 |
|
| Hobby Forum Index » Pyrotechnics » THE FORUM HAS BEEN SOOO DEAD... |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| pyroboy1438... |
Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 7:22 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
| Anybody have anything new to share? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| 100%Pyro... |
Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:34 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 29, 12:22 pm, pyroboy1438 <pyroboy1... at (no spam) aol.com> wrote:
Quote: Anybody have anything new to share?
New? No. Newsworthy? No. I got nothing. But I do have a question...how
do you make explosives? :p |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| hhc314 at (no spam) yahoo.com... |
Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 4:22 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 29, 1:22 pm, pyroboy1438 <pyroboy1... at (no spam) aol.com> wrote:
Quote: Anybody have anything new to share?
New? Define new.
Physics is rather old, having never changed with time. Still, to buy
into the physics game requires anywhere between 4 and 10 years of
concentrated study, It takes this long to know who the players are,
and what the rules are.
Harry C. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Web... |
Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
I've got some old highly enriched Plutonium laying around, any ideas what I
could do with it?
"100%Pyro" <a100percentpyro at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d744ed77-c59c-4a3e-bafb-9de7bad514a4 at (no spam) g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 29, 12:22 pm, pyroboy1438 <pyroboy1... at (no spam) aol.com> wrote:
Quote: Anybody have anything new to share?
New? No. Newsworthy? No. I got nothing. But I do have a question...how
do you make explosives? :p |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| rbirch... |
Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:52 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 10:22 am, "hhc... at (no spam) yahoo.com" <hhc... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
Quote: On Oct 29, 1:22 pm, pyroboy1438 <pyroboy1... at (no spam) aol.com> wrote:
Anybody have anything new to share?
New? Define new.
Physics is rather old, having never changed with time. Still, to buy
into the physics game requires anywhere between 4 and 10 years of
concentrated study, It takes this long to know who the players are,
and what the rules are.
Harry C.
It appears you believe you're on a different newsgroup than you
actually are. This is rec.pyro, not rec.physics.
Russ
PS: "Physics" has changed a lot. Physics is a study... a science. It
changes daily as we continue to learn more about the way things work.
The laws of physics, as we believe we know them, also change when we
find out how wrong we are. The real laws of physics will reveal
themselves as we continue to discover them and we correct our
misinterpretations of how we think things work. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| boom.armstrong... |
Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 6:10 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
| How are the beans in Colombia Joe? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Joe Smith... |
Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 6:57 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Here we go with Harry's bullshit. Again. "Physics is rather old, having
never changed with time." Only a complete idiot would write such nonsense.
Christ.
Nice going, pyroboy ;-)
<hhc314 at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b36dcec8-b503-435d-86da-308826b596c0 at (no spam) c3g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 29, 1:22 pm, pyroboy1438 <pyroboy1... at (no spam) aol.com> wrote:
Quote: Anybody have anything new to share?
New? Define new.
Physics is rather old, having never changed with time. Still, to buy
into the physics game requires anywhere between 4 and 10 years of
concentrated study, It takes this long to know who the players are,
and what the rules are.
Harry C. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| mikes2653... |
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 10:10 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
I suppose how "old" physics is depends upon what part of the
discipline is intended and what frame of reference is used.
Newtonian mechanics, optics, acoustics, etc., have been settled issues
for a long time. Celestial mechanics as done today is not very
different from how it was done by Euler and Lagrange. The study of
electricity did not come into its own until the nineteenth century.
Everything 'electronic' in the broadest sense of the term is dependent
on the work of Clerk Maxwell in the latter half of the nineteenth
century. Subatomic particle physics and quantum mechanics date from
the first half of the twentieth century. The work of Shockley, Bardeen
and Brattain on semiconductors, at the very end of this period, led to
their receiving the Nobel Prize in 1956. Has there been any discovery
in physics since then of comparable theoretical importance or
practical impact?
From at least my point of view - that of a reasonably educated layman
who does not pretend to be a physicist - recent highly publicised
'research' in physics about such things as 'chaos theory' and 'string
theory' appears mainly to be cosmological speculation that has not
been, and is perhaps not able to be, subjected to experimental
testing. Modern 'scientific' cosmology is not much more than
Epicureanism tarted up with maths.
On Oct 30, 1:52 pm, rbirch <rbi... at (no spam) merchant-general.com> wrote:
Quote: On Oct 30, 10:22 am, "hhc... at (no spam) yahoo.com" <hhc... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
On Oct 29, 1:22 pm, pyroboy1438 <pyroboy1... at (no spam) aol.com> wrote:
Anybody have anything new to share?
