On 1/22/2023 5:33 PM, patdolan wrote:
> On Sunday, January 22, 2023 at 5:39:15 AM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
>> On 1/21/2023 11:33 PM, patdolan wrote:
>>> On Saturday, January 21, 2023 at 7:51:22 PM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
>>>> On 1/21/2023 9:22 PM, patdolan wrote:
>>>>> On Saturday, January 21, 2023 at 4:26:28 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Friday, January 20, 2023 at 2:31:03 PM UTC-8, JanPB wrote:
>>>>>>> On Friday, January 20, 2023 at 11:39:17 AM UTC-8, Ciro Di pietro wrote:
>>>>>>>> J. J. Lodder evacuated:
>>>>>>>>> Ciro Di pietro <pi...@rioied.ao> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Absolute zero is no quantity of all. Beyond it is only positive.
>>>>>>>>>>> The infinitesimal is the relative dark math.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> what instrument are you using, proverbially? Not true. Infinitesimals
>>>>>>>>>> *_doesn't_actually_exists_*. Close to the smallest, say quantum scale,
>>>>>>>>>> the distances disappears. Hence, it can't become smaller.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You really should upgrade your understanding of mathematics,
>>>>>>>> where did you see "mathematics", you fucking braindead imbecile. You don't
>>>>>>>> undrestand shit, do you.
>>>>>>> In the context you used it, your phrase "Infinitesimals
>>>>>>> *_doesn't_actually_exists_*" was "nicht einmal falsch" (Pauli).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>> What is your definition of the infinitely small jan?
>>>>>> Does that not exist? or are against infinity?
>>>>> "dark math"
>>>>> Mitch, this may be your greatest neologism yet.
>>>> IMO the best thing everyone participating in this newsgroup could do is
>>>> to completely ignore Mitch. There is nothing to be gained by reading his
>>>> postings and it is also a complete waste of Mitch's time to make those
>>>> postings. Surely there's something better for him to do with his time.
>>> whodat you miserable philistine cur. When you can write as impressionistically about relativity as Mitch can, then you will have standing to pass judgement. Mitch's verse probes the intersection of human perception and physical with a unique styling that comes close the likes of Shelly, C. C. Wiliams, Frost, and even Joyce. If Mitch and his verse were ever to team up with Hunter Biden and his blow painting, the world would be treated to the finest collaboration of abstract fine art since Jackson Pollock!
>> I'll thank you to remember that this is sci.PHYSICS.
>>
>> That raises the question what are you doing?
> You blocks, you stones, you worse than senseless things! Oh you hard hearts, you cruel men of Relativity.
>
> Mitch is often times the only breath of fresh air in the miasma that is this forum. He is the decorative statue on the mantle; the radiative warm and sweet scent of the old peat fire glowing on the forum's hearth. Mitch is the refulgent bunch of flowers on the little table back in the corner that every once in a while catches the eye. But most importantly, he is the full length mirror across the antechamber from the coat rack, in which each member of this forum has the opportunity to take the measure of his own thoughts and beliefs about relativity reflected back at him at the profoundest level that words can achieve--far, far deeper than mere equations could ever reach.

In terms of physics, the basis for this discussion group, you have
provided a word salad rant void of any scientific value.

Thanks for answering my question about what it is you're doing here.

Given you have nothing to say about science, STFU.

Since you persist, I have no choice but to PLONK. Realistically the
quality of the articles I read has improved significantly every time I
killfiled someone. I do hope that with time you might mature and become
a useful member of society, because whatever your age, so far you've
failed to achieve that very basic ability. It sounds as though you might
have a substance abuse problem. Whatever.

