Forums » Group W Forums » Topical Tropical Discussions

 


Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2012 9:16 pm
  

User avatar
Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Sep 15, 1999
Posts: 7227
DrCharbonneau wrote:
heraclitis wrote:
DrCharbonneau wrote:


The question, though, is thus: "Is the container based on the geometry of the fractal or the fractal based on the geometry of the container?"



I have no idea what you are talking about?



You are right Agnes. The metaphorical goalpost of meaninglessness keeps changing. It was fun at first. Then it became rude and insulting. Soft spoken demogoguery. Now it's just plain stupid. I've met people with Downs Syndrome who could have better comprehended a paradox like that one about fractals.

Here on the net I encounter these "math whizzes" who can crunch numbers but don't have the first clue about philosophical logic. So educated they are... not. They can c&p a wiki link, but recognize a curious or even humorous paradox? They have no clue.

Yes, I'm sorry that what could have been fun cannot... at least not without insulting. Wasn't this website founded with the idea of doing something good for the human race? The planet?



i really don't know what you are talking about, but feel free to speak for yourself.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 7:00 am
  

Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Jul 17, 2010
Posts: 1375
DrCharbonneau wrote:
The question, though, is thus: "Is the container based on the geometry of the fractal or the fractal based on the geometry of the container?"



I didn't see the paradox?

I must be a crude liar with Down Syndrome! Or did I not have Down Syndrome? Oh ya, I am also rude?

Man, it is hard to live up to your standards.

So anyway, this thread was supposed to be about whether CAPITALISM (bump ba bah!!) made America Great?

An interesting bit of trivia in that direction is that the first rebellion against the government was centered around Pittsburgh Pa. in 1794. The rebellious bunch modeled themselves on the Tea Party (of revolutionary days not the ultraconservative lackeys of Karl Rove we find today in America). The rebels complained of absentee landlords (interestingly, one of the largest absentee landlords in that area was none other than the President himself, a Mr. George Washington). The complaint, the landlords were taking to much given the economic conditions in that area at the time and that they were unapproachable when it came to building a working economic situation (they all lived in big houses on the other side of the mountains). The rebels also complained of an unfair tax structure that favored the rich. This provoked Al Hamilton who had developed the American Capitalism to favor the rich so they could be successful and trickle down on everybody.

Now here is a paradox:

George and Al used the Constitution to justify their claims of authority over the "Tea Party" and their grievances basically telling them it is a rich man's world and if they want a voice, get rich!

Well, I find it a paradox given politics as we know it today!


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 7:50 am
  

User avatar
Senior ArloNetizen

Joined: Mar 15, 2012
Posts: 408
The question is did this thread evolve from smoking crack, or does one have to smoke crack to follow the thinking behind this thread and the reasons for the proliferations?


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 8:25 am
  

Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Jul 17, 2010
Posts: 1375
DrCharbonneau wrote:
The question is did this thread evolve from smoking crack, or does one have to smoke crack to follow the thinking behind this thread and the reasons for the proliferations?


Like I said, I am really sorry you are not particularly good at basic chemistry. The issue is that if you establish that you don't know what you are talking about when you are inside the box then why should anybody pay attention when you go outside the box. It is not that there are misconceptions and lack of understanding when pushing the edge of the box (everybody is human) but when it is fundamental mistakes in the area of "expertise", well.

So, a toast to Al and George for putting down the rebellion (and to the excise on the dram your drinking and the constitutional clause in favor of taxing the poor more than the rich!).


          Top  
Reply with quote  
Offline
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 10:15 am
  

User avatar
Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Feb 26, 2009
Posts: 1201
The fractal fills the space. The zoom factor is variable therefore, settable. Keep staring and more and more of the same.

The funny bit is the fractal is a dynamic metaphor of regeneration.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 10:53 am
  

User avatar
Senior ArloNetizen

Joined: Mar 15, 2012
Posts: 408
heraclitis wrote:
DrCharbonneau wrote:
The question is did this thread evolve from smoking crack, or does one have to smoke crack to follow the thinking behind this thread and the reasons for the proliferations?


Like I said, I am really sorry you are not particularly good at basic chemistry. The issue is that if you establish that you don't know what you are talking about when you are inside the box then why should anybody pay attention when you go outside the box. It is not that there are misconceptions and lack of understanding when pushing the edge of the box (everybody is human) but when it is fundamental mistakes in the area of "expertise", well.

So, a toast to Al and George for putting down the rebellion (and to the excise on the dram your drinking and the constitutional clause in favor of taxing the poor more than the rich!).



Something like I said earlier: "I'm sorry you were poorly raised and turned out to be a pathological liar and OCPD victim and on top of that lack a real understanding of much of any science at all, including political science" You told everyone here that a gas is plastic.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 7:08 pm
  

Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Jul 17, 2010
Posts: 1375
DrCharbonneau wrote:
heraclitis wrote:
DrCharbonneau wrote:
The question is did this thread evolve from smoking crack, or does one have to smoke crack to follow the thinking behind this thread and the reasons for the proliferations?


