On 26-May-22 7:41 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
> https://neolegesmotus.com/2022/05/25/latest-developments-on-subitam-class-thrusters/

Still looks like a thermal effect to me.

Sylvia.

On Thu, 26 May 2022 11:09:48 +1000, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid>
wrote:

>On 26-May-22 7:41 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>> https://neolegesmotus.com/2022/05/25/latest-developments-on-subitam-class-thrusters/
>
>Still looks like a thermal effect to me.
>
>Sylvia.

illusions of the ignorant!

when the effect exceeds the diameter of the power cable it cannot be a
thermal effect but only a thrust.

On May/27/2022 at 05:40, Doctor Who wrote :
> On Thu, 26 May 2022 11:09:48 +1000, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> On 26-May-22 7:41 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>> https://neolegesmotus.com/2022/05/25/latest-developments-on-subitam-class-thrusters/
>>
>> Still looks like a thermal effect to me.
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
>
> illusions of the ignorant!
>
> when the effect exceeds the diameter of the power cable it cannot be a
> thermal effect but only a thrust.

No. Thermal effects can provide thrust for large distances. But the
effect disappears when you get out of the atmosphere. If you heat the
air on one side of your gizmo, you will get thrust towards the other
side while in an atmosphere. You will not get that thrust in vacuum.

Alain Fournier

On Fri, 27 May 2022 07:09:45 -0400, Alain Fournier
<alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:

>On May/27/2022 at 05:40, Doctor Who wrote :
>> On Thu, 26 May 2022 11:09:48 +1000, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 26-May-22 7:41 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>> https://neolegesmotus.com/2022/05/25/latest-developments-on-subitam-class-thrusters/
>>>
>>> Still looks like a thermal effect to me.
>>>
>>> Sylvia.
>>
>>
>> illusions of the ignorant!
>>
>> when the effect exceeds the diameter of the power cable it cannot be a
>> thermal effect but only a thrust.
>
>No. Thermal effects can provide thrust for large distances. But the
>effect disappears when you get out of the atmosphere. If you heat the
>air on one side of your gizmo, you will get thrust towards the other
>side while in an atmosphere. You will not get that thrust in vacuum.
>
>
>Alain Fournier

Yes yes, but you know nothing about PNN so shut up now.

On May/27/2022 at 13:26, Doctor Who wrote :
> On Fri, 27 May 2022 07:09:45 -0400, Alain Fournier
> <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:
>
>> On May/27/2022 at 05:40, Doctor Who wrote :
>>> On Thu, 26 May 2022 11:09:48 +1000, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 26-May-22 7:41 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>>> https://neolegesmotus.com/2022/05/25/latest-developments-on-subitam-class-thrusters/
>>>>
>>>> Still looks like a thermal effect to me.
>>>>
>>>> Sylvia.
>>>
>>>
>>> illusions of the ignorant!
>>>
>>> when the effect exceeds the diameter of the power cable it cannot be a
>>> thermal effect but only a thrust.
>>
>> No. Thermal effects can provide thrust for large distances. But the
>> effect disappears when you get out of the atmosphere. If you heat the
>> air on one side of your gizmo, you will get thrust towards the other
>> side while in an atmosphere. You will not get that thrust in vacuum.
>>
>>
>> Alain Fournier
>
>
> Yes yes, but you know nothing about PNN so shut up now.

I'm just trying to help here. Have you measured the temperatures on the
front and the back of your thrusters? If the temperature difference can
explain the thrust your measuring, that would fit better with known
science than not Newtownian physics.

Alain Fournier

On 2022-05-29 13:14:04 +0000, Alain Fournier said:

> On May/27/2022 at 13:26, Doctor Who wrote :
>> On Fri, 27 May 2022 07:09:45 -0400, Alain Fournier
>> <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> On May/27/2022 at 05:40, Doctor Who wrote :
>>>> On Thu, 26 May 2022 11:09:48 +1000, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 26-May-22 7:41 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>>>> https://neolegesmotus.com/2022/05/25/latest-developments-on-subitam-class-thrusters/
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Still looks like a thermal effect to me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sylvia.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> illusions of the ignorant!
>>>>
>>>> when the effect exceeds the diameter of the power cable it cannot be a
>>>> thermal effect but only a thrust.
>>>
>>> No. Thermal effects can provide thrust for large distances. But the
>>> effect disappears when you get out of the atmosphere. If you heat the
>>> air on one side of your gizmo, you will get thrust towards the other
>>> side while in an atmosphere. You will not get that thrust in vacuum.
>>>
>>>
>>> Alain Fournier
>>
>>
>> Yes yes, but you know nothing about PNN so shut up now.
>
> I'm just trying to help here. Have you measured the temperatures on the
> front and the back of your thrusters? If the temperature difference can
> explain the thrust your measuring, that would fit better with known
> science than not Newtownian physics.
>
>
> Alain Fournier

It must be tested in vacuum. Otherwise nobody is going to carry it to
an orbit or beyond.

