question for jobst brandt

[Luke]

In article <[email protected]>, jim beam
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
> "if you want to have a fight michael, just say so. that's about all
> that's left since you evidently don't have a technical contribution to
> make."
>
> do you want another 24 hours to think this over?


After school, by the bike rack -- where else? Bet'ya my dad can beat up
yer dad.

 

[Tim McNamara]

In article <[email protected]>,
Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Michael Press wrote:
> > > In article <[email protected]>,
> > > jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Michael Press wrote:
> > >>> In article <[email protected]>,
> > >>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Phil Holman wrote:
> > >>>>> "jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > >>>>> news:[email protected]...
> > >>>>>> Phil Holman wrote:
> > >>>>>>> "jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > >>>>>>> news[email protected]...
> > >>>>>>>> how long did you work in "automobile design engineering"
> > >>>>>>>> jobst? and in what capacity?
> > >>>>>>> You don't really expect an answer to such a "loaded"
> > >>>>>>> question do you?
> > >>>>>> if he wants to lecture on the subject, yes i do!
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Being constantly contrary diminishes the credibility of
> > >>>>>>> your input.
> > >>>>>> does constantly presenting presumptive speculation as fact
> > >>>>>> make for credibility? how about when it's on a subject with
> > >>>>>> over 100 years of published research which are being
> > >>>>>> ignored?
> > >>>>> I wasn' t talking about his credibility I was talking about
> > >>>>> yours.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> why do you care - and who are you to ask? i'm an anonymous
> > >>>> troll.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> however, i'm not resting on the laurels of my alma mater. and
> > >>>> i have no interest in trying to sell you anything. and the
> > >>>> questions i ask are all independently verifiable. and i don't
> > >>>> cite myself as a reference.
> > >>> You have nothing to reference.
> > >> how would you know? i'm certainly not going to pass off the
> > >> research of others as my own. and i'm not going to cite to
> > >> product of an insufficiently educated and fevered imagination
> > >
> > > "Product of an insufficiently educated and fevered imagination"
> > > OK, got it.
> >
> > if you want to have a fight michael, just say so. that's about all
> > that's left since you evidently don't have a technical contribution
> > to make.
>
> As in
>
> "however, i'm not resting on the laurels of my alma mater. and i
> have no interest in trying to sell you anything. and the questions i
> ask are all independently verifiable. and i don't cite myself as a
> reference." ?
>
> By the way, what does the construction "and the questions i ask are
> all independently verifiable" mean?

Gee, beamster's only a step away from calling you "retard" or some other
equally cutting epithet. How will you stand the pain?

 

[jim beam]

Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>>>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Phil Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>> "jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>>>>>> Phil Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> "jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news[email protected]...
>>>>>>>>>>> how long did you work in "automobile design engineering"
>>>>>>>>>>> jobst? and in what capacity?
>>>>>>>>>> You don't really expect an answer to such a "loaded"
>>>>>>>>>> question do you?
>>>>>>>>> if he wants to lecture on the subject, yes i do!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Being constantly contrary diminishes the credibility of
>>>>>>>>>> your input.
>>>>>>>>> does constantly presenting presumptive speculation as fact
>>>>>>>>> make for credibility? how about when it's on a subject with
>>>>>>>>> over 100 years of published research which are being
>>>>>>>>> ignored?
>>>>>>>> I wasn' t talking about his credibility I was talking about
>>>>>>>> yours.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> why do you care - and who are you to ask? i'm an anonymous
>>>>>>> troll.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> however, i'm not resting on the laurels of my alma mater. and
>>>>>>> i have no interest in trying to sell you anything. and the
>>>>>>> questions i ask are all independently verifiable. and i don't
>>>>>>> cite myself as a reference.
>>>>>> You have nothing to reference.
>>>>> how would you know? i'm certainly not going to pass off the
>>>>> research of others as my own. and i'm not going to cite to
>>>>> product of an insufficiently educated and fevered imagination
>>>> "Product of an insufficiently educated and fevered imagination"
>>>> OK, got it.
>>> if you want to have a fight michael, just say so. that's about all
>>> that's left since you evidently don't have a technical contribution
>>> to make.
>> As in
>>
>> "however, i'm not resting on the laurels of my alma mater. and i
>> have no interest in trying to sell you anything. and the questions i
>> ask are all independently verifiable. and i don't cite myself as a
>> reference." ?
>>
>> By the way, what does the construction "and the questions i ask are
>> all independently verifiable" mean?
>
> Gee, beamster's only a step away from calling you "retard" or some other
> equally cutting epithet. How will you stand the pain?

