I am the first in the world

[The Man]

Damn math, damn it to hell.

But if I have a long enough "lever," can I "move" Natalie Portman?

Depends on where you put the "fulcrum".

 

[AdMan]

You plagiarized your opening from here:
http://www.physics.fsu.edu/users/ProsperH/AST3033/quantumworld.htm

The following bit about the brain from here:
www-physics.lbl.gov/~stapp/AC.ppt

If I keep searching strings from "your" article in Google, will I find more of the same? I am certain of it.

Very dishonest of you to change a few words here and there and present this patchwork as your own.

Caught!

Adrian, I think this disqualifies you from being president of Transylvania.

 

[alfa1]

I take the common equations, the general physics from Wikipedia because I can not discover them again...
I can not come with new definitions!
Those are not my discoveries!

My equations WILL NOT FIND ON INTERNET, they are not PLAGIARISM!

 

[AdMan]

I take the common equations, the general physics from Wikipedia because I can not discover them again...
I can not come with new definitions!
Those are not my discoveries!

My equations WILL NOT FIND ON INTERNET, they are not PLAGIARISM!

Your equations are not elsewhere on the internet because they're garbage.

You had to plagiarize the actual stuff because you don't know it or understand it.

Face it, you were busted.

 

[carlitos]

I take the common equations, the general physics from Wikipedia because I can not discover them again...
I can not come with new definitions!
Those are not my discoveries!

My equations WILL NOT FIND ON INTERNET, they are not PLAGIARISM!

So the words are plagiarized, but the numbers are original. Ok.

 

[Sideroxylon]

I take the common equations, the general physics from Wikipedia because I can not discover them again...
I can not come with new definitions!
Those are not my discoveries!

My equations WILL NOT FIND ON INTERNET, they are not PLAGIARISM!

Maybe not your equations, but you stole your blog text. You copied other people's written ideas and presented them as your own. That is plagiarism. In the text I looked at it it seemed you were trying to be sneaky about it or mitigate your theft by changing a single adjective and some punctuation.

 

[alfa1]

All the math, physics books are Plagiarism because are using old equations and couple words around them...
The important thing is what you bring new to your work!
That is maximum 1 page in a book!

Show me better equations about consciousness than my equations about consciousness on internet and I will delete my equations!

 

[Sideroxylon]

All the math, physics books are Plagiarism because are using old equations and couple words around them...
The important thing is what you bring new to your work!
That is maximum 1 page in a book!

Show me better equations about consciousness than my equations about consciousness on internet and I will delete my equations!

No, they provide citations attributing from whom and where they have taken text extracts. They use quotation marks to deliminate them. And cutting and pasting large swathes of text and doing little new work of your own is frowned upon.

 

[AdMan]

In short, Newton's laws can describe a vast array of everyday things; principally, those things which are on a scale that we can directly perceive. The fundamental principle is: Given all the forces (causes) acting on a body its motion (effects) could, in principle, be predicted with arbitrary accuracy. All effects had causes. The Newtonian world was deterministic. Our ability to predict was limited only by our practical inability to measure all the forces with infinite precision.

Towards the end of the 19th century, however, it became apparent that all was not well with the Newtonian world view.

Source: http://www.physics.fsu.edu/users/ProsperH/AST3033/quantumworld.htm

Newton's laws can describe a huge array of everyday things; principally, those things which are on a scale that we can directly perceive.
The fundamental principle is: given all the forces (causes) acting on a body its motion (effects) could, in principle, be predicted with arbitrary accuracy. All effects had causes. The Newtonian world was deterministic. Our ability to predict was limited only by our practical inability to measure all the forces with infinite precision.

Towards the end of the 19th century, however, it became apparent that all was not well with the Newtonian world view.

http://adrianferent.blogspot.com/

Admit it--you stole it (and that's just one example).

 

[alfa1]

This things are everywhere on internet, in 1000 physics books, nothing new idea here about old Newtonian world.

I wrote this article 1 year ago with my first equation!

 

[AdMan]

You are a thief.

 

[Sideroxylon]

This things are everywhere on internet, in 1000 physics books, nothing new idea here about old Newtonian world.

I wrote this article 1 year ago with my first equation!

The part posted from physics.fsu.edu was last modified in 2002. You stole part of it for your article. You also took text from other sites without attribution or indication it was not your work. You did not write it. You stole pieces from all over the net.

 

[alfa1]

These phrases are in all Newtonian books!

 

[ddt]

This phrases are in each Newtonian books!

There are 1,001 ways to phrase these ideas. You could have phrased them yourself anew, were it not for your poor command of English as exhibited in your posts here. Yes, you're a plagiarizer. And if you aspire a position in politics - as you claimed earlier in this thread - you better improve your English knowledge.

 

[Dinwar]

Than it should be easy to cite your sources, alfa1.

 

[Sideroxylon]

These phrases are in all Newtonian books!

Name one with this exact piece in it.

 

[AdMan]

In 1900 the physicist Max Planck succeeded in deriving a formula that could describe the experimentally observed spectral distribution of radiation from a hot oven. The spectrum was that of a perfect absorber and emitter of radiation; a so-called black-body. Planck's idea was to model the radiation in an oven as a collection of harmonic waves... In an act of inspired desperation Planck introduced what he considered a truly horrible idea, namely, that the energy in a bounded system, like an oven, can change only in discrete amounts. He called these discrete changes in energy quanta (plural of quantum). Thus was born the quantum hypothesis.

http://www.physics.fsu.edu/users/ProsperH/AST3033/quantumworld.htm

In 1900 the physicist Max Planck succeeded in deriving a formula that could describe the experimentally observed spectral distribution of radiation from a hot oven. The spectrum was that of a perfect absorber and emitter of radiation; a so-called black-body. Planck's idea was to model the radiation in an oven as a collection of harmonic waves. In an act of inspired desperation Planck introduced what he considered a truly horrible idea, namely, that the energy in a bounded system, like an oven, can change only in discreet amounts. He called these discrete changes in energy quanta. Thus was born the quantum hypothesis.

http://adrianferent.blogspot.com/

Thief.

 

[alfa1]

I did not claim the Newton theory is mine!
All the books about Newton theory are Plagiarism!

My consciousness equations are not Plagiarism!

 

[carlitos]

http://www-physics.lbl.gov/~stapp/ACPPTPDF.pdf

The Evolution of the Quantum State via the Schroedinger Wave Equation Causes a (Wave-Like) Quantum State That Is Initially Concordant with All Human Experience to Develop into State that Corresponds a Continuous Plenum of Alternative Possible Worlds of the Kind that we Actually Experience.

http://adrianferent.blogspot.com/

The evolution of the quantum state via the Schrödinger wave equation causes a (wave-like) quantum state that is initially concordant with all human experience to develop into state that correspond a continuous plenum of alternative possible worlds of the kind that we actually experience.

Are these exact phrases really so common that one can use them without attribution?

 

[Sideroxylon]

I did not claim the Newton theory is mine!
All the books about Newton theory are Plagiarism!

My consciousness equations are not Plagiarism!

No one is suggesting anything so silly as you stealing Newton's laws.

You gave the false appearance that the words and ideas about Newton and other scientists on your blog page were yours.