Mikko

On Sunday, May 29, 2022 at 10:43:43 AM UTC-4, Mikko wrote:
> On 2022-05-29 13:14:04 +0000, Alain Fournier said:
>
> > On May/27/2022 at 13:26, Doctor Who wrote :
> >> On Fri, 27 May 2022 07:09:45 -0400, Alain Fournier
> >> <alai...@videotron.ca> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On May/27/2022 at 05:40, Doctor Who wrote :
> >>>> On Thu, 26 May 2022 11:09:48 +1000, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 26-May-22 7:41 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
> >>>>>> https://neolegesmotus.com/2022/05/25/latest-developments-on-subitam-class-thrusters/
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Still looks like a thermal effect to me.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sylvia.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> illusions of the ignorant!
> >>>>
> >>>> when the effect exceeds the diameter of the power cable it cannot be a
> >>>> thermal effect but only a thrust.
> >>>
> >>> No. Thermal effects can provide thrust for large distances. But the
> >>> effect disappears when you get out of the atmosphere. If you heat the
> >>> air on one side of your gizmo, you will get thrust towards the other
> >>> side while in an atmosphere. You will not get that thrust in vacuum.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Alain Fournier
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes yes, but you know nothing about PNN so shut up now.
> >
> > I'm just trying to help here. Have you measured the temperatures on the
> > front and the back of your thrusters? If the temperature difference can
> > explain the thrust your measuring, that would fit better with known
> > science than not Newtownian physics.
> >
> >
> > Alain Fournier
> It must be tested in vacuum. Otherwise nobody is going to carry it to
> an orbit or beyond.
>
> Mikko

I've noticed that any time someone asks a reasonable scientific question of PNN, the reply is either insults, incoherence or "you are wrong". Not a very good use of science.

On Sun, 29 May 2022 09:14:04 -0400, Alain Fournier
<alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:

>On May/27/2022 at 13:26, Doctor Who wrote :
>> On Fri, 27 May 2022 07:09:45 -0400, Alain Fournier
>> <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> On May/27/2022 at 05:40, Doctor Who wrote :
>>>> On Thu, 26 May 2022 11:09:48 +1000, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 26-May-22 7:41 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>>>> https://neolegesmotus.com/2022/05/25/latest-developments-on-subitam-class-thrusters/
>>>>>
>>>>> Still looks like a thermal effect to me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sylvia.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> illusions of the ignorant!
>>>>
>>>> when the effect exceeds the diameter of the power cable it cannot be a
>>>> thermal effect but only a thrust.
>>>
>>> No. Thermal effects can provide thrust for large distances. But the
>>> effect disappears when you get out of the atmosphere. If you heat the
>>> air on one side of your gizmo, you will get thrust towards the other
>>> side while in an atmosphere. You will not get that thrust in vacuum.
>>>
>>>
>>> Alain Fournier
>>
>>
>> Yes yes, but you know nothing about PNN so shut up now.
>
>I'm just trying to help here. Have you measured the temperatures on the
>front and the back of your thrusters? If the temperature difference can
>explain the thrust your measuring, that would fit better with known
>science than not Newtownian physics.
>
>
>Alain Fournier

why can't you understand that we made all possible tests and found
that there is a thrust ?

On 02-June-22 1:22 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
> Il giorno giovedì 26 maggio 2022 alle 03:09:51 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>> On 26-May-22 7:41 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>> https://neolegesmotus.com/2022/05/25/latest-developments-on-subitam-class-thrusters/
>>
>> Still looks like a thermal effect to me.
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
> Can you translate this? www.asps.it/falliti.htm …. No i suspect 😊
>
> Can you reply this
>
> http://www.asps.it/impnn4.png :-) ? … no i suspect😊
>
> i.e. A simple effect of of Lorentz force applied to an open circuit i.e. violation of action reaction principle

There is no reason to assume that the Lorentz force has no reaction.

