Initialy I was sceptical the theory that Arindam and bertietaylor were
the same person. However, see this (from yesterday):

From: bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (bertietaylor)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: Where have all the sneerers gone...
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2024 23:11:59 +0000
palsing wrote:

>Banjo Boy, you are still completely ignorant regarding physics. Too
bad you >figured out how to post without the Google Groups crutch...

Pung! Thus unbungs Alsing's head from its personal black hole. Same old
output, though, time had stopped for it.
Cheers, Alsing. Keep well.
Arindam

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 37 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

On 15/04/24 20:20, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> Initialy I was sceptical the theory that Arindam and bertietaylor were
> the same person. However, see this (from yesterday):
>
>
> From: bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (bertietaylor)
> Newsgroups: sci.physics
> Subject: Re: Where have all the sneerers gone...
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2024 23:11:59 +0000
>
> palsing wrote:
>
>> Banjo Boy, you are still completely ignorant regarding physics. Too
> bad you >figured out how to post without the Google Groups crutch...
>
> Pung! Thus unbungs Alsing's head from its personal black hole. Same old
> output, though, time had stopped for it.
> Cheers, Alsing. Keep well.
> Arindam

Well spotted. I didn't think they were the same person either, but I was
struggling to understand why bertie seemed so gullible.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

* Peter Moylan <uvj5f3$941e$1@dont-email.me> :
Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 22:10:10 +1000:
> On 15/04/24 20:20, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>> Initialy I was sceptical the theory that Arindam and bertietaylor were
>> the same person. However, see this (from yesterday):
>> From: bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (bertietaylor)
>> Newsgroups: sci.physics
>> Subject: Re: Where have all the sneerers gone...
>> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2024 23:11:59 +0000
> Well spotted. I didn't think they were the same person either, but I was
> struggling to understand why bertie seemed so gullible.

Look whose calling who gullible

On 15/04/2024 12:20, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> Initialy I was sceptical the theory that Arindam and bertietaylor were
> the same person. However, see this (from yesterday):
>
>
>     From:    bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (bertietaylor)
>     Newsgroups:    sci.physics
>     Subject:    Re: Where have all the sneerers gone...
>     Date:    Sun, 14 Apr 2024 23:11:59 +0000
>     
> palsing wrote:
>
>> Banjo Boy, you are still completely ignorant regarding physics. Too
> bad you >figured out how to post without the Google Groups crutch...
>
> Pung! Thus unbungs Alsing's head from its personal black hole. Same old
> output, though, time had stopped for it.
> Cheers, Alsing. Keep well.
> Arindam
>

Hmm. Still sceptical.

Can you confirm that the 'bertie taylor' post is
coming via NemoWeb (as reported by Jan?) Here in AUE he posts through a
web service called 'Rocksolid Light'.

occam <occam@nowhere.nix> wrote:

> On 15/04/2024 12:20, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> > Initialy I was sceptical the theory that Arindam and bertietaylor were
> > the same person. However, see this (from yesterday):
> >
> >
> > From: bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (bertietaylor)
> > Newsgroups: sci.physics
> > Subject: Re: Where have all the sneerers gone...
> > Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2024 23:11:59 +0000
> >
> > palsing wrote:
> >
> >> Banjo Boy, you are still completely ignorant regarding physics. Too
> > bad you >figured out how to post without the Google Groups crutch...
> >
> > Pung! Thus unbungs Alsing's head from its personal black hole. Same old
> > output, though, time had stopped for it.
> > Cheers, Alsing. Keep well.
> > Arindam
> >
>
> Hmm. Still sceptical.
>
> Can you confirm that the 'bertie taylor' post is
> coming via NemoWeb (as reported by Jan?) Here in AUE he posts through a
> web service called 'Rocksolid Light'.
>

Any troll who's won his spurs will have a variety of means by which
to post. It's 'Trolling for Newbies 101' and not at all difficult.

A small plea: when referring to a post made in another group, it's
very helpful to include the Message-ID for use in Howard Knight's
valuable Usenet lookup service: <http://al.howardknight.net/>

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator

My pet rock Gordon just is.

* occam <l84r7sFt18mU1@mid.individual.net> :
Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:17:31 +0200:
> Hmm. Still sceptical.

face it. you were all had. you underestimated the effectiveness of the
jesuit education and assumed incapacity of dissimulation.