no timmy, /you/ are the retard. if you were smart enough and paid
attention, you'd figure out that /you/ are the only person on this group
that's earned that declaration. but because you aren't and you haven't...

 

[[email protected]]

On Jan 23, 7:34 pm, Luke <[email protected]> wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, jim beam
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > "if you want to have a fight michael, just say so.  that's about all
> > that's left since you evidently don't have a technical contribution to
> > make."
>
> > do you want another 24 hours to think this over?
>
> After school, by the bike rack -- where else?

That's it, I'm gettin' off the bus at YOUR stop.

 

[Michael Press]

In article <[email protected]>,
jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:

> Michael Press wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Michael Press wrote:
> >>> In article <[email protected]>,
> >>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
> >>>>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Phil Holman wrote:
> >>>>>>> "jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>>>>> news:[email protected]...
> >>>>>>>> Phil Holman wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> "jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>> news[email protected]...
> >>>>>>>>>> how long did you work in "automobile design engineering" jobst? and
> >>>>>>>>>> in what capacity?
> >>>>>>>>> You don't really expect an answer to such a "loaded" question do you?
> >>>>>>>> if he wants to lecture on the subject, yes i do!
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Being constantly contrary diminishes the credibility of your input.
> >>>>>>>> does constantly presenting presumptive speculation as fact make for
> >>>>>>>> credibility? how about when it's on a subject with over 100 years of
> >>>>>>>> published research which are being ignored?
> >>>>>>> I wasn' t talking about his credibility I was talking about yours.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> why do you care - and who are you to ask? i'm an anonymous troll.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> however, i'm not resting on the laurels of my alma mater. and i have no
> >>>>>> interest in trying to sell you anything. and the questions i ask are
> >>>>>> all independently verifiable. and i don't cite myself as a reference.
> >>>>> You have nothing to reference.
> >>>> how would you know? i'm certainly not going to pass off the research of
> >>>> others as my own. and i'm not going to cite to product of an
> >>>> insufficiently educated and fevered imagination
> >>> "Product of an insufficiently educated and fevered imagination"
> >>> OK, got it.
> >> if you want to have a fight michael, just say so. that's about all
> >> that's left since you evidently don't have a technical contribution to make.
> >
> >
> > As in
> >
> > "however, i'm not resting on the laurels of my alma mater. and i have no
> > interest in trying to sell you anything. and the questions i ask are
> > all independently verifiable. and i don't cite myself as a reference."
> > ?
> >
> > By the way, what does the construction "and the questions i ask are
> > all independently verifiable" mean?
> >
>
> "if you want to have a fight michael, just say so. that's about all
> that's left since you evidently don't have a technical contribution to
> make."
>
> do you want another 24 hours to think this over?

Technical content? You wrote
"yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger
than the atomic size of He.  that also affects diffusion rate."

How big is the H2 molecule and how big is the He atom?

--
Michael Press

 

[jim beam]