Sylvia.

On Thu, 2 Jun 2022 22:05:43 +1000, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid>
wrote:

>On 02-June-22 1:22 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>> Il giorno giovedì 26 maggio 2022 alle 03:09:51 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>>> On 26-May-22 7:41 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>> https://neolegesmotus.com/2022/05/25/latest-developments-on-subitam-class-thrusters/
>>>
>>> Still looks like a thermal effect to me.
>>>
>>> Sylvia.
>>
>> Can you translate this? www.asps.it/falliti.htm …. No i suspect ?
>>
>> Can you reply this
>>
>> http://www.asps.it/impnn4.png :-) ? … no i suspect?
>>
>> i.e. A simple effect of of Lorentz force applied to an open circuit i.e. violation of action reaction principle
>
>There is no reason to assume that the Lorentz force has no reaction.
>
>Sylvia.

LOL, you are a good clown.

On 03-June-22 3:47 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
> Il giorno giovedì 2 giugno 2022 alle 14:05:46 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>> On 02-June-22 1:22 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>> Il giorno giovedì 26 maggio 2022 alle 03:09:51 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>>>> On 26-May-22 7:41 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>>> https://neolegesmotus.com/2022/05/25/latest-developments-on-subitam-class-thrusters/
>>>>
>>>> Still looks like a thermal effect to me.
>>>>
>>>> Sylvia.
>>>
>>> Can you translate this? www.asps.it/falliti.htm …. No i suspect 😊
>>>
>>> Can you reply this
>>>
>>> http://www.asps.it/impnn4.png :-) ? … no i suspect😊
>>>
>>> i.e. A simple effect of of Lorentz force applied to an open circuit i.e. violation of action reaction principle
>> There is no reason to assume that the Lorentz force has no reaction.
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
> Even if it is out of its mental reach I remind you that the 2 forces of action and reaction are vectors
>
> and rotfl :-)

That's gibberish.

On Fri, 3 Jun 2022 11:07:15 +1000, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid>
wrote:

>On 03-June-22 3:47 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>> Il giorno giovedì 2 giugno 2022 alle 14:05:46 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>>> On 02-June-22 1:22 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>> Il giorno giovedì 26 maggio 2022 alle 03:09:51 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>>>>> On 26-May-22 7:41 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>>>> https://neolegesmotus.com/2022/05/25/latest-developments-on-subitam-class-thrusters/
>>>>>
>>>>> Still looks like a thermal effect to me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sylvia.
>>>>
>>>> Can you translate this? www.asps.it/falliti.htm …. No i suspect ?
>>>>
>>>> Can you reply this
>>>>
>>>> http://www.asps.it/impnn4.png :-) ? … no i suspect?
>>>>
>>>> i.e. A simple effect of of Lorentz force applied to an open circuit i.e. violation of action reaction principle
>>> There is no reason to assume that the Lorentz force has no reaction.
>>>
>>> Sylvia.
>>
>> Even if it is out of its mental reach I remind you that the 2 forces of action and reaction are vectors
>>
>> and rotfl :-)
>
>That's gibberish.

you just wrote the proof that you understand nothing.

On Jun/3/2022 at 00:49, pnn calmagorod wrote :
> Il giorno venerdì 3 giugno 2022 alle 03:07:18 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>> On 03-June-22 3:47 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>> Il giorno giovedì 2 giugno 2022 alle 14:05:46 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>>>> On 02-June-22 1:22 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>>> Il giorno giovedì 26 maggio 2022 alle 03:09:51 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>>>>>> On 26-May-22 7:41 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>>>>> https://neolegesmotus.com/2022/05/25/latest-developments-on-subitam-class-thrusters/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Still looks like a thermal effect to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sylvia.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you translate this? www.asps.it/falliti.htm …. No i suspect 😊
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you reply this
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.asps.it/impnn4.png :-) ? … no i suspect😊
>>>>>
>>>>> i.e. A simple effect of of Lorentz force applied to an open circuit i.e. violation of action reaction principle
>>>> There is no reason to assume that the Lorentz force has no reaction.
>>>>
>>>> Sylvia.
>>>
>>> Even if it is out of its mental reach I remind you that the 2 forces of action and reaction are vectors
>>>
>>> and rotfl :-)
>> That's gibberish.
>
> to make them different: they can have the same module but different direction :-)
> If you don't accept this you violate Lorentz force rule in interaction of V shape dipole... moreever Newton know nothing of lorentz force :-)
> So ..... be happy with newton :-)

Newton also new nothing about cars. Yet his third law seems to apply
very well to cars. If Newton's third law didn't apply to Lorentz force
in any significant way, then CERN's particle accelerator would run into
serious trouble.