(i recognized the wodehouse fan for bertie but didn't get further on
where taylor came from)

On 2024-04-15 16:33:56 +0000, Madhu said:

> * occam <l84r7sFt18mU1@mid.individual.net> :
> Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:17:31 +0200:
>> Hmm. Still sceptical.
>
> face it. you were all had. you underestimated the effectiveness of the
> jesuit education and assumed incapacity of dissimulation.

Had by whom? And for what purpose? What would the point have been?
>
> (i recognized the wodehouse fan for bertie but didn't get further on
> where taylor came from)

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 37 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

On 15/04/2024 18:03, Madhu wrote:
> * occam <l84r7sFt18mU1@mid.individual.net> :
> Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:17:31 +0200:
>> Hmm. Still sceptical.
>
> face it. you were all had. you underestimated the effectiveness of the
> jesuit education

Clearly Jesuits are as shit at teaching physics as Bertie is at string
theory.

> and assumed incapacity of dissimulation.
>
> (i recognized the wodehouse fan for bertie

....and that is your rationale for equating one idiot to another?

Listen cupcake, how about you stick to what you know. Bible references
and Jesuit voodoo.

> but didn't get further on
> where taylor came from)
>
>

On 15-Apr-24 21:26, occam wrote:
> On 15/04/2024 18:03, Madhu wrote:
>> * occam <l84r7sFt18mU1@mid.individual.net> :
>> Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:17:31 +0200:
>>> Hmm. Still sceptical.
>>
>> face it. you were all had. you underestimated the effectiveness of the
>> jesuit education
>
> Clearly Jesuits are as shit at teaching physics as Bertie is at string
> theory.
>
>
>> and assumed incapacity of dissimulation.
>>
>> (i recognized the wodehouse fan for bertie
>
> ...and that is your rationale for equating one idiot to another?
>
> Listen cupcake, how about you stick to what you know. Bible references
> and Jesuit voodoo.
>
>> but didn't get further on
>> where taylor came from)

No no. He's on to something here.

"Bertie" _must_ be a reference to Wodehouse - in the same way that
"John" must be a New Testament reference.

--
Sam Plusnet

* Athel Cornish-Bowden <l85558FufviU1@mid.individual.net> :
Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:07:06 +0200:
> On 2024-04-15 16:33:56 +0000, Madhu said:
>> * occam <l84r7sFt18mU1@mid.individual.net> :
>> Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:17:31 +0200:
>>> Hmm. Still sceptical.
>> face it. you were all had. you underestimated the effectiveness of
>> the
>> jesuit education and assumed incapacity of dissimulation.
>
> Had by whom? And for what purpose? What would the point have been?

Had by Arindam and his sock puppet. the point is to make you look like
fools, and he succeeded brilliantly.

>> (i recognized the wodehouse fan for bertie but didn't get further on
>> where taylor came from)

On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:57:12 +0100, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

>On 15-Apr-24 21:26, occam wrote:
>> On 15/04/2024 18:03, Madhu wrote:
>>> * occam <l84r7sFt18mU1@mid.individual.net> :
>>> Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:17:31 +0200:
>>>> Hmm. Still sceptical.
>>>
>>> face it. you were all had. you underestimated the effectiveness of the
>>> jesuit education
>>
>> Clearly Jesuits are as shit at teaching physics as Bertie is at string
>> theory.
>>
>>
>>> and assumed incapacity of dissimulation.
>>>
>>> (i recognized the wodehouse fan for bertie
>>
>> ...and that is your rationale for equating one idiot to another?
>>
>> Listen cupcake, how about you stick to what you know. Bible references
>> and Jesuit voodoo.
>>
>>> but didn't get further on
>>> where taylor came from)
>
>No no. He's on to something here.
>
>"Bertie" _must_ be a reference to Wodehouse

Not Edward VII? Known as "Dirty Bertie"

https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/life/476490/Dirtie-Bertie-the-Royal-PLAYBOY-who-took-Paris-by-storm

On 2024-04-15 16:33:56 +0000, Madhu said:

> * occam <l84r7sFt18mU1@mid.individual.net> :
> Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:17:31 +0200:
>> Hmm. Still sceptical.
>
> face it. you were all had. you underestimated the effectiveness of the
> jesuit education and assumed incapacity of dissimulation.
>
> (i recognized the wodehouse fan for bertie but didn't get further on
> where taylor came from)

Why should it have any connection wth Bertie Wooster? There are a great
many real people known as Bertie, some them very well known?