In inanity <[email protected]>
Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Michael Press wrote:
>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>>>>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Phil Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>>>>>>> Phil Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> "jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> news[email protected]...
>>>>>>>>>>>> how long did you work in "automobile design engineering" jobst? and
>>>>>>>>>>>> in what capacity?
>>>>>>>>>>> You don't really expect an answer to such a "loaded" question do you?
>>>>>>>>>> if he wants to lecture on the subject, yes i do!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Being constantly contrary diminishes the credibility of your input.
>>>>>>>>>> does constantly presenting presumptive speculation as fact make for
>>>>>>>>>> credibility? how about when it's on a subject with over 100 years of
>>>>>>>>>> published research which are being ignored?
>>>>>>>>> I wasn' t talking about his credibility I was talking about yours.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> why do you care - and who are you to ask? i'm an anonymous troll.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> however, i'm not resting on the laurels of my alma mater. and i have no
>>>>>>>> interest in trying to sell you anything. and the questions i ask are
>>>>>>>> all independently verifiable. and i don't cite myself as a reference.
>>>>>>> You have nothing to reference.
>>>>>> how would you know? i'm certainly not going to pass off the research of
>>>>>> others as my own. and i'm not going to cite to product of an
>>>>>> insufficiently educated and fevered imagination
>>>>> "Product of an insufficiently educated and fevered imagination"
>>>>> OK, got it.
>>>> if you want to have a fight michael, just say so. that's about all
>>>> that's left since you evidently don't have a technical contribution to make.
>>>
>>> As in
>>>
>>> "however, i'm not resting on the laurels of my alma mater. and i have no
>>> interest in trying to sell you anything. and the questions i ask are
>>> all independently verifiable. and i don't cite myself as a reference."
>>> ?
>>>
>>> By the way, what does the construction "and the questions i ask are
>>> all independently verifiable" mean?
>>>
>> "if you want to have a fight michael, just say so. that's about all
>> that's left since you evidently don't have a technical contribution to
>> make."
>>
>> do you want another 24 hours to think this over?
>
> Technical content? You wrote
> "yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger
> than the atomic size of He. �that also affects diffusion rate."
>
> How big is the H2 molecule and how big is the He atom?
>

you're not interested in an answer because you can look it up yourself -
you're simply interested in being a schmuck. i otoh am interested in
why it takes your razor-sharp wit more that 24 hours to come up with
such a dim response - if you want to play schlemiel you need to be
quicker off the mark.

 

[Michael Press]

In article <[email protected]>,
jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:

> In inanity <[email protected]>
> Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Michael Press wrote:
> >>> In article <[email protected]>,
> >>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
> >>>>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
> >>>>>>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Phil Holman wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> "jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>> news:[email protected]...
> >>>>>>>>>> Phil Holman wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> "jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>>>> news[email protected]...
> >>>>>>>>>>>> how long did you work in "automobile design engineering" jobst? and
> >>>>>>>>>>>> in what capacity?
> >>>>>>>>>>> You don't really expect an answer to such a "loaded" question do you?
> >>>>>>>>>> if he wants to lecture on the subject, yes i do!
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Being constantly contrary diminishes the credibility of your input.
> >>>>>>>>>> does constantly presenting presumptive speculation as fact make for
> >>>>>>>>>> credibility? how about when it's on a subject with over 100 years of
> >>>>>>>>>> published research which are being ignored?
> >>>>>>>>> I wasn' t talking about his credibility I was talking about yours.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> why do you care - and who are you to ask? i'm an anonymous troll.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> however, i'm not resting on the laurels of my alma mater. and i have no
> >>>>>>>> interest in trying to sell you anything. and the questions i ask are
> >>>>>>>> all independently verifiable. and i don't cite myself as a reference.
> >>>>>>> You have nothing to reference.
> >>>>>> how would you know? i'm certainly not going to pass off the research of
> >>>>>> others as my own. and i'm not going to cite to product of an
> >>>>>> insufficiently educated and fevered imagination
> >>>>> "Product of an insufficiently educated and fevered imagination"
> >>>>> OK, got it.
> >>>> if you want to have a fight michael, just say so. that's about all
> >>>> that's left since you evidently don't have a technical contribution to make.
> >>>
> >>> As in
> >>>
> >>> "however, i'm not resting on the laurels of my alma mater. and i have no
> >>> interest in trying to sell you anything. and the questions i ask are
> >>> all independently verifiable. and i don't cite myself as a reference."
> >>> ?
> >>>
> >>> By the way, what does the construction "and the questions i ask are
> >>> all independently verifiable" mean?
> >>>
> >> "if you want to have a fight michael, just say so. that's about all
> >> that's left since you evidently don't have a technical contribution to
> >> make."
> >>
> >> do you want another 24 hours to think this over?
> >
> > Technical content? You wrote
> > "yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger
> > than the atomic size of He. ?that also affects diffusion rate."
> >
> > How big is the H2 molecule and how big is the He atom?
> >
>
> you're not interested in an answer because you can look it up yourself -
> you're simply interested in being a schmuck. i otoh am interested in
> why it takes your razor-sharp wit more that 24 hours to come up with
> such a dim response - if you want to play schlemiel you need to be
> quicker off the mark.

