Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: The HOAX of the neutrino invention. After 95 years don't know shit.
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2025 14:17:20 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <dbbd624dcd0896666688991107a07628@www.novabbs.com>
References: <0dd990630edbc9332716605722eb087a@www.novabbs.com> <137de285af1075fd38879770e4639130@www.novabbs.com> <e3a7231ccaeda2a33dcba756f18dd831@www.novabbs.com> <6574ed55bab2a34e1954de7883b13e3e@www.novabbs.com> <vspbsu$91m3$1@dont-email.me> <98bbe12b3dc453953454c3cabe00bd9f@www.novabbs.com> <8673251dcbfa63f7a079393a4dc91de9@www.novabbs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3385634"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="TRF929uvrTGZYJLF+N3tVBXNVfr/PeoSjsJ9hd5hWzo";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$GKu6V3kpmhGty6tZxzVEYuWqIxC2MnizxsDEgcpZHXqlG1ZpKwHAa
X-Rslight-Posting-User: cefb4c33981645a229d345bae7bb8942e6b32c35
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 5049
Lines: 86

On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 2:49:16 +0000, rhertz wrote:
>
> On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 22:36:13 +0000, gharnagel wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 19:28:31 +0000, Charleton Christakos Dou wrote:
> > >
> > > gharnagel wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, 30 Mar 2025 16:55:51 +0000, rhertz wrote:
> > > > > THE WORLD DEVELOPED THANKS TO INVENTORS AND ENGINEER SINCE
> SUMERIAN
> > > > > TIMES, OR MUCH OLDER THAN THAT.
> > > >
> > > > Yeah, engineers who believe in conservation of energy and momentum
> )
> > >
> > > not true. You cannot conserve energy. It would leak out. It always
> leaks
> > > out, sooner or later.
> >
> > Yep, it's called radiation.  Engineers and scientists measure it
> > all the time.  Energy from the sun impinges on the earth, some is
> > reflected back into space, some is absorbed and some heats up the
> > earth.  Fortunately, the warmer earth sends more infrared energy
> > back into space.  Otherwise, we would all be roasted.
> >  Conservation of energy means that earth reaches an equilibrium
> > temperature.  It's a simple differential equation.
> > You DO understand simple calculus, don't you?
>
> There are so many institutions working on this subject for decades
> that you wouldn't believe, simpleton. And they are using supercomputers
> to try to get EVEN AN APPROXIMATION to the complex models developed
> to figure out what would happen in the next hour, day or week, and
> THEY CONSTANTLY FAIL MISERABLY.
>
> There are no SIMPLE differential equations to model climate,

Do you think I was talking about CLIMATE, lunkhead?  Your response is
a straw man assault, as expected from you.

The subject is CONSERVATION OF ENERGY, dunderhead, and the earth
obeys it.

> nor even complex sets of N-Dimensional matrixes, with algorithms
> and software that need constant real time feed of information
> gathered by vast arrays of sensors, satellites, etc., that make
> the general problem to predict the BALANCE OF ENERGY IMPOSSIBLE
> TO BE SOLVED.

This is an inverse straw man argument: bringing in all kinds of
irrelevant complications to make the initial question see to be
impossible to solve.  Earth has an effective albedo which describes
how the earth reflects electromagnetic radiation.  The earth's
average temperature describes how the earth radiates EMR.  Energy
comes in from the sun, more energy comes from radioactive decay,
oxidation, etc.  The DETAILS of each of these are where you're
coming from, but that doesn't invalidate conservation of energy.


> Not only the many influences of the Sun on Earth, but MUCH MORE
> INFLUENCES from the Earth itself, that make the problem UNSOLVABLE.

If you can't quantify them, then you have no argument against CoE.

> Earth's rotation, dragging air and water in non-linear spiral
> patterns blah, blah, blah.

> all what you say is that a High School differential equation solve this?

I said a simple DE, but, of course, I exaggerated for the sake of
promoting discussion.  After all the disingenuous BS about unsolvable
details and deprecating assaults, you finally get to the crux, but then
you don't attack the obvious result: Energy out = Energy in.  If not, we
would eventually either freeze or roast.

And CoE is KNOWN to be valid by engineers.  I spent part of my career
dealing with the problem of keeping laser diodes from overheating and
I can tell you that Electrical power in = [light power + heat power]
out.
It's not necessary to go into the quantum mechanics, solid state
physics,
population inversion, or stimulated emission or optical reflection at
facets or anything else.  If you disagree with that, then you are:

> more stupid than what I thought once. An idiot without cure.

Now THAT I can agree with :-))