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 37 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

In article <m38r1em6rn.fsf@leonis4.robolove.meer.net>,
enometh@meer.net says...
>
> * Athel Cornish-Bowden <l85558FufviU1@mid.individual.net> :
> Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:07:06 +0200:
> > On 2024-04-15 16:33:56 +0000, Madhu said:
> >> * occam <l84r7sFt18mU1@mid.individual.net> :
> >> Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:17:31 +0200:
> >>> Hmm. Still sceptical.
> >> face it. you were all had. you underestimated the effectiveness of
> >> the
> >> jesuit education and assumed incapacity of dissimulation.
> >
> > Had by whom? And for what purpose? What would the point have been?
>
> Had by Arindam and his sock puppet. the point is to make you look like
> fools, and he succeeded brilliantly.

Bertie's English suggests a native speaker; Arindaram's
never did.

Janet.

On 16/04/24 18:50, Janet wrote:
> In article <m38r1em6rn.fsf@leonis4.robolove.meer.net>,
> enometh@meer.net says...
>>
>> * Athel Cornish-Bowden <l85558FufviU1@mid.individual.net> : Wrote
>> on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:07:06 +0200:
>>> On 2024-04-15 16:33:56 +0000, Madhu said:
>>>> * occam <l84r7sFt18mU1@mid.individual.net> : Wrote on Mon, 15
>>>> Apr 2024 16:17:31 +0200:

>>>>> Hmm. Still sceptical.
>>>> face it. you were all had. you underestimated the
>>>> effectiveness of the jesuit education and assumed incapacity
>>>> of dissimulation.
>>>
>>> Had by whom? And for what purpose? What would the point have
>>> been?
>>
>> Had by Arindam and his sock puppet. the point is to make you look
>> like fools, and he succeeded brilliantly.
>
> Bertie's English suggests a native speaker; Arindaram's never did.

Precisely. Arindam deserves some credit for successfully imitating two
different dialects. That's what fooled us. To do it, though, required
setting up bertie as a bit of an idiot. In some ways, he was straight
out of Wodehouse.

To me, as an electrical engineer, there was something strange about the
bertie persona. On the one hand, it was clear that he had to be an EE.
On the other, it's hard to understand how anyone could get an EE degree
while still displaying gross ignorance about some basic physics. (For
example, asserting that a gravitational field could propagate with zero
time delay.) It suggested that his degree was from one of those shonky
places that skimp on physics education.

Long ago, one of my jobs was assessing qualifications of foreign
graduates. If I still had that job, I would be looking much more
carefully at IIT.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

On 16/04/24 06:26, occam wrote:
> On 15/04/2024 18:03, Madhu wrote:
>> * occam <l84r7sFt18mU1@mid.individual.net> : Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr
>> 2024 16:17:31 +0200:
>>> Hmm. Still sceptical.
>>
>> face it. you were all had. you underestimated the effectiveness of
>> the jesuit education
>
> Clearly Jesuits are as shit at teaching physics as Bertie is at
> string theory.

Jesuits are an interesting bunch. I lived for four years in a Jesuit-run
college, so got some insight into their thinking. They are very much
oriented towards teaching, and that makes them the intellectuals among
the Catholic religious orders. In the past they have created
universities and colleges. In the colonial era, they helped to reduce
the oppression of the conquerors. Of course they were also interested in
propagating their religion, but that's true of all of Christianity.

In terms of scholarship and research, their main contributions have
naturally been in theology and the humanities (with some significant
contributions to linguistics). There have, however, been Jesuit
physicists, some of whom have made important contributions to physics.
And we should not forget Roger Bacon (not a Jesuit, but only because
Jesuits did not exist at the time), who has some claim to being the
first modern scientist.

None of this, of course, excludes the possibility that the person who
taught bertie physics was an incompetent.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

On 2024-04-16, Peter Moylan wrote:

> On 16/04/24 06:26, occam wrote:
>> On 15/04/2024 18:03, Madhu wrote:
>>> * occam <l84r7sFt18mU1@mid.individual.net> : Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr
>>> 2024 16:17:31 +0200:
>>>> Hmm. Still sceptical.
>>>
>>> face it. you were all had. you underestimated the effectiveness of
>>> the jesuit education
>>
>> Clearly Jesuits are as shit at teaching physics as Bertie is at
>> string theory.
>
> Jesuits are an interesting bunch. I lived for four years in a Jesuit-run
> college, so got some insight into their thinking. They are very much
> oriented towards teaching, and that makes them the intellectuals among
> the Catholic religious orders. In the past they have created
> universities and colleges. In the colonial era, they helped to reduce
> the oppression of the conquerors. Of course they were also interested in
> propagating their religion, but that's true of all of Christianity.

