Jump to content
Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


VonLud last won the day on August 16 2016

VonLud had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

591 Excellent


About VonLud

  • Rank
    Eternal Poster

Recent Profile Visitors

945 profile views
  1. I used to be in a club called "The White Devils". It was the Green Devils and White Tigers combined.
  2. The pic in that link is meaningless. Cathode and anode are interchangeable depending on the flow of current. As for current, if the charge carrier is electrons, like in a wire, the current flows in the opposite direction of the electrons. There is no such thing as dielectricity for dummies. No easy answers. No Mason. Edit: Way to be Rothbard!
  3. Don't get carried away. If no one responded, it would be isolated. People are compelled to respond. Raaar
  4. People leave you out to dry. Did you ever notice that? An ion is an atom or molecule stripped of electrons. Plasma consists of ions and free electrons floating along happily together with no electric charge overall. So, knowing your stance, I see that you must reconcile whether or not you choose to accept the idea that there may be, indeed, a structure known as the atom. If you choose not to believe, then the ideas of ions and plasma are in direct conflict to your previously stated opinions regarding miscellaneous thingamajigs.
  5. Rumor | 7.8 at Yellowstone??

    The Richter scale is now defunct, correct? We now use the Moment Magnitude Scale (Mw) Valvida, Chile earthquake was the largest ever recorded at 9.5 I am just trying to understand the scale of these quakes. I know that every whole number increase indicates a tenfold increase in magnitude. San Francisco 1906 - 7.8 I think that to judge scale and distance at which a quake might be felt, one must include Mercalli Intensity? I don't know much about quakes.
  6. Rumor | 7.8 at Yellowstone??

    Does a wall of lava coming towards my house count? JK
  7. NASA lied everythiung

    I don't understand morning on the moon. It only rotates/orbits every 27 days. Do you know what the position of the sun was during these films?
  8. Rumor | 7.8 at Yellowstone??

    There was 7.3 - 7.5 there in 1959.
  9. The White Dawn

    "In 1896, three whalers are stranded in the Arctic North Canada and seek refuge with an Eskimo tribe. Gradually they gain control with the Eskimo village and introduce gambling, booze, theft and their special variation of sex. In the beginning, the Eskimos accept it but slowly the cultural tension starts growing." http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072403/plotsummary?ref_=tt_ov_pl This is a cool movie that was on at 3 AM. Filmed in true surroundings with real Unuit camp. Igloos and everything. The best part was the scene with "The Wind Witches". My eyes popped out for two mins. Crazy footage. Try to watch it.
  10. I don't know exactly. Pick yer poison - Quarks - ha ha Leptons Electrons Neutrinos Gravitons Gluons Baryons Mesons Sparticle Slepton Gaugino Neutralino Axions Tachyons (all above are fermions VonLudions or bosons)
  11. I understand it fine. But, it is still a numerical representation of observed or predicted phenomena. Atomic mass was not first calculated by weighing an atom, which is not only impossible but not very useful due to the fact that different isotopes of the same element have different mass. At this point, the "mass" of all the elements is computed as a relationship to Carbon-12. It wasn't always this way, and the numbers they use, while not completely arbitrary, could be changed to suit the state of the science at a given time. The same goes for atomic number. They didn't get that number by counting the number of protons in an atom. The atomic number changed to proton count after they finally "discovered" the neutron. The neutron wasn't seen, is was postulated due to the discrepancy between the number of protons and electrons thought to be in an element and the element's actual mass. You see, they (Rutherford) made up a particle to explain faulty results, and then others designed experiments to find this particle. None of these things have been directly observed, only indirectly detected through experimentation. That doesn't mean the science doesn't work or is B.S. or whatever. You might think that The Large Hadron Collider was designed to open the gates of Hell, but it is just another experiment testing theories in particle physics, because they still don't have the answers they want.
  12. I agree. It coincides with what we were talking about with solipsism. A single individual cannot even prove that anything exists outside his own consciousness. So, then it becomes child's-play to destroy any argument on the basis that it is non-demonstrable. This could be considered to only apply to things that are beyond our direct observation, depending on your particular bent. Call it reductio ad infinitum. Fractaly speaking, of course.
  13. What is different

    I am pro-jew, pro-gay and I love the gov. But, I can look past your shortcomings, and not judge you. Shalom.
  14. You can describe and predict the behavior and outcomes in chemical reactions. But you can't prove the theory behind the fundamental underlying mechanisms at the molecular level.
  15. "Jump To Top" button again, please.
  1. Jump To Top