Like I said, I am really sorry you are not particularly good at basic chemistry. The issue is that if you establish that you don't know what you are talking about when you are inside the box then why should anybody pay attention when you go outside the box. It is not that there are misconceptions and lack of understanding when pushing the edge of the box (everybody is human) but when it is fundamental mistakes in the area of "expertise", well.

So, a toast to Al and George for putting down the rebellion (and to the excise on the dram your drinking and the constitutional clause in favor of taxing the poor more than the rich!).



Something like I said earlier: "I'm sorry you were poorly raised and turned out to be a pathological liar and OCPD victim and on top of that lack a real understanding of much of any science at all, including political science" You told everyone here that a gas is plastic.


Wait let me get this straight,

You are saying polyethylene is not made from ethylene?


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 10:02 pm
  

User avatar
Senior ArloNetizen

Joined: Mar 15, 2012
Posts: 408
Not at all, Mr. Perfection. I'm saying ethylene is not, as you described it, a plastic monomer, it is a gas. I'm also saying that in a thread that seems to argue quite a few proliferations of the reason for this being a capitalist country, including its destruction of the atmosphere with hydrocarbons and a variety of destructive distillates, the subject of biomass energy arose when I was new to this forum. I mentioned an accidental discovery of a slow process that generates propane and one of the condensates was isopropanol in 2009, then enhanced the rate using a sequence of catalysts and a [call it a] still, rendering me with enough fuel for the 2009-2010 winter so my supplimental electric heating bill was around $10 a month. I'm saying your precious "capitalist, mainstream science rules" philosophy can continue paying hundreds of dollars a month to pump more hydrocarbons and destructive distillates into the atmosphere and stay in denial that sometimes maverick innovation triumphs. I don't care. The planet is already ruined beyond the point of no return and it isn't my philosophy that ruined it. It's yours.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 10:38 pm
  

User avatar
Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Jul 06, 2008
Posts: 2531
Images: 2
Location: Crawfordville, Florida
DrCharbonneau wrote:
I don't care. The planet is already ruined beyond the point of no return and it isn't my philosophy that ruined it. It's yours.


If you don't care, why bother........with anything? I don't want to speak for others, but I feel comfortable saying that "we" do care. And I strongly disagree with your statement "The planet is already ruined beyond the point of no return....." - you, to your own detriment, greatly underestimate the planet's (and our) enormous capacity for resilience. No argument that things aren't looking so good at present, and that if we don't change our destructive behaviors relatively soon we will pay a high price for our arrogance, greed and selfishness.
I am almost hesitant to ask, but what the hell - could you clarify what you mean by your last statement: "and it isn't my philosophy that ruined it. It's yours." ??? :?


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 11:10 pm
  

User avatar
Senior ArloNetizen

Joined: Mar 15, 2012
Posts: 408
nortonkevin wrote:
DrCharbonneau wrote:
I don't care. The planet is already ruined beyond the point of no return and it isn't my philosophy that ruined it. It's yours.


If you don't care, why bother........with anything? I don't want to speak for others, but I feel comfortable saying that "we" do care. And I strongly disagree with your statement "The planet is already ruined beyond the point of no return....." - you, to your own detriment, greatly underestimate the planet's (and our) enormous capacity for resilience. No argument that things aren't looking so good at present, and that if we don't change our destructive behaviors relatively soon we will pay a high price for our arrogance, greed and selfishness.
I am almost hesitant to ask, but what the hell - could you clarify what you mean by your last statement: "and it isn't my philosophy that ruined it. It's yours." ??? :?



I was actually replying to Heraculis in a cynical manner because I've tried to fit in and he's only shown me mockery while "honkin' and hollerin'" about his great understanding of mainsteam science. As for the planet being ruined, it's been ruined by the mainstream scientific and atheist communities arguing against the mainstream theist communities, while making terabucks off the poor schmucks in life that turn the grinding wheels of self destruction because they are too cowardly to rise up and take back the planet. Well, there's another force at work that's going to take it back regardless. We refer to as Mother Nature. All the kings horsepower and all the kings atomic bombs can't roll back the inertia of a planet composed of trillions of trillions of tons in lockstep with a star 382,000 times that mass. All anyone can do now is take up a new way in a lifeboat big enough to withstand the cataclysm. I designed some. Offered to build them. I even offered to take Arlo's church and make the entire chunk of land it sits on into a "Richie Sowa" style island. Has anyone even looked into that and asked question one? Nottagotta.

You can actually sit at that machine and type out a claim that you care? My detriment? I don't want to know what you've been smoking, because it isn't mama nature's idea of a good time.

You asked.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 11:51 pm
  

User avatar
Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Jul 06, 2008
Posts: 2531
Images: 2
Location: Crawfordville, Florida
DrCharbonneau wrote:
All anyone can do now is take up a new way in a lifeboat big enough to withstand the cataclysm. I designed some. Offered to build them. I even offered to take Arlo's church and make the entire chunk of land it sits on into a "Richie Sowa" style island. Has anyone even looked into that and asked question one? Nottagotta.
I don't want to know what you've been smoking


Doc, you've got a lot of dang gall asking me what I've been smoking after what you just wrote up there. I mean, I mean.......you've figured out how to save the chosen (and apparantly choose the chosen) from "The Cataclysm" :shock: - So you're offended cuz Arlo hasn't jumped at your gracious and magnanimous offer to miracle the church into Fantasy Island and float it away - dirt, railroad tracks and all on some kind of deluvial survival cruise? Really Doc, you crack me up!!! :lol: It would be kinda sad if it wasn't so freakin' funny!!! What I've been smokin'? :lol:


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2012 5:49 am
  

Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Jul 17, 2010
Posts: 1375
DrCharbonneau wrote:
Not at all, Mr. Perfection. I'm saying ethylene is not, as you described it, a plastic monomer, it is a gas.


Monomer
The ingredient or monomer is ethylene (IUPAC name ethene). It has the formula C2H4, consisting of a pair of CH2 groups connected by a double bond, thus:

Because the catalysts are highly reactive, the ethylene must be of high purity. Typical specifications are <5 ppm for water, oxygen, as well as other alkenes. Acceptable contaminants include N2, ethane (common precursor to ethylene), and methane. Ethylene is usually produced from petrochemical sources, but also is generated by dehydration of ethanol.[3]
[edit]Polymerisation
Ethylene is a rather stable molecule that polymerizes only upon contact with catalysts. The conversion is highly exothermic, that is the process releases a lot of heat. Coordination polymerization is the most pervasive technology, which means that metal chlorides or metal oxides are used. The most common catalysts consist of titanium(III) chloride, the so-called Ziegler-Natta catalysts. Another common catalyst is the Phillips catalyst, prepared by depositing chromium(VI) oxide on silica.[3]Kenneth S. Whiteley,T. Geoffrey Heggs, Hartmut Koch, Ralph L. Mawer, Wolfgang Immel, "Polyolefins" in Ullmann's Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry 2005, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim. doi:10.1002/14356007.a21_487</ref> Ethylene can be produced through radical polymerization, but this route is only limited utility and typically requires high pressure apparatus.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2012 5:56 am
  

Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Jul 17, 2010
Posts: 1375
DrCharbonneau wrote:
I mentioned an accidental discovery of a slow process that generates propane and one of the condensates was isopropanol in 2009, then enhanced the rate using a sequence of catalysts and a [call it a] still, rendering me with enough fuel for the 2009-2010 winter so my supplimental electric heating bill was around $10 a month. I'm saying your precious "capitalist, mainstream science rules" philosophy can continue paying hundreds of dollars a month to pump more hydrocarbons and destructive distillates into the atmosphere and stay in denial that sometimes maverick innovation triumphs. I don't care. The planet is already ruined beyond the point of no return and it isn't my philosophy that ruined it. It's yours.


I asked a few simple questions about your accidental discovery and I got a lot of BS from somebody who obviously does not understand basic chemistry, so what am I supposed to believe? You couldn't answer a few basic questions and you accuse me of ruining the planet?


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2012 6:02 am
  

Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Jul 17, 2010
Posts: 1375
DrCharbonneau wrote:
As for the planet being ruined, it's been ruined by the mainstream scientific and atheist communities arguing against the mainstream theist communities,


Oh, got it, a god nut....


          Top  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2012 9:09 am
  

User avatar
Senior ArloNetizen

Joined: Mar 15, 2012
Posts: 408
heraclitis wrote:
DrCharbonneau wrote:
Not at all, Mr. Perfection. I'm saying ethylene is not, as you described it, a plastic monomer, it is a gas.


Monomer
The ingredient or monomer is ethylene (IUPAC name ethene). It has the formula C2H4, consisting of a pair of CH2 groups connected by a double bond, thus:

Because the catalysts are highly reactive, the ethylene must be of high purity. Typical specifications are <5 ppm for water, oxygen, as well as other alkenes. Acceptable contaminants include N2, ethane (common precursor to ethylene), and methane. Ethylene is usually produced from petrochemical sources, but also is generated by dehydration of ethanol.[3]
[edit]Polymerisation
Ethylene is a rather stable molecule that polymerizes only upon contact with catalysts. The conversion is highly exothermic, that is the process releases a lot of heat. Coordination polymerization is the most pervasive technology, which means that metal chlorides or metal oxides are used. The most common catalysts consist of titanium(III) chloride, the so-called Ziegler-Natta catalysts. Another common catalyst is the Phillips catalyst, prepared by depositing chromium(VI) oxide on silica.[3]Kenneth S. Whiteley,T. Geoffrey Heggs, Hartmut Koch, Ralph L. Mawer, Wolfgang Immel, "Polyolefins" in Ullmann's Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry 2005, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim. doi:10.1002/14356007.a21_487</ref> Ethylene can be produced through radical polymerization, but this route is only limited utility and typically requires high pressure apparatus.



(In his best Rocky the Flying Squirrel voice imitation)

Thank you, Mr. Know-it-all.

At least I won't waste any time manifesting paranoid delusions about you being some psychic looking over my shoulder or reading my mind. Since you're such a chem expert (anyone can c&p a Merck or EIC abstract) render us all a recipe for an aluminum base metalocelluloid...


          Top  
Reply with quote  
 
Post new topic Reply to topic



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group