On Sunday, January 22, 2023 at 5:28:00 PM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
> On 1/22/2023 5:33 PM, patdolan wrote:
> > On Sunday, January 22, 2023 at 5:39:15 AM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
> >> On 1/21/2023 11:33 PM, patdolan wrote:
> >>> On Saturday, January 21, 2023 at 7:51:22 PM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
> >>>> On 1/21/2023 9:22 PM, patdolan wrote:
> >>>>> On Saturday, January 21, 2023 at 4:26:28 PM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>> On Friday, January 20, 2023 at 2:31:03 PM UTC-8, JanPB wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Friday, January 20, 2023 at 11:39:17 AM UTC-8, Ciro Di pietro wrote:
> >>>>>>>> J. J. Lodder evacuated:
> >>>>>>>>> Ciro Di pietro <pi...@rioied.ao> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Absolute zero is no quantity of all. Beyond it is only positive.
> >>>>>>>>>>> The infinitesimal is the relative dark math.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> what instrument are you using, proverbially? Not true. Infinitesimals
> >>>>>>>>>> *_doesn't_actually_exists_*. Close to the smallest, say quantum scale,
> >>>>>>>>>> the distances disappears. Hence, it can't become smaller.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> You really should upgrade your understanding of mathematics,
> >>>>>>>> where did you see "mathematics", you fucking braindead imbecile. You don't
> >>>>>>>> undrestand shit, do you.
> >>>>>>> In the context you used it, your phrase "Infinitesimals
> >>>>>>> *_doesn't_actually_exists_*" was "nicht einmal falsch" (Pauli).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Jan
> >>>>>> What is your definition of the infinitely small jan?
> >>>>>> Does that not exist? or are against infinity?
> >>>>> "dark math"
> >>>>> Mitch, this may be your greatest neologism yet.
> >>>> IMO the best thing everyone participating in this newsgroup could do is
> >>>> to completely ignore Mitch. There is nothing to be gained by reading his
> >>>> postings and it is also a complete waste of Mitch's time to make those
> >>>> postings. Surely there's something better for him to do with his time.
> >>> whodat you miserable philistine cur. When you can write as impressionistically about relativity as Mitch can, then you will have standing to pass judgement. Mitch's verse probes the intersection of human perception and physical with a unique styling that comes close the likes of Shelly, C. C. Wiliams, Frost, and even Joyce. If Mitch and his verse were ever to team up with Hunter Biden and his blow painting, the world would be treated to the finest collaboration of abstract fine art since Jackson Pollock!
> >> I'll thank you to remember that this is sci.PHYSICS.
> >>
> >> That raises the question what are you doing?
> > You blocks, you stones, you worse than senseless things! Oh you hard hearts, you cruel men of Relativity.
> >
> > Mitch is often times the only breath of fresh air in the miasma that is this forum. He is the decorative statue on the mantle; the radiative warm and sweet scent of the old peat fire glowing on the forum's hearth. Mitch is the refulgent bunch of flowers on the little table back in the corner that every once in a while catches the eye. But most importantly, he is the full length mirror across the antechamber from the coat rack, in which each member of this forum has the opportunity to take the measure of his own thoughts and beliefs about relativity reflected back at him at the profoundest level that words can achieve--far, far deeper than mere equations could ever reach.
> In terms of physics, the basis for this discussion group, you have
> provided a word salad rant void of any scientific value.
>
> Thanks for answering my question about what it is you're doing here.
>
> Given you have nothing to say about science, STFU.
>
> Since you persist, I have no choice but to PLONK. Realistically the
> quality of the articles I read has improved significantly every time I
> killfiled someone. I do hope that with time you might mature and become
> a useful member of society, because whatever your age, so far you've
> failed to achieve that very basic ability. It sounds as though you might
> have a substance abuse problem. Whatever.
Sir, you address, and most impudently, the author/discoverer of the eponymous dilemma--a dilemma so complete that not even the likes of you can solve it. Don't believe me? Go ahead, make my day. Plonk-chump.

On 2023-01-23 01:42:40 +0000, patdolan said:

>
> [ … ]

> Sir, you address, and most impudently, the author/discoverer of the
> eponymous dilemma--a dilemma so complete that not even the likes of you
> can solve it. Don't believe me? Go ahead, make my day. Plonk-chump.