Alain Fournier

On Fri, 3 Jun 2022 07:27:09 -0400, Alain Fournier
<alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:

>On Jun/3/2022 at 00:49, pnn calmagorod wrote :
>> Il giorno venerdì 3 giugno 2022 alle 03:07:18 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>>> On 03-June-22 3:47 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>> Il giorno giovedì 2 giugno 2022 alle 14:05:46 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>>>>> On 02-June-22 1:22 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>>>> Il giorno giovedì 26 maggio 2022 alle 03:09:51 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>>>>>>> On 26-May-22 7:41 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>>>>>> https://neolegesmotus.com/2022/05/25/latest-developments-on-subitam-class-thrusters/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Still looks like a thermal effect to me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sylvia.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you translate this? www.asps.it/falliti.htm …. No i suspect ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you reply this
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.asps.it/impnn4.png :-) ? … no i suspect?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i.e. A simple effect of of Lorentz force applied to an open circuit i.e. violation of action reaction principle
>>>>> There is no reason to assume that the Lorentz force has no reaction.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sylvia.
>>>>
>>>> Even if it is out of its mental reach I remind you that the 2 forces of action and reaction are vectors
>>>>
>>>> and rotfl :-)
>>> That's gibberish.
>>
>> to make them different: they can have the same module but different direction :-)
>> If you don't accept this you violate Lorentz force rule in interaction of V shape dipole... moreever Newton know nothing of lorentz force :-)
>> So ..... be happy with newton :-)
>
>Newton also new nothing about cars. Yet his third law seems to apply
>very well to cars. If Newton's third law didn't apply to Lorentz force
>in any significant way, then CERN's particle accelerator would run into
>serious trouble.
>
>
>Alain Fournier

are you aware that CERN's particle accelerator violates newton's law?

On Fri, 3 Jun 2022 07:27:09 -0400, Alain Fournier
<alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:

>On Jun/3/2022 at 00:49, pnn calmagorod wrote :
>> Il giorno venerdì 3 giugno 2022 alle 03:07:18 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>>> On 03-June-22 3:47 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>> Il giorno giovedì 2 giugno 2022 alle 14:05:46 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>>>>> On 02-June-22 1:22 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>>>> Il giorno giovedì 26 maggio 2022 alle 03:09:51 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>>>>>>> On 26-May-22 7:41 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>>>>>> https://neolegesmotus.com/2022/05/25/latest-developments-on-subitam-class-thrusters/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Still looks like a thermal effect to me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sylvia.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you translate this? www.asps.it/falliti.htm …. No i suspect ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you reply this
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.asps.it/impnn4.png :-) ? … no i suspect?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i.e. A simple effect of of Lorentz force applied to an open circuit i.e. violation of action reaction principle
>>>>> There is no reason to assume that the Lorentz force has no reaction.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sylvia.
>>>>
>>>> Even if it is out of its mental reach I remind you that the 2 forces of action and reaction are vectors
>>>>
>>>> and rotfl :-)
>>> That's gibberish.
>>
>> to make them different: they can have the same module but different direction :-)
>> If you don't accept this you violate Lorentz force rule in interaction of V shape dipole... moreever Newton know nothing of lorentz force :-)
>> So ..... be happy with newton :-)
>
>Newton also new nothing about cars. Yet his third law seems to apply
>very well to cars. If Newton's third law didn't apply to Lorentz force
>in any significant way, then CERN's particle accelerator would run into
>serious trouble.
>
>
>Alain Fournier

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology

[Submitted on 8 Apr 2018 (v1), last revised 30 May 2018 (this version,
v2)]

Momentum Sum Rule Violation in QCD at High

Energy Colliders and Confinement

Gouranga C Nayak

Momentum sum rule in QCD is widely used at high energy colliders.
Although the exact form of the confinement potential energy is not
known but the confinement potential energy at large distance r can not
rise slower than ln(r). In this paper we find that if the confinement
potential energy at large distance r rises linearly with r (or faster)
then the momentum sum rule in QCD is violated at the high energy
colliders if we consider the hadron size as infinite.

