Ads by Muslim Ad Network

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Islam's claim about the 360 joints in the human body was proven to be true!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • THHuxley
    replied
    Re: Islam's claim about the 360 joints in the human body was proven to be true!

    Originally posted by P3X-018 View Post
    I did comment on this, in the part you just skipped again. Amazing how you keep intending to continue this. I guess for you to leave this, would be like a "defeat" to an "ignorant muslim kid".
    Actually, you did not.

    You asked if I knew what entropy was.

    That was your entire comment.

    Leave a comment:


  • P3X-018
    replied
    Re: Islam's claim about the 360 joints in the human body was proven to be true!

    Originally posted by THHuxley View Post
    Not at all. This is the same thing that I said in my first response to your comment on the 2d law.


    You must not have been paying attention.
    I did comment on this, in the part you just skipped again. Amazing how you keep intending to continue this. I guess for you to leave this, would be like a "defeat" to an "ignorant muslim kid".

    Leave a comment:


  • bint
    replied
    Re: Islam's claim about the 360 joints in the human body was proven to be true!

    its not islams...CLAIM..that sounds naff :p

    its what is islam has shown taught.

    Leave a comment:


  • THHuxley
    replied
    Re: Islam's claim about the 360 joints in the human body was proven to be true!

    Originally posted by P3X-018 View Post
    Alright a change a in strategy I see.
    Not at all. This is the same thing that I said in my first response to your comment on the 2d law.

    Originally posted by THHuxley
    Considering the law a statement on "probability" is merely an analogy. It is not what the law actually states. Once you start speaking of "probability" or "order," you are no longer speaking of thermodynamics. You have left thermodynamics behind completely.
    You must not have been paying attention.

    Leave a comment:


  • P3X-018
    replied
    Re: Islam's claim about the 360 joints in the human body was proven to be true!

    Originally posted by THHuxley View Post
    I cannot read your mind. If you do not say what you mean, it is your fault if I "fail" to have guessed correctly.

    I provided the link. Figure it out yourself.

    Like I said... reason and evidence.

    You should try them.
    I thought that you meant I had just copied and pasted all those lines. But I didn't. If you want to believe that, that's fine, since that is also irrelevant now.

    Leave a comment:


  • P3X-018
    replied
    Re: Islam's claim about the 360 joints in the human body was proven to be true!

    Originally posted by THHuxley View Post
    That is one of the implications of the 2d law. But is not the 2d Law itself.
    Alright a change a in strategy I see..
    As I already said that is the microscopic view of it, which is more fundamental than the macroscopic view. It was also based on some quantum mechanical principles, since if it weren't, multiplicities wouldn't be countable but infinite.

    But alright I'm just going to leave this be. Sad how this discussion just had to get uselessly extended like this...

    Oh well have a nice day.

    Leave a comment:


  • THHuxley
    replied
    Re: Islam's claim about the 360 joints in the human body was proven to be true!

    Originally posted by P3X-018 View Post
    What I meant, was show me what I had copied exactly? You failed...
    I cannot read your mind. If you do not say what you mean, it is your fault if I "fail" to have guessed correctly.

    I provided the link. Figure it out yourself.

    Like I said... reason and evidence.

    You should try them.
    Last edited by THHuxley; 27-03-07, 11:08 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • THHuxley
    replied
    Re: Islam's claim about the 360 joints in the human body was proven to be true!

    Originally posted by P3X-018 View Post
    So by "cut and paste" you don't mean litterally copy and pasting?
    Not necessarily although I still do not rule it out. Copying and typing is the same thing. But the accidental inclusion of that internal reference makes literal copying and pasting the more likely.

    Originally posted by P3X-018
    Ok I guess you're saying I just literally copy&pasted all what I wrote... in that case this is incorrect. Since you fail to proof where I copy&pasted those lines, I don't even see why you make such a claim... You should just leave this.
    I left it long ago. You are the one who keeps coming back and whining.

    Originally posted by P3X-018
    "a system is most likely to be in a state that is most proabable" <-- I explained a little deeper with what I was talking about when I mentioned this in the earlier post you choose to ignore everything, and say it was just copy & paste, you should read it, it wouldn't harm. Skip the part explaining what multiplicity, micro- and macrostates are if you know what it is already.
    I thought you said we should just leave this?

    Originally posted by PsX-018
    Microscopicly entropy is just a measure for the multiplicity of the systems' state. So multiplicity tends to "increase" for a system.
    That is one of the implications of the 2d law. But is not the 2d Law itself.

    Just as Kepler's orbital mechanics is an implication of Newton's laws of motion, but are not Newton's laws themselves.

    There is little further need to feed your need for obfuscation and irrelevence, since the subject of this thread has been solidly concluded. If you wish to get into a detailed discussion of the implications of the 2d law, then launch another thread.

    As in your "whining" thread, though, I will be unlikely to join.

    Leave a comment:


  • P3X-018
    replied
    Re: Islam's claim about the 360 joints in the human body was proven to be true!

    Originally posted by THHuxley View Post
    There is no such thing as "proof."

    There is only evidence and reason.
    What I meant, was show me what I had copied exactly? You failed...