To add to the long list of things Pat Dolan doesn't know or doesn't
understand, he doesn't know what "eponymous" means. He seems to think
it means "Dolan's", but it can only mean that in very specific
contexts, not here.

--
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> wrote:

> On Sunday, January 22, 2023 at 8:55:30 AM UTC-8, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > patdolan <patd...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sunday, January 22, 2023 at 3:08:14 AM UTC-8, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > mitchr...@gmail.com <mitchr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Friday, January 20, 2023 at 2:31:03 PM UTC-8, JanPB wrote:
> > > > > > On Friday, January 20, 2023 at 11:39:17 AM UTC-8, Ciro Di pietro:
> > > > > > > J. J. Lodder evacuated:
> > > > > > > > Ciro Di pietro <pi...@rioied.ao> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> > Absolute zero is no quantity of all. Beyond it is only
> > > > > > > >> > positive. The infinitesimal is the relative dark math.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> what instrument are you using, proverbially? Not true.
> > > > > > > >> Infinitesimals *_doesn't_actually_exists_*. Close to the
> > > > > > > >> smallest, say quantum scale, the distances disappears.
> > > > > > > >> Hence, it can't become smaller.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You really should upgrade your understanding of mathematics,
> > > > > > > > where did you see "mathematics", you fucking braindead
> > > > > > > > imbecile.
> > > > > > > You don't undrestand shit, do you.
> > > > > > In the context you used it, your phrase "Infinitesimals
> > > > > > *_doesn't_actually_exists_*" was "nicht einmal falsch" (Pauli).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Jan
> > > > >
> > > > > What is your definition of the infinitely small jan?
> > > > > Does that not exist? or are against infinity?
> > > > Do upgrade your math competence.
> > > > The keyword you need is 'non-standard analysis',
> > > >
> > > > And fyi, much of modern physics is formulated in terms infinitesimals,
> > > > in the form of differential geometry,
> > > >
> > > > Jan
> > > Wait a minute. I'm confused.
> > What's the news?
> > > J. J. Loader and JanPB??
> > Two posters who sign as Jan, both with a long posting history.
> >
> > You are not only confused, you are late indeed
> > in discovering how confused you are,
> >
> > Jan
> Okay, fine. But I would still like to know which Jan I opened the can of
> whup-ass on, back when I conceived the eponymous dilemma.

Again, do your own homework,

JAn

On Monday, 23 January 2023 at 11:20:31 UTC+1, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2023-01-23 01:42:40 +0000, patdolan said:
>
> >
> > [ … ]
> > Sir, you address, and most impudently, the author/discoverer of the
> > eponymous dilemma--a dilemma so complete that not even the likes of you
> > can solve it. Don't believe me? Go ahead, make my day. Plonk-chump.
> To add to the long list of things Pat Dolan doesn't know or doesn't
> understand, he doesn't know what "eponymous" means.

Athel Cornish-Bowden, on the other hand, knows everything
he must: enemies of The Shit bad! Bark! Bark! Bark!

Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2023-01-23 01:42:40 +0000, patdolan said:
>
> >
> > [ … ]
>
> > Sir, you address, and most impudently, the author/discoverer of the
> > eponymous dilemma--a dilemma so complete that not even the likes of you
> > can solve it. Don't believe me? Go ahead, make my day. Plonk-chump.
>
> To add to the long list of things Pat Dolan doesn't know or doesn't
> understand, he doesn't know what "eponymous" means. He seems to think
> it means "Dolan's", but it can only mean that in very specific
> contexts, not here.

FYA, you just reminded me of a children's book (said 8+, but adult also)

Lauren Ipsum: A Story About Computer Science and Other Improbable Things
by Carlos Bueno. (also in Spanish and Portugese)

You might like it, if you have children/grandchildren of the right age,
and with the right kind of curiosity.
<https://www.amazon.com/Lauren-Ipsum-Computer-Science-Improbable-ebook/dp/B00QL616IC>
<https://sanfranciscobookreview.com/product/lauren-ipsum-a-story-about-computer-science-and-other-improbable-things/>

Lauren Ipsum (Laurie) is a clever girl, just like Alice,
who gets lost in a wood, and meets curious people,
like the travelling Salesman.