For finite size hadron we find that the momentum sum rule in QCD is
violated at the high energy colliders for any form of the confinement
potential energy.

Comments:

2 New Sections, 13 pages latex

Subjects:

HHigh Energy Physics - Phenomenology (hep-ph); High Energy Physics -
Lattice (hep-lat); Nuclear Theory (nucl-th)

Cite as:

arXiv:1804.02712 [hep-ph]

On Fri, 03 Jun 2022 20:28:54 +0200, Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote:

>On Fri, 3 Jun 2022 07:27:09 -0400, Alain Fournier
><alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:
>
>>On Jun/3/2022 at 00:49, pnn calmagorod wrote :
>>> Il giorno venerdì 3 giugno 2022 alle 03:07:18 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>>>> On 03-June-22 3:47 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>>> Il giorno giovedì 2 giugno 2022 alle 14:05:46 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>>>>>> On 02-June-22 1:22 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>>>>> Il giorno giovedì 26 maggio 2022 alle 03:09:51 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>>>>>>>> On 26-May-22 7:41 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>>>>>>>>> https://neolegesmotus.com/2022/05/25/latest-developments-on-subitam-class-thrusters/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Still looks like a thermal effect to me.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sylvia.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can you translate this? www.asps.it/falliti.htm …. No i suspect ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can you reply this
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.asps.it/impnn4.png :-) ? … no i suspect?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i.e. A simple effect of of Lorentz force applied to an open circuit i.e. violation of action reaction principle
>>>>>> There is no reason to assume that the Lorentz force has no reaction.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sylvia.
>>>>>
>>>>> Even if it is out of its mental reach I remind you that the 2 forces of action and reaction are vectors
>>>>>
>>>>> and rotfl :-)
>>>> That's gibberish.
>>>
>>> to make them different: they can have the same module but different direction :-)
>>> If you don't accept this you violate Lorentz force rule in interaction of V shape dipole... moreever Newton know nothing of lorentz force :-)
>>> So ..... be happy with newton :-)
>>
>>Newton also new nothing about cars. Yet his third law seems to apply
>>very well to cars. If Newton's third law didn't apply to Lorentz force
>>in any significant way, then CERN's particle accelerator would run into
>>serious trouble.
>>
>>
>>Alain Fournier
>
>
>High Energy Physics - Phenomenology
>
>[Submitted on 8 Apr 2018 (v1), last revised 30 May 2018 (this version,
>v2)]
>
>
>
>Momentum Sum Rule Violation in QCD at High
>
>Energy Colliders and Confinement
>
>
>
>Gouranga C Nayak
>
>Momentum sum rule in QCD is widely used at high energy colliders.
>Although the exact form of the confinement potential energy is not
>known but the confinement potential energy at large distance r can not
>rise slower than ln(r). In this paper we find that if the confinement
>potential energy at large distance r rises linearly with r (or faster)
>then the momentum sum rule in QCD is violated at the high energy
>colliders if we consider the hadron size as infinite.
>
>For finite size hadron we find that the momentum sum rule in QCD is
>violated at the high energy colliders for any form of the confinement
>potential energy.
>
>Comments:
>
>
>2 New Sections, 13 pages latex
>
>Subjects:
>
>
>HHigh Energy Physics - Phenomenology (hep-ph); High Energy Physics -
>Lattice (hep-lat); Nuclear Theory (nucl-th)
>
>Cite as:
>
>
>arXiv:1804.02712 [hep-ph]

I see that in the end you fell silent, maybe you begin to understand
that pnn is not a joke.

On Mon, 6 Jun 2022 08:46:01 -0700 (PDT), pnn calmagorod
<calmagorod@gmail.com> wrote:

