Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Is a Coulomb dimensionless?

J

John Fields

Jan 1, 1970
0
I neither know, nor care, how a "law" that defines any amount of weight
as a unit of mass was made, and pursuing the details of that misguided
legislation is something I'm not interested in doing because no amount
of legislation can make a pound a unit of mass. Ergo, why should I care
which fucking idiot declared that the Earth was flat or that the moon
was made out of green cheese and which group of fucking morons went
along with it?

Let's just look at who fits John Fields'various classes of people:

Intelligent people:

John Fields

.... [don't think he's mentioned anyone else, other than vague terms
like some unidentified "people in this newsgroup"--GN]

---
There's no need to single them out, since they already know who they
are.
---
Then there's the other class in the Fields taxonomy:

"Fucking idiot" and "groups of fucking morons":
=================================================

Gene Nygaard, naturally


---
Naturally. I'm glad you agree.
---

 
G

Gene Nygaard

Jan 1, 1970
0
I read in sci.electronics.design that Gene Nygaard <[email protected]>


I disagree. You are just one big, bigoted bore. Just dry up!

Oh, quit your whining about not being included in the same category as
John Fields in my list; he remains alone, so far.

You don't belong there, and you know it.

You also aren't good enough to fit in with me and all the others I
named listed in the Fields category of "fucking idiots or groups of
fucking morons."

You fall into your own category (we could likely add a few more from
this newsgroup to give you some company):

DISHONEST LYING BASTARDS
------------------------

John Woodgate

You see, you know that John Fields is flatout wrong. Yet you won't
jump in and tell him to pull his head out of his ass, not on the
public forum and not in a private email.

It is the dishonest fools like you who have needlessly prolonged this
discussion long after it should have ended.

You likely understood the explanation about the use of pounds in
physics as units of mass from Sears and Zemansky even without my "slow
learner" comments in the original posting. You didn't need the repeat
version of it, and you certainly didn't need the third "super
bonehead" version of it.

How do I know that? Well, for one thing, you've told us that on other
newsgroups. For example, way back on 3 Aug 1999 John Woodgate
[then-undisguised addy omitted] wrote on alt.french and
sci.lang.translation:
If you are going to be a pedant, the first thing to do is
to get your facts right.
The pound and slug are both units of mass, in different
systems of units. With the pound mass goes the poundal
as the unit of force. With the slug goes the pound force.
Message-ID: <[email protected]>#1/1
[anyone who wants to check on this can put this into the search engine
at Google Groups to retrieve the message]

Maybe you don't like the way I've been pointing out the repeated
errors of John Fields. What you should keep in mind is that this
shouldn't prevent you from pointing them out in you own way.

So why don't you try to explain it to him nicely and politely? See if
you can be more successful than I have been. I'd love to see how long
it takes you to figure out that what we are dealing with here truly is
one of the dumbest critters ever to inhabit the planet.

Gene Nygaard
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Gene_Nygaard/
 
Top