One of the persons she meets is Eponymous Bach.
Eponymous is a clever old lady, and a composer of ideas,
and as a mater of course she names all her ideas after herself.

Not suitable for most of the posters here,

Jan

On 1/22/2023 6:33 PM, patdolan wrote:
> On Sunday, January 22, 2023 at 5:39:15 AM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
>> On 1/21/2023 11:33 PM, patdolan wrote:

>>> whodat you miserable philistine cur. When you can write as impressionistically about relativity as Mitch can, then you will have standing to pass judgement. Mitch's verse probes the intersection of human perception and physical with a unique styling that comes close the likes of Shelly, C. C. Wiliams, Frost, and even Joyce. If Mitch and his verse were ever to team up with Hunter Biden and his blow painting, the world would be treated to the finest collaboration of abstract fine art since Jackson Pollock!

>> I'll thank you to remember that this is sci.PHYSICS.
>>
>> That raises the question what are you doing?

> Mitch is often times the only breath of fresh air in the miasma that is this forum. He is the decorative statue on the mantle; the radiative warm and sweet scent of the old peat fire glowing on the forum's hearth. Mitch is the refulgent bunch of flowers on the little table back in the corner that every once in a while catches the eye. But most importantly, he is the full length mirror across the antechamber from the coat rack, in which each member of this forum has the opportunity to take the measure of his own thoughts and beliefs about relativity reflected back at him at the profoundest level that words can achieve--far, far deeper than mere equations could ever reach.

I assume this is a troll; if not, you must be pretty desperate to need
babbling Mitch for support.

On Monday, January 23, 2023 at 7:25:23 AM UTC-8, Volney wrote:
> On 1/22/2023 6:33 PM, patdolan wrote:
> > On Sunday, January 22, 2023 at 5:39:15 AM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
> >> On 1/21/2023 11:33 PM, patdolan wrote:
>
> >>> whodat you miserable philistine cur. When you can write as impressionistically about relativity as Mitch can, then you will have standing to pass judgement. Mitch's verse probes the intersection of human perception and physical with a unique styling that comes close the likes of Shelly, C. C. Wiliams, Frost, and even Joyce. If Mitch and his verse were ever to team up with Hunter Biden and his blow painting, the world would be treated to the finest collaboration of abstract fine art since Jackson Pollock!
>
> >> I'll thank you to remember that this is sci.PHYSICS.
> >>
> >> That raises the question what are you doing?
> > Mitch is often times the only breath of fresh air in the miasma that is this forum. He is the decorative statue on the mantle; the radiative warm and sweet scent of the old peat fire glowing on the forum's hearth. Mitch is the refulgent bunch of flowers on the little table back in the corner that every once in a while catches the eye. But most importantly, he is the full length mirror across the antechamber from the coat rack, in which each member of this forum has the opportunity to take the measure of his own thoughts and beliefs about relativity reflected back at him at the profoundest level that words can achieve--far, far deeper than mere equations could ever reach.
> I assume this is a troll; if not, you must be pretty desperate to need
> babbling Mitch for support.
Rash young fool Volney. Myself and the eponymous dilemma await your pleasure at dawn.

On Monday, January 23, 2023 at 2:20:31 AM UTC-8, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2023-01-23 01:42:40 +0000, patdolan said:
>
> >
> > [ … ]
> > Sir, you address, and most impudently, the author/discoverer of the
> > eponymous dilemma--a dilemma so complete that not even the likes of you
> > can solve it. Don't believe me? Go ahead, make my day. Plonk-chump.
> To add to the long list of things Pat Dolan doesn't know or doesn't
> understand, he doesn't know what "eponymous" means. He seems to think
> it means "Dolan's", but it can only mean that in very specific
> contexts, not here.
> --
> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
I used to refer to it as "my" eponymous dilemma. But I like the sound and ambiguity of "the" eponymous dilemma better, Athel-mainly in England. This ambiguity pairs well with the overall ambiguity and equivocation of relativity itself.