>Il giorno lunedì 6 giugno 2022 alle 17:42:29 UTC+2 pnn calmagorod ha scritto:
>> Il giorno lunedì 6 giugno 2022 alle 16:40:11 UTC+2 Doctor Who ha scritto:
>> > On Fri, 03 Jun 2022 20:28:54 +0200, Doctor Who <d...@tardis.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > >On Fri, 3 Jun 2022 07:27:09 -0400, Alain Fournier
>> > ><alai...@videotron.ca> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >>On Jun/3/2022 at 00:49, pnn calmagorod wrote :
>> > >>> Il giorno venerdì 3 giugno 2022 alle 03:07:18 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>> > >>>> On 03-June-22 3:47 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>> > >>>>> Il giorno giovedì 2 giugno 2022 alle 14:05:46 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>> > >>>>>> On 02-June-22 1:22 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>> > >>>>>>> Il giorno giovedì 26 maggio 2022 alle 03:09:51 UTC+2 Sylvia Else ha scritto:
>> > >>>>>>>> On 26-May-22 7:41 am, pnn calmagorod wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>>> https://neolegesmotus.com/2022/05/25/latest-developments-on-subitam-class-thrusters/
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> Still looks like a thermal effect to me.
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> Sylvia.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Can you translate this? www.asps.it/falliti.htm …. No i suspect ?
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Can you reply this
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> http://www.asps.it/impnn4.png :-) ? … no i suspect?
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> i.e. A simple effect of of Lorentz force applied to an open circuit i.e. violation of action reaction principle
>> > >>>>>> There is no reason to assume that the Lorentz force has no reaction.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Sylvia.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> Even if it is out of its mental reach I remind you that the 2 forces of action and reaction are vectors
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> and rotfl :-)
>> > >>>> That's gibberish.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> to make them different: they can have the same module but different direction :-)
>> > >>> If you don't accept this you violate Lorentz force rule in interaction of V shape dipole... moreever Newton know nothing of lorentz force :-)
>> > >>> So ..... be happy with newton :-)
>> > >>
>> > >>Newton also new nothing about cars. Yet his third law seems to apply
>> > >>very well to cars. If Newton's third law didn't apply to Lorentz force
>> > >>in any significant way, then CERN's particle accelerator would run into
>> > >>serious trouble.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>Alain Fournier
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >High Energy Physics - Phenomenology
>> > >
>> > >[Submitted on 8 Apr 2018 (v1), last revised 30 May 2018 (this version,
>> > >v2)]
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >Momentum Sum Rule Violation in QCD at High
>> > >
>> > >Energy Colliders and Confinement
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >Gouranga C Nayak
>> > >
>> > >Momentum sum rule in QCD is widely used at high energy colliders.
>> > >Although the exact form of the confinement potential energy is not
>> > >known but the confinement potential energy at large distance r can not
>> > >rise slower than ln(r). In this paper we find that if the confinement
>> > >potential energy at large distance r rises linearly with r (or faster)
>> > >then the momentum sum rule in QCD is violated at the high energy
>> > >colliders if we consider the hadron size as infinite.
>> > >
>> > >For finite size hadron we find that the momentum sum rule in QCD is
>> > >violated at the high energy colliders for any form of the confinement
>> > >potential energy.
>> > >
>> > >Comments:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >2 New Sections, 13 pages latex
>> > >
>> > >Subjects:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >HHigh Energy Physics - Phenomenology (hep-ph); High Energy Physics -
>> > >Lattice (hep-lat); Nuclear Theory (nucl-th)
>> > >
>> > >Cite as:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >arXiv:1804.02712 [hep-ph]
>> > I see that in the end you fell silent, maybe you begin to understand
>> > that pnn is not a joke.
>> sono impegnati a inventare qualche nuova cazzata che sembri verosimile per salvare le comiche trombette ... o Sylvia dalla completa paranoia :-)
>> .... ovvero scappare come fanno i saccenti gothalist (Serni, Cesaretti) www.asps.it/gabolas.htm ...
>> o in alternativa per riattaccare il solito nastro disperato ....che la pnn non vola :-)
>> Del resto i razzi dimostrano che sono stati inventati da hitler : idonei solo per ammazzarsi sulla terra ovvero su distanze corte (guerra in ucraina) .... se allarghi lo scenario fino alla luna o fino a marte puoi solo utilizzarli per giocare con i robottini..... controllando i media asserviti .... se no se ne accorgono
>>
>> and Rotfl
>
>pardon
>
>are busy inventing some new bullshit that seems likely to save the comic trumpets ... or Sylvia from complete paranoia :-)
>.... or rather escape as the knowledgeable gothalists do (Serni, Cesaretti) www.asps.it/gabolas.htm ...
>or alternatively to hang up the usual desperate tape .... that the pnn does not fly :-)
>After all, the rockets show that they were invented by hitler: suitable only for killing themselves on earth or over short distances (war in ukraine) .... if you expand the scenario to the moon or to mars you can only use them to play with robots ..... controlling the enslaved media .... otherwise they notice it
>
>and Rotfl
>
>
>
>

“Silvia, rimembri ancora quel tempo della tua vita mortale…”

e lallo

Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote:

> I see that in the end you fell silent, maybe you begin to understand
> that pnn is not a joke.