I am interested in your answer. Your statement about the relative
sizes of H2 and He is false. Everything you do is to avoid facing
that.

--
Michael Press

 

[jim beam]

Michael Press wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> In inanity <[email protected]>
>> Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>>>>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>>>>>>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Phil Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> "jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>>>>>>>>> Phil Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>> news[email protected]...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how long did you work in "automobile design engineering" jobst? and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in what capacity?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You don't really expect an answer to such a "loaded" question do you?
>>>>>>>>>>>> if he wants to lecture on the subject, yes i do!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Being constantly contrary diminishes the credibility of your input.
>>>>>>>>>>>> does constantly presenting presumptive speculation as fact make for
>>>>>>>>>>>> credibility? how about when it's on a subject with over 100 years of
>>>>>>>>>>>> published research which are being ignored?
>>>>>>>>>>> I wasn' t talking about his credibility I was talking about yours.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> why do you care - and who are you to ask? i'm an anonymous troll.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> however, i'm not resting on the laurels of my alma mater. and i have no
>>>>>>>>>> interest in trying to sell you anything. and the questions i ask are
>>>>>>>>>> all independently verifiable. and i don't cite myself as a reference.
>>>>>>>>> You have nothing to reference.
>>>>>>>> how would you know? i'm certainly not going to pass off the research of
>>>>>>>> others as my own. and i'm not going to cite to product of an
>>>>>>>> insufficiently educated and fevered imagination
>>>>>>> "Product of an insufficiently educated and fevered imagination"
>>>>>>> OK, got it.
>>>>>> if you want to have a fight michael, just say so. that's about all
>>>>>> that's left since you evidently don't have a technical contribution to make.
>>>>> As in
>>>>>
>>>>> "however, i'm not resting on the laurels of my alma mater. and i have no
>>>>> interest in trying to sell you anything. and the questions i ask are
>>>>> all independently verifiable. and i don't cite myself as a reference."
>>>>> ?
>>>>>
>>>>> By the way, what does the construction "and the questions i ask are
>>>>> all independently verifiable" mean?
>>>>>
>>>> "if you want to have a fight michael, just say so. that's about all
>>>> that's left since you evidently don't have a technical contribution to
>>>> make."
>>>>
>>>> do you want another 24 hours to think this over?
>>> Technical content? You wrote
>>> "yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger
>>> than the atomic size of He. ?that also affects diffusion rate."
>>>
>>> How big is the H2 molecule and how big is the He atom?
>>>
>> you're not interested in an answer because you can look it up yourself -
>> you're simply interested in being a schmuck. i otoh am interested in
>> why it takes your razor-sharp wit more that 24 hours to come up with
>> such a dim response - if you want to play schlemiel you need to be
>> quicker off the mark.
>
> I am interested in your answer. Your statement about the relative
> sizes of H2 and He is false. Everything you do is to avoid facing
> that.
>

i'm not interested in that little game, schmuck. get smart if you want
to play.

 

[Michael Press]

In article <[email protected]>,
jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:

