🚀 go-pugleaf

hmmmm........I think it is called intention,  a forceful "push" of intent.
and who is next door?



holog





foolsrushin. wrote:

> On 14 Aug, 00:38, holog <ho...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> 
>>hmmmm,    wasn't expecting a troll response,  in the infamous formula
>>e=mc(squared) time is taken for granted. i.e.  speed=distance/time.
>>what exactly is time?  obviously it is the limit at which photons
>>travel, but is that an exact measurement? the density of the medium
>>obviously plays a role in this.
>>ok here is the hard part,   density assumes there is mass, and mass has
>>a field effect...........ok your turn explain the rest.
>>holog
>>n...@bid.nes wrote:
>>
>>>On Aug 11, 3:42 pm, holog <ho...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>n...@bid.nes wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Aug 8, 11:07 pm, Osmium <Rusht...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Aug 8, 11:03 pm, "n...@bid.nes" <Alien8...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Aug 8, 6:47 pm, Mitch Raemsch <mitch.nicolas.raem...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Time. Geometry. Energy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>An actual "formula" would relate those elements with mathematical
>>>>>>>"operators", "functions",  "relations" and such; you may be familiar
>>>>>>>with the simpler ones like "plus", "minus", and "equals" for instance.
>>>>>>>Try adding some to your words above to see if you can write an
>>>>>>>actual "formula".
>>>>>>>Mark L. Fergerson
>>>>>>
>>>>>>(Energy)(Time)=Geometry
>>>>>
>>>>> Fails dimensional analysis, but is still an infinite improvement.
>>>>
>>>>isn't it energy = (mass) x (time)?
>>>
>>>  Grading your troll on a scale of one-to-ten with (Mitch's being a
>>>ten solely for comparison purposes in this exercise), I give you a
>>>four point five. Your troll score was lower than his because you
>>>demonstrate a familiarity with not only basic mathematics (you know
>>>how to construct an equation) but also with Dimensional Analysis.
>>>  I'd have given you a lower score but the sheer innocence of the way
>>>you phrased your question was disarming enough to get you several
>>>bonus points.
>>>  Anyway, for those truly interested, here's a brief introduction to
>>>Dimensional Analysis using commonly understandable quantities:
>>>http://www.chaosmatrix.org/library/humor/equation.html
>>>  Mark L. Fergerson
> 
> 
> Suppose there are almost ultimately only 'ideas', massless but
> purposeful,
> upper-dimesional, yet, by thinking, able to acquire and use mass in 3D
> +1+2, etc. Suppose, also, they are next door!
> 
> http://groups.google.co.uk/group/rec.org.mensa/browse_thread/thread/1b6a730270cf0677/896328a7222e97e1?hl=en&lnk=gst&q=silos+missiles+shut+down#896328a7222e97e1
> --
> foolsrushin.
> 
> 
> 
>