On 2023-01-23 16:06:29 +0000, patdolan said:

> On Monday, January 23, 2023 at 2:20:31 AM UTC-8, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>> On 2023-01-23 01:42:40 +0000, patdolan said:>> >> > [ … ]
>>> Sir, you address, and most impudently, the author/discoverer of the> >
>>> eponymous dilemma--a dilemma so complete that not even the likes of
>>> you> > can solve it. Don't believe me? Go ahead, make my day.
>>> Plonk-chump.
>> To add to the long list of things Pat Dolan doesn't know or doesn't>
>> understand, he doesn't know what "eponymous" means. He seems to think>
>> it means "Dolan's", but it can only mean that in very specific>
>> contexts, not here.
>> --
>> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
> I used to refer to it as "my" eponymous dilemma. But I like the sound
> and ambiguity of "the" eponymous dilemma better,

So you're not really interested in communicating information. You just
like the sight of your own writing.

--
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

On Monday, 23 January 2023 at 17:28:23 UTC+1, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2023-01-23 16:06:29 +0000, patdolan said:
>
> > On Monday, January 23, 2023 at 2:20:31 AM UTC-8, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> >> On 2023-01-23 01:42:40 +0000, patdolan said:>> >> > [ … ]
> >>> Sir, you address, and most impudently, the author/discoverer of the> >
> >>> eponymous dilemma--a dilemma so complete that not even the likes of
> >>> you> > can solve it. Don't believe me? Go ahead, make my day.
> >>> Plonk-chump.
> >> To add to the long list of things Pat Dolan doesn't know or doesn't>
> >> understand, he doesn't know what "eponymous" means. He seems to think>
> >> it means "Dolan's", but it can only mean that in very specific>
> >> contexts, not here.
> >> --
> >> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
> > I used to refer to it as "my" eponymous dilemma. But I like the sound
> > and ambiguity of "the" eponymous dilemma better,
> So you're not really interested in communicating information. You just
> like the sight of your own writing.

The "success" of your moronic religion looks
exactly like that.

On 1/23/2023 9:25 AM, Volney wrote:
> On 1/22/2023 6:33 PM, patdolan wrote:
>> On Sunday, January 22, 2023 at 5:39:15 AM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
>>> On 1/21/2023 11:33 PM, patdolan wrote:
>
>>>> whodat you miserable philistine cur. When you can write as
>>>> impressionistically about relativity as Mitch can, then you will
>>>> have standing to pass judgement. Mitch's verse probes the
>>>> intersection of human perception and physical with a unique styling
>>>> that comes close the likes of Shelly, C. C. Wiliams, Frost, and even
>>>> Joyce. If Mitch and his verse were ever to team up with Hunter Biden
>>>> and his blow painting, the world would be treated to the finest
>>>> collaboration of abstract fine art since Jackson Pollock!
>
>>> I'll thank you to remember that this is sci.PHYSICS.
>>>
>>> That raises the question what are you doing?
>
>> Mitch is often times the only breath of fresh air in the miasma that
>> is this forum.  He is the decorative statue on the mantle; the
>> radiative warm and sweet scent of the old peat fire glowing on the
>> forum's hearth.  Mitch is the refulgent bunch of flowers on the little
>> table back in the corner that every once in a while catches the eye.
>> But most importantly, he is the full length mirror across the
>> antechamber from the coat rack, in which each member of this forum has
>> the opportunity to take the measure of his own thoughts and beliefs
>> about relativity reflected back at him at the profoundest level that
>> words can achieve--far, far deeper than mere equations could ever reach.
>
> I assume this is a troll; if not, you must be pretty desperate to need
> babbling Mitch for support.

He's inept.