I can't find this now, but ISTR reading somewhere that the Jesuit
missionaries in Japan said locals did not have to give up Shinto if
they converted to Christianity because Shinto wasn't a religion as
such. (And the other RC missionary order in Japan at the time
disagreed.)

> In terms of scholarship and research, their main contributions have
> naturally been in theology and the humanities (with some significant
> contributions to linguistics). There have, however, been Jesuit
> physicists, some of whom have made important contributions to physics.
> And we should not forget Roger Bacon (not a Jesuit, but only because
> Jesuits did not exist at the time), who has some claim to being the
> first modern scientist.
>
> None of this, of course, excludes the possibility that the person who
> taught bertie physics was an incompetent.
>

--
And awful things are happening: we've let this drama fold,
and now the time has come at last to crush the motif of the rose.

On 16-Apr-24 4:29, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:57:12 +0100, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>
>> On 15-Apr-24 21:26, occam wrote:
>>> On 15/04/2024 18:03, Madhu wrote:
>>>> * occam <l84r7sFt18mU1@mid.individual.net> :
>>>> Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:17:31 +0200:
>>>>> Hmm. Still sceptical.
>>>>
>>>> face it. you were all had. you underestimated the effectiveness of the
>>>> jesuit education
>>>
>>> Clearly Jesuits are as shit at teaching physics as Bertie is at string
>>> theory.
>>>
>>>
>>>> and assumed incapacity of dissimulation.
>>>>
>>>> (i recognized the wodehouse fan for bertie
>>>
>>> ...and that is your rationale for equating one idiot to another?
>>>
>>> Listen cupcake, how about you stick to what you know. Bible references
>>> and Jesuit voodoo.
>>>
>>>> but didn't get further on
>>>> where taylor came from)
>>
>> No no. He's on to something here.
>>
>> "Bertie" _must_ be a reference to Wodehouse
>
> Not Edward VII? Known as "Dirty Bertie"

We have been assured that it can only be a Wodehouse reference. To
disagree implies that the original author is an idiot.

--
Sam Plusnet

It needed a fellow doggie to sniff that out!
WOOF WOOF

bt

Madhu wrote:

> * Peter Moylan <uvj5f3$941e$1@dont-email.me> :
> Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 22:10:10 +1000:
>> On 15/04/24 20:20, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>>> Initialy I was sceptical the theory that Arindam and bertietaylor were
>>> the same person. However, see this (from yesterday):
>>> From: bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (bertietaylor)
>>> Newsgroups: sci.physics
>>> Subject: Re: Where have all the sneerers gone...
>>> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2024 23:11:59 +0000
>> Well spotted. I didn't think they were the same person either, but I was
>> struggling to understand why bertie seemed so gullible.

> Look whose calling who gullible

Nah, as Arindam (amiable, serene brontosaurus) brushes past their impressive mounds, named Oxford, Harvard, etc. trying not to harm them, the little blind ones make the huge rackety sound of "Dunning Kluger! Dunning Kluger!"

Metaphorically speaking, of course.

bt

Madhu wrote:

> * occam <l84r7sFt18mU1@mid.individual.net> :
> Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:17:31 +0200:
>> Hmm. Still sceptical.

> face it. you were all had. you underestimated the effectiveness of the
> jesuit education and assumed incapacity of dissimulation.

> (i recognized the wodehouse fan for bertie but didn't get further on
> where taylor came from)

Partly correct.
Allow me to introduce ourselves.
Yes, one of us was indeed named Bertram Wilberforce Wooster, a favourite character of Arindam.
That became Bertie, of course.
Sometimes latnised to Bertius Bowus Wowus. (Note the aristocratic Roman 3-word formation).
To the kids, Bertiedoggie.

Now then, what am I, Bertie, doing here?

To defend Arindam, as any good doggie of his should, so what if I died long ago. I am here to tell what I do know about the BigDog. And to start the scandal that Arindam's dogs know better physics than the Nobel Prize winners of Physics.

I mean, I was there back in 1998 when he discovered the formula e=0.5mVVN(N-k) which was an alternative to the infamous e=mcc.

I was at his feet when he write the book "To the Stars!" in 1999, and I am so glad to say that I was mentioned in that book! Yes, indeed. And I was also at his feet when that was published in his adda webiste in 2000. Yes, that website did contain my photograph.

I was there when he did his first internal force experiemnts, trying to move a raft in water - mechanically - without pushing anything back. A failure that, but I am glad to say that my spirit was with him when he finally succeeded in 2015. By that time he had learnt that with electrical methods had to be adopted instead of anything mechanical, for violating inertia.