New? Define new.
Physics is rather old, having never changed with time. Still, to buy
into the physics game requires anywhere between 4 and 10 years of
concentrated study, It takes this long to know who the players are,
and what the rules are.
Harry C.
It appears you believe you're on a different newsgroup than you
actually are. This is rec.pyro, not rec.physics.
Russ
PS: "Physics" has changed a lot. Physics is a study... a science. It
changes daily as we continue to learn more about the way things work.
The laws of physics, as we believe we know them, also change when we
find out how wrong we are. The real laws of physics will reveal
themselves as we continue to discover them and we correct our
misinterpretations of how we think things work. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Joe Smith... |
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 10:54 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
The beans in Colombia are pretty darned good, boom. It's been a good year.
Although most of the really good coffee (supremo) is exported, there is
still a lot of second grade (excelso) that is far superior to what is
commonly available here in the supermarket. Nothing like a nice tazo de
tinto...Yummy. Fresh always makes it over marketing hype...
Plus we still don't have (don't need or even want) any Starbucks in
Colombia. ;-)
I'm guessing you remember my posts about visiting the fireworks factories in
Colombia???
----- Original Message -----
From: "boom.armstrong" <boom.armstrong at (no spam) yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: rec.pyrotechnics
Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 9:10 PM
Subject: Re: THE FORUM HAS BEEN SOOO DEAD
Quote: How are the beans in Colombia Joe?
"boom.armstrong" <boom.armstrong at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fd22e73a-8c04-4e66-b5fc-6e782e57261e at (no spam) k4g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
Quote: How are the beans in Colombia Joe?
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Tom Coughlin... |
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:54 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 4, 2:10 pm, mikes2653 <ekim2... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Quote: I suppose how "old" physics is depends upon what part of the
discipline is intended and what frame of reference is used.
Newtonian mechanics, optics, acoustics, etc., have been settled issues
for a long time. Celestial mechanics as done today is not very
different from how it was done by Euler and Lagrange. The study of
electricity did not come into its own until the nineteenth century.
Everything 'electronic' in the broadest sense of the term is dependent
on the work of Clerk Maxwell in the latter half of the nineteenth
century. Subatomic particle physics and quantum mechanics date from
the first half of the twentieth century. The work of Shockley, Bardeen
and Brattain on semiconductors, at the very end of this period, led to
their receiving the Nobel Prize in 1956. Has there been any discovery
in physics since then of comparable theoretical importance or
practical impact?
From at least my point of view - that of a reasonably educated layman
who does not pretend to be a physicist - recent highly publicised
'research' in physics about such things as 'chaos theory' and 'string
theory' appears mainly to be cosmological speculation that has not
been, and is perhaps not able to be, subjected to experimental
testing. Modern 'scientific' cosmology is not much more than
Epicureanism tarted up with maths.
On Oct 30, 1:52 pm, rbirch <rbi... at (no spam) merchant-general.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 10:22 am, "hhc... at (no spam) yahoo.com" <hhc... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
On Oct 29, 1:22 pm, pyroboy1438 <pyroboy1... at (no spam) aol.com> wrote:
Anybody have anything new to share?
New? Define new.
Physics is rather old, having never changed with time. Still, to buy
into the physics game requires anywhere between 4 and 10 years of
concentrated study, It takes this long to know who the players are,
and what the rules are.
Harry C.
It appears you believe you're on a different newsgroup than you
actually are. This is rec.pyro, not rec.physics.
Russ
PS: "Physics" has changed a lot. Physics is a study... a science. It
changes daily as we continue to learn more about the way things work.
The laws of physics, as we believe we know them, also change when we
find out how wrong we are. The real laws of physics will reveal
themselves as we continue to discover them and we correct our
misinterpretations of how we think things work.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
One needn't be a contrarian to enjoy the spectacle (and a predictable
one at that) of "modern" physics coming to ground, finally, upon that
same small bit of earth that once saw the philosopher undertake his
first tentative steps. It's a wise man (And rarer still a scientist?)
who enjoys the thread of folly that's woven throughout our earnest
pursuit of the "truth."
Is it not whispered in our ears daily? That the author of this play
and His design will not so easily be pinned down?
In this world I suspect, we seek the truth even as we love the fable.
We are children and not yet ready to see the thing, whole and
complete.
Tom C. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Tue Dec 15, 2009 1:13 am
|
|