On Monday, January 23, 2023 at 8:28:23 AM UTC-8, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2023-01-23 16:06:29 +0000, patdolan said:
>
> > On Monday, January 23, 2023 at 2:20:31 AM UTC-8, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> >> On 2023-01-23 01:42:40 +0000, patdolan said:>> >> > [ … ]
> >>> Sir, you address, and most impudently, the author/discoverer of the> >
> >>> eponymous dilemma--a dilemma so complete that not even the likes of
> >>> you> > can solve it. Don't believe me? Go ahead, make my day.
> >>> Plonk-chump.
> >> To add to the long list of things Pat Dolan doesn't know or doesn't>
> >> understand, he doesn't know what "eponymous" means. He seems to think>
> >> it means "Dolan's", but it can only mean that in very specific>
> >> contexts, not here.
> >> --
> >> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
> > I used to refer to it as "my" eponymous dilemma. But I like the sound
> > and ambiguity of "the" eponymous dilemma better,
> So you're not really interested in communicating information. You just
> like the sight of your own writing.
> --
> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
Precisely, Athel--mainly in England. Pretty much like every other denizen of this forum. Yes?

On 1/23/2023 11:00 AM, patdolan wrote:
> On Monday, January 23, 2023 at 7:25:23 AM UTC-8, Volney wrote:
>> On 1/22/2023 6:33 PM, patdolan wrote:

>>> Mitch is often times the only breath of fresh air in the miasma that is this forum. He is the decorative statue on the mantle; the radiative warm and sweet scent of the old peat fire glowing on the forum's hearth. Mitch is the refulgent bunch of flowers on the little table back in the corner that every once in a while catches the eye. But most importantly, he is the full length mirror across the antechamber from the coat rack, in which each member of this forum has the opportunity to take the measure of his own thoughts and beliefs about relativity reflected back at him at the profoundest level that words can achieve--far, far deeper than mere equations could ever reach.

>> I assume this is a troll; if not, you must be pretty desperate to need
>> babbling Mitch for support.

> Rash young fool Volney. Myself and the eponymous dilemma await your pleasure at dawn.

When you and your "dilemma" will be executed?

p.s. 25. 20 [Crackpot Index] points for naming something after yourself.
(E.g., talking about the "The Evans Field Equation" when your name
happens to be Evans.)

On 2023-01-23 20:28:10 +0000, Volney said:

> On 1/23/2023 11:00 AM, patdolan wrote:
>> On Monday, January 23, 2023 at 7:25:23 AM UTC-8, Volney wrote:
>>> On 1/22/2023 6:33 PM, patdolan wrote:
>
>>>> Mitch is often times the only breath of fresh air in the miasma that is
>>>> this forum. He is the decorative statue on the mantle; the radiative
>>>> warm and sweet scent of the old peat fire glowing on the forum's
>>>> hearth. Mitch is the refulgent bunch of flowers on the little table
>>>> back in the corner that every once in a while catches the eye. But most
>>>> importantly, he is the full length mirror across the antechamber from
>>>> the coat rack, in which each member of this forum has the opportunity
>>>> to take the measure of his own thoughts and beliefs about relativity
>>>> reflected back at him at the profoundest level that words can
>>>> achieve--far, far deeper than mere equations could ever reach.
>
>>> I assume this is a troll; if not, you must be pretty desperate to need
>>> babbling Mitch for support.
>
>> Rash young fool Volney. Myself and the eponymous dilemma await your
>> pleasure at dawn.
>
> When you and your "dilemma" will be executed?
>
> p.s. 25. 20 [Crackpot Index] points for naming something after
> yourself. (E.g., talking about the "The Evans Field Equation" when your
> name happens to be Evans.)

There ought to be some extra points for using "eponymous" as a synonym
for one's own name.