> Michael Press wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> In inanity <[email protected]>
> >> Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> In article <[email protected]>,
> >>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
> >>>>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
> >>>>>>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Michael Press wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
> >>>>>>>>> jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Phil Holman wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> "jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>>>> news:[email protected]...
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Phil Holman wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> "jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> news[email protected]...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> how long did you work in "automobile design engineering" jobst? and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in what capacity?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You don't really expect an answer to such a "loaded" question do you?
> >>>>>>>>>>>> if he wants to lecture on the subject, yes i do!
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Being constantly contrary diminishes the credibility of your input.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> does constantly presenting presumptive speculation as fact make for
> >>>>>>>>>>>> credibility? how about when it's on a subject with over 100 years of
> >>>>>>>>>>>> published research which are being ignored?
> >>>>>>>>>>> I wasn' t talking about his credibility I was talking about yours.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> why do you care - and who are you to ask? i'm an anonymous troll.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> however, i'm not resting on the laurels of my alma mater. and i have no
> >>>>>>>>>> interest in trying to sell you anything. and the questions i ask are
> >>>>>>>>>> all independently verifiable. and i don't cite myself as a reference.
> >>>>>>>>> You have nothing to reference.
> >>>>>>>> how would you know? i'm certainly not going to pass off the research of
> >>>>>>>> others as my own. and i'm not going to cite to product of an
> >>>>>>>> insufficiently educated and fevered imagination
> >>>>>>> "Product of an insufficiently educated and fevered imagination"
> >>>>>>> OK, got it.
> >>>>>> if you want to have a fight michael, just say so. that's about all
> >>>>>> that's left since you evidently don't have a technical contribution to make.
> >>>>> As in
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "however, i'm not resting on the laurels of my alma mater. and i have no
> >>>>> interest in trying to sell you anything. and the questions i ask are
> >>>>> all independently verifiable. and i don't cite myself as a reference."
> >>>>> ?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> By the way, what does the construction "and the questions i ask are
> >>>>> all independently verifiable" mean?
> >>>>>
> >>>> "if you want to have a fight michael, just say so. that's about all
> >>>> that's left since you evidently don't have a technical contribution to
> >>>> make."
> >>>>
> >>>> do you want another 24 hours to think this over?
> >>> Technical content? You wrote
> >>> "yeahbut, the molecular size of H2 is much larger
> >>> than the atomic size of He. ?that also affects diffusion rate."
> >>>
> >>> How big is the H2 molecule and how big is the He atom?
> >>>
> >> you're not interested in an answer because you can look it up yourself -
> >> you're simply interested in being a schmuck. i otoh am interested in
> >> why it takes your razor-sharp wit more that 24 hours to come up with
> >> such a dim response - if you want to play schlemiel you need to be
> >> quicker off the mark.
> >
> > I am interested in your answer. Your statement about the relative
> > sizes of H2 and He is false. Everything you do is to avoid facing
> > that.
> >
>
> i'm not interested in that little game, schmuck. get smart if you want
> to play.

I know your game, and you always win.
You made a false statement about the relative sizes of H2 and He.
You asked for "technical contribution" and when it is offered
you change the subject. Classic bait-and-swithch. Are you in sales?

--
Michael Press

 

[Tim McNamara]

In article <[email protected]>,
Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:

> I know your game, and you always win.

When and what has the beamster won? He has lost every discussion I can
recall, thanks to his incomprehension of most issues related to bicycle
design and- it seems- materials science as well. If the prize to be won
is being publicly discredited time and again, then the beamster has won
that prize. No wonder he remains an anonymous coward.

 

[Michael Press]

In article <[email protected]>,
Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I know your game, and you always win.
>
> When and what has the beamster won? He has lost every discussion I can
> recall, thanks to his incomprehension of most issues related to bicycle
> design and- it seems- materials science as well. If the prize to be won
> is being publicly discredited time and again, then the beamster has won
> that prize. No wonder he remains an anonymous coward.

Nobody can make jim beam take heed, agree to anything,
get him to look at a matter from anybody else's
point of view, change his mind, or say that it turns
out that things are not the way he first put them.
jim beam wins.

--
Michael Press

 

[Tim McNamara]

In article <[email protected]>,
Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > I know your game, and you always win.
> >
> > When and what has the beamster won? He has lost every discussion I
> > can recall, thanks to his incomprehension of most issues related to
> > bicycle design and- it seems- materials science as well. If the
> > prize to be won is being publicly discredited time and again, then
> > the beamster has won that prize. No wonder he remains an anonymous
> > coward.
>
> Nobody can make jim beam take heed, agree to anything, get him to
> look at a matter from anybody else's point of view, change his mind,
> or say that it turns out that things are not the way he first put
> them. jim beam wins.