Now, of course, with his latest railgun-based motor, that could go on and on in free space, he has clearly demonstrated how fundamentally correct he had always been.

As for the Taylor bit, I was originally Tyler, one of the many rescue dogs fostered by Arindam and his pack.

Arindam is getting on, so he made Tyler Taylor.

Along with Bertie, I too deserve mention, for I led to the cure of Arindam from an ongoing illness and the remedy for that illness may even have saved the MediumDog's life.

But that is another story, not the world seems to care.

Woof-woof for now,

bt

occam wrote:

> On 15/04/2024 18:03, Madhu wrote:
>> * occam <l84r7sFt18mU1@mid.individual.net> :
>> Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:17:31 +0200:
>>> Hmm. Still sceptical.
>>
>> face it. you were all had. you underestimated the effectiveness of the
>> jesuit education

> Clearly Jesuits are as shit at teaching physics as Bertie is at string
> theory.

Bertie invented the spring theory.
That is:
Springs connect strings.
ie assuming matter is strings.

To learn further, about the cause of gravity and the ways of the universe, read up our master Arindam's papers on the cause of gravity, and novas and supernovas.

****
The physics aphorisms of Arindam
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/8HgH3sbRe94/m/gYzu9OAkAgAJ

The cause of gravity
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/mmigkl3yZYc/m/8Rs16NCXAAAJ

Explaining the nova and supernova phenomena with new physics theories - 1
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/6UIGDNHH7n0/m/U0t-kYqgAAAJ

Explaining the nova and supernova phenomena with new physics theories - 2
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/CffbGTXV72c/m/5ONP6J6gAAAJ

woof-woof

bt

Madhu wrote:

> * Athel Cornish-Bowden <l85558FufviU1@mid.individual.net> :
> Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:07:06 +0200:
>> On 2024-04-15 16:33:56 +0000, Madhu said:
>>> * occam <l84r7sFt18mU1@mid.individual.net> :
>>> Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:17:31 +0200:
>>>> Hmm. Still sceptical.
>>> face it. you were all had. you underestimated the effectiveness of
>>> the
>>> jesuit education and assumed incapacity of dissimulation.
>>
>> Had by whom? And for what purpose? What would the point have been?

> Had by Arindam and his sock puppet. the point is to make you look like
> fools, and he succeeded brilliantly.

Thanks! Thanks! Thanks!
Heh-heh-heh-heh-heh-heh-:)))))
We had a great time pulling the legs of the esteemed and pompous fools.

bt

On 15/04/2024 19:07, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2024-04-15 16:33:56 +0000, Madhu said:
>
>> * occam <l84r7sFt18mU1@mid.individual.net> :
>> Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:17:31 +0200:
>>> Hmm. Still sceptical.
>>
>> face it. you were all had. you underestimated the effectiveness of the
>> jesuit education and assumed incapacity of dissimulation.
>
> Had by whom? And for what purpose? What would the point have been?

I guess in the petty mindset of Arindam, that would be a sort of victory
over western man.

The fact remains that his crackpot theories of conservation of momentum
remain just that - the thoughts of a cracked pot from Jamshedpur, India.

On 17/04/2024 06:59, bertietaylor wrote:
> occam wrote:
>
>> On 15/04/2024 18:03, Madhu wrote:
>>> * occam <l84r7sFt18mU1@mid.individual.net> :
>>> Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:17:31 +0200:
>>>> Hmm. Still sceptical.
>>>
>>> face it. you were all had. you underestimated the effectiveness of the
>>> jesuit education
>
>> Clearly Jesuits are as shit at teaching physics as Bertie is at string
>> theory.
>
> Bertie invented the spring theory.
> That is:
> Springs connect strings.
> ie assuming matter is strings.
>
<snip nonsense>

Tell your bevakoof of a master-of-none that as long as his understanding
of gravity is 'instant' he will die a disappointed chaiwallah.

On 17/04/2024 06:16, bertietaylor wrote:
> Madhu wrote:
>
>> * occam <l84r7sFt18mU1@mid.individual.net> :
>> Wrote on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:17:31 +0200:
>>> Hmm. Still sceptical.
>
>> face it. you were all had. you underestimated the effectiveness of the
>> jesuit education and assumed incapacity of dissimulation.
>
>> (i recognized the wodehouse fan for bertie but didn't get further on
>> where taylor came from)
>
> Partly correct.
> Allow me to introduce ourselves.

Schizophrenia can be a wonderful thing. It can keep one entertained for
ever. Now go play with yourself.

<nonsense deleted>