--
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

On Tuesday, 24 January 2023 at 08:13:51 UTC+1, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2023-01-23 20:28:10 +0000, Volney said:
>
> > On 1/23/2023 11:00 AM, patdolan wrote:
> >> On Monday, January 23, 2023 at 7:25:23 AM UTC-8, Volney wrote:
> >>> On 1/22/2023 6:33 PM, patdolan wrote:
> >
> >>>> Mitch is often times the only breath of fresh air in the miasma that is
> >>>> this forum. He is the decorative statue on the mantle; the radiative
> >>>> warm and sweet scent of the old peat fire glowing on the forum's
> >>>> hearth. Mitch is the refulgent bunch of flowers on the little table
> >>>> back in the corner that every once in a while catches the eye. But most
> >>>> importantly, he is the full length mirror across the antechamber from
> >>>> the coat rack, in which each member of this forum has the opportunity
> >>>> to take the measure of his own thoughts and beliefs about relativity
> >>>> reflected back at him at the profoundest level that words can
> >>>> achieve--far, far deeper than mere equations could ever reach.
> >
> >>> I assume this is a troll; if not, you must be pretty desperate to need
> >>> babbling Mitch for support.
> >
> >> Rash young fool Volney. Myself and the eponymous dilemma await your
> >> pleasure at dawn.
> >
> > When you and your "dilemma" will be executed?
> >
> > p.s. 25. 20 [Crackpot Index] points for naming something after
> > yourself. (E.g., talking about the "The Evans Field Equation" when your
> > name happens to be Evans.)
> There ought to be some extra points for using "eponymous" as a synonym
> for one's own name.

And everybody ought to obey ACB and
his brilliant ideas.

Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2023-01-23 20:28:10 +0000, Volney said:
>
> > On 1/23/2023 11:00 AM, patdolan wrote:
> >> On Monday, January 23, 2023 at 7:25:23 AM UTC-8, Volney wrote:
> >>> On 1/22/2023 6:33 PM, patdolan wrote:
> >
> >>>> Mitch is often times the only breath of fresh air in the miasma that is
> >>>> this forum. He is the decorative statue on the mantle; the radiative
> >>>> warm and sweet scent of the old peat fire glowing on the forum's
> >>>> hearth. Mitch is the refulgent bunch of flowers on the little table
> >>>> back in the corner that every once in a while catches the eye. But most
> >>>> importantly, he is the full length mirror across the antechamber from
> >>>> the coat rack, in which each member of this forum has the opportunity
> >>>> to take the measure of his own thoughts and beliefs about relativity
> >>>> reflected back at him at the profoundest level that words can
> >>>> achieve--far, far deeper than mere equations could ever reach.
> >
> >>> I assume this is a troll; if not, you must be pretty desperate to need
> >>> babbling Mitch for support.
> >
> >> Rash young fool Volney. Myself and the eponymous dilemma await your
> >> pleasure at dawn.
> >
> > When you and your "dilemma" will be executed?
> >
> > p.s. 25. 20 [Crackpot Index] points for naming something after
> > yourself. (E.g., talking about the "The Evans Field Equation" when your
> > name happens to be Evans.)
>
> There ought to be some extra points for using "eponymous" as a synonym
> for one's own name.

Why? That particular culprit is way out of reach of any index,

Jan

Volney wrote:

> On 1/23/2023 11:00 AM, patdolan wrote:
>> Rash young fool Volney. Myself and the eponymous dilemma await your
>> pleasure at dawn.
>
> When you and your "dilemma" will be executed?
> p.s. 25. 20 [C̶r̶a̶c̶k̶p̶o̶t̶ I̶n̶d̶e̶x̶] points for naming something after yourself.
> (E̶.g̶., t̶a̶l̶k̶i̶n̶g̶ a̶b̶o̶u̶t̶ t̶h̶e̶ "T̶h̶e̶ E̶v̶a̶n̶s̶ F̶i̶e̶l̶d̶ E̶q̶u̶a̶t̶i̶o̶n̶" w̶h̶e̶n̶ y̶o̶u̶r̶ n̶a̶m̶e̶
> h̶a̶p̶p̶e̶n̶s̶ t̶o̶ b̶e̶ E̶v̶a̶n̶s̶.)

Japan is firmly controlled by the US economically, politically &
militarily and its population inflicted with serious Stockholm syndrome;
worshipping your abusive master at all cost, sad but true.