Nah. That's what makes him a loser.

 

[Bill Sornson]

TRIM YOUR POSTS!!!!!!

 

[Tim McNamara]

In article <[email protected]>,
"Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:

> TRIM YOUR POSTS!!!!!!

If you trim them *too* much, no one knows what you're talking about. ;-)

 

[Bill Sornson]

Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> TRIM YOUR POSTS!!!!!!
>
> If you trim them *too* much, no one knows what you're talking about.
> ;-)

Moderation in all things, Posthumper. (Errr, Grasshopper!)

 

[still just me]

On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 19:07:49 -0800, jim beam
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>you're the weakest, most pathetic y-chromosome lacking schoolyard cop
>out i think i've yet seen on r.b.t! you want to pick a fight? man up!
> schmuck.

OK, tough guy. Why don't you two take it outside. You're disrupting
the classroom.

 

[Ozark Bicycle]

On Jan 31, 1:26 pm, still just me <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 19:07:49 -0800, jim beam
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >you're the weakest, most pathetic y-chromosome lacking schoolyard cop
> >out i think i've yet seen on r.b.t!  you want to pick a fight?  man up!
> >  schmuck.
>
> OK, tough guy. Why don't you two take it outside. You're disrupting
> the classroom.

Right! We all wanna learn more about dung beetles!

 

[jim beam]

Ed Pirrero wrote:
<snip for brevity>
> From a small amount of calculation and consultation with my physical
> chemistry text, the length of a diatomic hydrogen molecule is close to
> 2.2 angstroms. The diameter of a helium atom is close to 1.0
> angstrom. The diameter of a single hydrogen atom is about 0.75
> angstrom. The relevant numbers are:
>
> Atomic radii: H, 0.37; He, 0.5. Bond length, H-H, 0.74. Lengths
> given in angstroms.
>
> E.P.

thanks ed. that stuff is easy enough to look up. even for michael
press. unfortunately, he has no interest in the numbers, or the
original subject matter, that of hydrogen diffusivity - his only
interest is that of being a schmuck trying to play a stupid game. and
stamping his little foot in childish tantrum when denied.

 

[Michael Press]

In article
<b55b2d43-4559-4c28-a656-f21bd6db98c4@q21g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
Ed Pirrero <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Jan 30, 7:07 pm, jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Michael Press wrote:

[...]

> > > My assertion is exactly this: What you said about the relative
> > > sizes of H2 and He is incorrect.
> >
> > you're the weakest...
>
> From a small amount of calculation and consultation with my physical
> chemistry text, the length of a diatomic hydrogen molecule is close to
> 2.2 angstroms. The diameter of a helium atom is close to 1.0
> angstrom. The diameter of a single hydrogen atom is about 0.75
> angstrom. The relevant numbers are:
>
> Atomic radii: H, 0.37; He, 0.5. Bond length, H-H, 0.74. Lengths
> given in angstroms.

jim beam wrote "yeah but, the molecular size
of H2 is much larger than the atomic size of He. that also affects diffusion"

The relevant measure for size here is volume and the best value is
the b parameter in the van der Waals equation of state.
b for H2 = 2.65 x 10^{-5} m^3/mole
b for He = 2.34 x 10^{-5} m^3/mole
As you can see the difference between H2 and He is negligible.

<http://www.ac.wwu.edu/%7Evawter/PhysicsNet/Topics/Thermal/vdWaalEquatOfState.html>

--
Michael Press

 

[Ben C]

On 2008-02-01, Ed Pirrero <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jan 30, 7:07 pm, jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
[...]
> From a small amount of calculation and consultation with my physical
> chemistry text, the length of a diatomic hydrogen molecule is close to
> 2.2 angstroms. The diameter of a helium atom is close to 1.0
> angstrom. The diameter of a single hydrogen atom is about 0.75
> angstrom. The relevant numbers are:

If you take one of those diatomic Hydrogen molecules and carefully
squeeze the two halves together until it's only about 1 angstrom across
it should make a bit of a ping and turn into Helium.