There's a guy in comp.lang.c that is convinced he's solved the halting
problem, and keeps spewing messages about it, with lots of x86 assembly
that he somehow seems to think prove something.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem

When people don't believe him on his say-so, and don't accept his genius
over such nincompoops as Alan Turing, he starts insulting them.

Maybe the two of you could get together?
--
/* * * Otto J. Makela <om@iki.fi> * * * * * * * * * */
/* Phone: +358 40 765 5772, ICBM: N 60 10' E 24 55' */
/* Mail: Mechelininkatu 26 B 27, FI-00100 Helsinki */
/* * * Computers Rule 01001111 01001011 * * * * * * */

On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 19:27:40 +0300, om@iki.fi (Otto J. Makela) wrote:

>Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote:
>
>> I see that in the end you fell silent, maybe you begin to understand
>> that pnn is not a joke.
>
>There's a guy in comp.lang.c that is convinced he's solved the halting
>problem, and keeps spewing messages about it, with lots of x86 assembly
>that he somehow seems to think prove something.
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
>
>When people don't believe him on his say-so, and don't accept his genius
>over such nincompoops as Alan Turing, he starts insulting them.
>
>Maybe the two of you could get together?

I don't see any insult here.

On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 19:27:40 +0300, om@iki.fi (Otto J. Makela) wrote:

>Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote:
>
>> I see that in the end you fell silent, maybe you begin to understand
>> that pnn is not a joke.
>
>There's a guy in comp.lang.c that is convinced he's solved the halting
>problem, and keeps spewing messages about it, with lots of x86 assembly
>that he somehow seems to think prove something.
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
>
>When people don't believe him on his say-so, and don't accept his genius
>over such nincompoops as Alan Turing, he starts insulting them.
>
>Maybe the two of you could get together?

why your parents called you Otto and not Nove ???????

e lallo

Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote:

> On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 19:27:40 +0300, om@iki.fi (Otto J. Makela) wrote:
>> There's a guy in comp.lang.c that is convinced he's solved the
>> halting problem, and keeps spewing messages about it, with lots of
>> x86 assembly that he somehow seems to think prove something.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
>>
>> When people don't believe him on his say-so, and don't accept his
>> genius over such nincompoops as Alan Turing, he starts insulting them.
>>
>> Maybe the two of you could get together?
>
> I don't see any insult here.

That's strange, have you checked your eyesight?

Someone using the same pseudo-email address in their headers as you has
(even fairly recently) been making claims about other writer's olfactory
properties, their mental acuity, and chosen professions, in ways many
people would indubitably consider insulting:

Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote Tue, 29 Mar 2022 11:21:56 +0200:

> you just smell like poo!

Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote Tue, 29 Mar 2022 12:30:23 +0200:

> you just smell like poo!

Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote Tue, 29 Mar 2022 12:33:30 +0200:

> you just smell like poo!

Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:01:42 +0200:

> responding like an idiot is an even greater indication of insanity.

Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote Thu, 07 Apr 2022 19:24:18 +0200:

> just like you
>
> you smell like poo

Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote Thu, 02 Jun 2022 14:27:39 +0200:

> LOL, you are a good clown.

--
/* * * Otto J. Makela <om@iki.fi> * * * * * * * * * */
/* Phone: +358 40 765 5772, ICBM: N 60 10' E 24 55' */
/* Mail: Mechelininkatu 26 B 27, FI-00100 Helsinki */
/* * * Computers Rule 01001111 01001011 * * * * * * */

On Wed, 15 Jun 2022 15:53:04 +0300, om@iki.fi (Otto J. Makela) wrote:

>Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 19:27:40 +0300, om@iki.fi (Otto J. Makela) wrote:
>>> There's a guy in comp.lang.c that is convinced he's solved the
>>> halting problem, and keeps spewing messages about it, with lots of
>>> x86 assembly that he somehow seems to think prove something.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
>>>
>>> When people don't believe him on his say-so, and don't accept his
>>> genius over such nincompoops as Alan Turing, he starts insulting them.
>>>
>>> Maybe the two of you could get together?
>>
>> I don't see any insult here.
>
>That's strange, have you checked your eyesight?
>
>Someone using the same pseudo-email address in their headers as you has
>(even fairly recently) been making claims about other writer's olfactory
>properties, their mental acuity, and chosen professions, in ways many
>people would indubitably consider insulting:
>
>Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote Tue, 29 Mar 2022 11:21:56 +0200:
>
>> you just smell like poo!
>
>Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote Tue, 29 Mar 2022 12:30:23 +0200:
>
>> you just smell like poo!
>
>Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote Tue, 29 Mar 2022 12:33:30 +0200:
>
>> you just smell like poo!
>
>Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:01:42 +0200:
>
>> responding like an idiot is an even greater indication of insanity.
>
>Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote Thu, 07 Apr 2022 19:24:18 +0200:
>
>> just like you
>>
>> you smell like poo
>
>Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote Thu, 02 Jun 2022 14:27:39 +0200:
>
>> LOL, you are a good clown.

what a prickly man !

On Wed, 15 Jun 2022 15:53:04 +0300, om@iki.fi (Otto J. Makela) wrote:

>Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 19:27:40 +0300, om@iki.fi (Otto J. Makela) wrote:
>>> There's a guy in comp.lang.c that is convinced he's solved the
>>> halting problem, and keeps spewing messages about it, with lots of
>>> x86 assembly that he somehow seems to think prove something.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
>>>
>>> When people don't believe him on his say-so, and don't accept his
>>> genius over such nincompoops as Alan Turing, he starts insulting them.
>>>
>>> Maybe the two of you could get together?
>>
>> I don't see any insult here.
>
>That's strange, have you checked your eyesight?
>
>Someone using the same pseudo-email address in their headers as you has
>(even fairly recently) been making claims about other writer's olfactory
>properties, their mental acuity, and chosen professions, in ways many
>people would indubitably consider insulting:
>
>Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote Tue, 29 Mar 2022 11:21:56 +0200:
>
>> you just smell like poo!
>
>Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote Tue, 29 Mar 2022 12:30:23 +0200:
>
>> you just smell like poo!
>
>Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote Tue, 29 Mar 2022 12:33:30 +0200:
>
>> you just smell like poo!
>
>Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:01:42 +0200:
>
>> responding like an idiot is an even greater indication of insanity.
>
>Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote Thu, 07 Apr 2022 19:24:18 +0200:
>
>> just like you
>>
>> you smell like poo
>
>Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote Thu, 02 Jun 2022 14:27:39 +0200:
>
>> LOL, you are a good clown.

you would have to introspect to understand that you have vilified and
denigrated the PNN, so you deserve only insults.

Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote:

> you would have to introspect to understand that you have vilified and
> denigrated the PNN, so you deserve only insults.

My only requests here have been for more information on the supposed
patent(s) of the process, and suspicion that they do not exist as no
such information has been offered.

Refusal to accept any kind of criticism but immediately resorting to
attempted personal attacks makes one sound just like a cultist who is
deadly afraid of their wobbly little faith structure falling apart.
This most definitely is not the reaction of a stable researcher with
certainty of correctness of their findings and firm documentation.

https://medium.com/@zelphontheshelf/10-signs-youre-probably-in-a-cult-1921eb5a3857
--
/* * * Otto J. Makela <om@iki.fi> * * * * * * * * * */
/* Phone: +358 40 765 5772, ICBM: N 60 10' E 24 55' */
/* Mail: Mechelininkatu 26 B 27, FI-00100 Helsinki */
/* * * Computers Rule 01001111 01001011 * * * * * * */

On Mon, 04 Jul 2022 18:12:40 +0300, om@iki.fi (Otto J. Makela) wrote:

>Doctor Who <doc@tardis.org> wrote:
>
>> you would have to introspect to understand that you have vilified and
>> denigrated the PNN, so you deserve only insults.
>
>My only requests here have been for more information on the supposed
>patent(s) of the process, and suspicion that they do not exist as no
>such information has been offered.
>
>Refusal to accept any kind of criticism but immediately resorting to
>attempted personal attacks makes one sound just like a cultist who is
>deadly afraid of their wobbly little faith structure falling apart.
>This most definitely is not the reaction of a stable researcher with
>certainty of correctness of their findings and firm documentation.
>
>https://medium.com/@zelphontheshelf/10-signs-youre-probably-in-a-cult-1921eb5a3857

blah blah blah

--
PNL = Pipparda New Licantropy
Il loppo reatino ulula alla luna!