    Leave a comment:


  • P3X-018
    replied
    Re: Islam's claim about the 360 joints in the human body was proven to be true!

    Originally posted by THHuxley View Post
    That too would be a "cut and paste." You do know what cut and paste means, right? I asked you that question before, but you did not answer it then either.
    So by "cut and paste" you don't mean litterally copy and pasting?

    You bet you can!!! That is why it was so easy to find. Entire sentences and unique phrasings are identical between your "discussion" and several other sites on line. That is how it can be identified as cutting and pasting.
    Ok I guess you're saying I just literally copy&pasted all what I wrote... in that case this is incorrect. Since you fail to proof where I copy&pasted those lines, I don't even see why you make such a claim... You should just leave this.

    "a system is most likely to be in a state that is most proabable" <-- I explained a little deeper with what I was talking about when I mentioned this in the earlier post you choose to ignore everything, and say it was just copy & paste, you should read it, it wouldn't harm. Skip the part explaining what multiplicity, micro- and macrostates are if you know what it is already.
    Microscopicly entropy is just a measure for the multiplicity of the systems' state. So multiplicity tends to "increase" for a system.

    Leave a comment:


  • THHuxley
    replied
    Re: Islam's claim about the 360 joints in the human body was proven to be true!

    Originally posted by P3X-018 View Post
    Proof please....
    There is no such thing as "proof."

    There is only evidence and reason.

    Leave a comment:


  • THHuxley
    replied
    Re: Islam's claim about the 360 joints in the human body was proven to be true!

    Originally posted by P3X-018 View Post
    LMAO @ Copied word for word! I have the book I refered to my self.

    That too would be a "cut and paste." You do know what cut and paste means, right? I asked you that question before, but you did not answer it then either.

    So if your excuse is that your initial internal "reference" was merely a demonstration that you do not know how to properly reference a source, it does you little credit but might get you off the hook for deliberate plagiarism.

    Originally posted by P3X-018
    And the example with coins is the most basic and easy to understand, I've read it so many times, that's why I used it. Funny how you claim I copy & pasted, if you had actually read it you wouldn't have said that. The example I used was, as I also mentioned from that textbook (p 73-74), and I can see many things are taken from Shroeder's book in that note you refered to...

    You bet you can!!! That is why it was so easy to find. Entire sentences and unique phrasings are identical between your "discussion" and several other sites on line. That is how it can be identified as cutting and pasting.

    Duh.

    Originally posted by P3X-018
    Can you please directly refer to what exactly was wrong in my statement?

    Sigh. You really have no intention of leaving with any shred of remaining dignity, do you? You wrote:

    Originally posted by P3X-018
    the 2. law of thermodynamics isn't a fundamental law at all, but it only says that a system is most likely to be in a state that is most proabable

    My response was:

    Originally posted by THHuxley
    The 2nd Law of Thermodynamic says that in any closed thermodynamic system, entropy tends to increase over time. Entropy is, of course, an extensive property that can be measured. Its relationship with probability (or "order") is at best indirect and not determinative.

    Considering the law a statement on "probability" is merely an analogy. It is not what the law actually states. Once you start speaking of "probability" or "order," you are no longer speaking of thermodynamics. You have left thermodynamics behind completely.
    You could have looked that up yourself. It was only a couple of days ago that we had the exchange.

    Leave a comment:


  • P3X-018
    replied
    Re: Islam's claim about the 360 joints in the human body was proven to be true!

    Originally posted by THHuxley View Post
    Hmmmm.... I'm pretty sure that's one too.
    Proof please....

    Leave a comment:


  • P3X-018
    replied
    Re: Islam's claim about the 360 joints in the human body was proven to be true!

    Originally posted by THHuxley View Post
    What makes me think that?

    1) The fact that vast sections of it are copied word for word from lectures published on the Internet such as:

    http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/PHYS2060/pdf/PHYS2060%20Thermal%20Physics%20Lecture%2020.pdf

    2) The fact that your original "citation" was an internal reference completely lacking the actual source, demonstrating that you had copied from a more comprehensive secondary source that cited Shroeder, rather than directly from Shroeder himself.

    Finally, who ever said you were "completely" wrong? You were specifically wrong in the areas where you were corrected. Sorry if that hurts your feelings. But your thin skin is not my responsibility.
    LMAO @ Copied word for word! I have the book I refered to my self. And the example with coins is the most basic and easy to understand, I've read it so many times, that's why I used it. Funny how you claim I copy & pasted, if you had actually read it you wouldn't have said that. The example I used was, as I also mentioned from that textbook (p 73-74), and I can see many things are taken from Shroeder's book in that note you refered to...
    Can you please directly refer to what exactly was wrong in my statement?

    Leave a comment:


  • THHuxley
    replied
    Re: Islam's claim about the 360 joints in the human body was proven to be true!

    Originally posted by P3X-018 View Post
    Because you insist on calling me a lier about that statement.
    The only lies I am certain you have told to this point is the claim that I ever called you a liar. There may be others, but that is the only one I am certain of.

    Originally posted by P3X-018
    Btw I didn't copy and paste anything.
    Hmmmm.... I'm pretty sure that's one too.

    Leave a comment:

Collapse

Edit this module to specify a template to display.

Working...
X