....
Click to expand...

Hmm, on the other hand, that would mean he'd be talking about fairies all the time.
However, he used to talk about gods all the time, so he could be talking about fairies
 
Pixie of key said:
Did Aristoteles tell that one atom be later same size what visible universe is now etc.?

Did Aristoteles tell that this expanding movement / energy what expanding nucleus of atoms have now, changing with time and finally expanding nucleus of atoms are same, but that expanding movement / energy is other expanding movemdnt / energy what now?

i think, Aristoteles never found out that all stuff expanding all a time, also light snd ssme time expanding concentrstions recycling expanding movement / energy whit each other!

EternalOne
Click to expand...
No. Aristoteles didn't tell anyone that
light snd ssme time expanding concentrstions recycling expanding movement / energy whit each other
Click to expand...
If he had said that, he would have been locked up in a madhouse, and would never have been a famous philosopher.

What he did say, though, is one of the things that you also say: movement is equivalent to being pushed. That is what he said, and it is WRONG. Only when this false idea was abandoned, did it become possible for human beings to understand the true laws of motion.
 
Pixie of key said:
"Demonstrably false, even stationary objects have energy."

heh heh! There is no any stationary object!
Click to expand...

In technical terms it is ("heh heh!") called a comoving reference frame. Even in such a comoving frame an object can still have energy.


Pixie of key said:
even one quark recycling all a time movement / energy!

later is same expanding quark with other expanding movement / energy!

Everything moving all a time!

there and here is only movement / energy and nothing else!

i can see that you dont have any idea yet, what kind of thing eternal and infinity universe really is!

stationary object, what a **** is stationary object i just ask?
Click to expand...


That your OneSimplePrinciple apparently can't even consider a comoving frame puts it at a serious disadvantage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comoving_distance

Though I can see that you don't have any idea what eternal nonsense your OneSimplePrinciple really is yet.

Pixie of key said:
EternalOne

.
Click to expand...

EternalNone
 
The Man said:
In technical terms it is ("heh heh!") called a comoving reference frame. Even in such a comoving frame an object can still have energy.





That your OneSimplePrinciple apparently can't even consider a comoving frame puts it at a serious disadvantage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comoving_distance

Though I can see that you don't have any idea what eternal nonsense your OneSimplePrinciple really is yet.



EternalNone
Click to expand...

Comoving frame, heheh!

Expanding Earth move!

Expanding solarsystem move!

Expanding Milky way move!

Expanding visible Universe move extremely fast and accelerstion way "in" eternal and infinity space which is nothing!

Expanding light move littlebit faster than we!

A proper frame, heh heh!

EtetnalLove
 
Last edited:
Pixie of key said:
Comoving frame, heheh!

Expanding Earth move!

Expanding solarsystem move!

Expanding Milky way move!

Expanding visible Universe move extremely fast and accelerstion way "in" eternal and infinity space which is nothing!

Expanding light move littlebit faster than we!

A proper frame, heh heh!
Click to expand...

As already noted the apparent inability of your OneSimplePrinciple to even consider a comoving frame makes it rather limited. As funny as that may seem to you and perhaps others, it really is just a simple and fundamental limitation on your part. Instead of just laughing at the limits of your OneSimplePrinciple have you ever considered trying, well, expanding them?

Take your "Expanding Earth move" for example. On the surface of the Earth, as we are, we would be comoving with that "Expanding Earth" surface. That your OneSimplePrinciple apparently can't even consider such a reference frame that we generally do experience makes it limited to the point of being useless.

Pixie of key said:
EtetnalLove
Click to expand...

EternalUselessness
 
Pixie of key lies about "Today model an atom is total wrong"

Pixie of key said:
"The excitation of a semiconductor with light is traditionally conceived as a process involving two distinct events. First, the electrons absorb light and get excited. Afterwards, the lattice, composed of the individual atoms in the crystal, rearranges in response to this redistribution of electrons, turning part of the absorbed energy into heat carried by vibrational waves called phonons.
In analyzing their data, the team found clear indications that this hypothesis is true. They showed that initially, only the electrons react to the impinging light while the atomic lattice remains unaffected. Long after the excitation laser pulse has left the sample - some 60 femtoseconds later - they observed the onset of a collective movement of the atoms, that is, phonons. This is near the 64 femtosecond period of the fastest lattice vibrations."

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2014-12-attosecond-laser-movie-fast-electrons.html#jCp
Click to expand...
Snipped usual EternalGibberish, EternalFantasy and EternalIgnorance from Pixie of key!
Pixie of key lies with "Today model an atom is total wrong!" but this is probably based on his ignorance about this science.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom