Posted on 08/12/2025 3:12:31 PM PDT by fruser1
Fear Not.
Rumors abound that Elon’s SpaceX is going to board the bitches and highjack their rock, parking it in near mars orbit.
Pencil-head, attention-freak, phony-baloney, plastic-banana, pie-eyed, douche-bagging 'Hahvahd' piece of schnorrer shit.
Put Raving Loebnatic into a Crew Dragon so he can make personal contact with this piece of rock, and then aim his Crew Dragon on a course straight into the sun.
I am sorry, I should have been more clear, and shouldn’t have been so defensive. I was not objecting to your explanation. The reasoning I read was different. Some astromoners, from studying the Kiuper Belt, and observations of nearby sun-like stars, reasoned that the solar system is passing through debris ejected from nearby solar systems. The made a rough estimate of the number and sizes of the members of that population of such matter within the orbit of Neptune.
It appears you are saying that another possible view is that given the number and size of such objects we have observed one can make a similar rough estimate of the population. From your tone, it appears that you object to such speculation. I do not, provided that it is clearly labeled as “speculation” a.k.a an “educated guess”. So long as the guesser does not demand billions of taxpayer dollars to verify his guess because “Science”.
Maxwell’s equations
—
Are you referring to James Clerk Maxwell original field equations [ his 200 quaternions ] or to the vector equations conjured up by Oliver Heaviside?
Although aside from the Electric Universe theories, I fail to see what unified the theories of electricity and magnetism have to do with stellar body types ans number. An explanation on this point would be helpful.
You seemed to be critical of “scientific theories”. The difference among theories is the degree of verification.
Not critical just skeptical but please tell me where Maxwell fits in
An example. I thought it was obvious.
We are the Borg
Resistance is Futile
you keep avoiding giving an answer - am i to believe you are talking through your hat?
You are not paying attention, or deliberating being obtuse.
So you utter failure to answer my simple question means that all your comments are nothing more that you talking through your hat, making it up as you go.
End
Okay, if you say so. I don’t know what specific question I failed to answer. I made an offhand remark about something I read weeks ago, and you attacked the the conclusions about some supposed hypothesis you attached to the observations. I tried to explain that the article was not based on your assumptions, and you became beligerent and offensive. If you will PLEASE state a simple question I will attempt to answer it. I am not asking you to agree, just state a “simple question”.
I had gotten the impression that you were attacking the very concept of a scientific theory. I find your comments incoherent, rambling, and pointlessly hostile. I have tried to remain civil, you might try to reciprocate.
The specific question was your comment about Maxwell and how his equations dealing with electricity and magnetism fit in with the subject at hand.
—
Quote: Maxwell’s equations, and General Relativity are theories, supported by statistical inference from countless experiments and experience. The inferences about the number of interstellar objects is much weaker, but not ridiculous. Until we have more evidence, and with the more sensitive sensors that should be available in the near future we will. In the meantime, we should to keep an open mind, agreed.
—
If you continue to obfuscate, then you are just trolling.
If your most resent reply is supposed to contain a simple question, I missed it. It was simply continued beligerence. You claimed that I failed to answer a simple question. I claim that I do not know what your question is. I do not mean to obfuscate, but honestly, I do not know what your question is.
If your question was
“What does maxwell’s equation have to do with it?”
I answered:
“As an example, I thought that that was obvious.”
You had raised what I took to be beligerent objections to “theories”, which struck me as infantile. I thought that you might accept that Maxwell’s Equations as an expression of a scientific theory that is both widely accepted, and useful.
I answered: “As an example, I thought that that was obvious.”
—
‘Obvious’ is not a specific answer. So try again.
“Maxwell’s Equations as an expression of a scientific theory that is both widely accepted, and useful.”
From that answer you show you have little knowledge of who Maxwell was and what he originally postulated, nor the faintest idea how Heaviside change his equations - which can be fairly said are actually Heaviside’s, since they are not even the same sort of equation, nor have anything to do with the original postulate.
You missed that all-important word “example”, which I take to be specific. You are being deliberately obtuse and it’s obnoxious, not clever.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.