When the poster in question has expressed a desire to mutilate people who post incorrect info in GQ it’s just karma.
Enjoy,
Steven
Ah, now that is a valid criticism.
I also remember Bricker, on more than one occasion, ranting about how people who are just guessing about legal issues should keep the fuck out of GQ rather than posting wild guesses. Maybe he will now appreciate that those folks sometimes post with good intentions, or in the genuine belief that their responses are correct, and cut them some slack.
Heh. I guess that would sort of put Bricker in a special class, wouldn’t it? Although, to be fair, there is a difference between people who post an occasional poorly-qualified (or even flat-out wrong) statement and serial offenders.
Enjoyed. Thanks.
C’mon, Cartooniverse is one of the biggest hypocrites on the board. Freaking out because Bricker wouldn’t apologize in a day and a half, but a year and half later Colin Farell is still awaiting his apology from Cartooniverse.
“ancient photons, bouncing about without a home” is NOT a good band name.
Although if such a band is formed, odds are that it will contain Paul McCartney.
Unless the vBulletin software has some background javascript in its pages that constantly updates the server (unlikely), then all ‘online’ means is that the session cookie which was created/updated when the last page request took place has not expired yet. It doesn’t matter if you leave your browser open or not. It matters to you at home, because when you close your browser you lose your session cookie, so to you it looks like you’ve gone from online to offline. But the SDMB server isn’t notified by your PC when you close your browser window.
So whether the SDMB shows a person to be online or not does not tell you at all whether he or she is still at the computer. It just means, “I established a session with the user, and that session hasn’t expired yet.”
Good catch.
True. However, it should be noted that Bricker’s original answer in that thread was far from being unequivocally wrong. It depends on whether you consider a photon to be “produced” when the energy it contains was created in a nuclear reaction (and then has bounced around being re-absorbed and re-emitted many times), or whether it is “produced” when it is re-emitted. In the latter case, Bricker was correct. The question is debatable, and in fact is still being debated in the original thread.
Ancient Photons is a pretty good band name, though.
Bouncing about without a home could be the album.
Nope.
What I will do is acknowledge, again, that I did the same thing. It doesn’t make me appreciate confidently wrong answers posted by others; it makes me even sorrier that I did the same damn wrong stupid thing.
If it happens that I was right, that will be cool.
But not really, because it will be a case of the blind squirrel who found an acorn every once in a while. In other words, I’ll have been right by chance, not because I knew the subject thoroughly enough to post in GQ about it.
But now that others in that thread have made the same claim I did, I wonder if Cartooniverse will unleash similar tirades against them?
I suspect that his objections to your post were not based on a deep knowledge of particle physics on his part. 
If the Sun stopped producing photons, would the radiation pressure then drop to zero and the Sun collapse? It’s not massive enough to collapse to a black hole, but presuming that whatever stopped the fusion process would also stop the expansion to red giant status…
My understanding is that the Sun produces photons at its core thru fusion. Said photons are then absorbed and re-radiated until they reach the outside, and then radiate out. If the theoretical process stopped fusion, then the collapse would occur but then the subsequent fusion of the hydrogen in the outer layers of the Sun would not occur, and no explosion would happen. So it would go straight from G to black or brown dwarf or something.
Wanders off muttering “Oh Be A Fine Girl Kiss Me Right Now Smack!”…
Regards,
Shodan
I didn’t say you had to appreciate wrong answers; i just suggested that you might appreciate that, in giving wrong answers, people sometime demonstrate genuine deficiencies in knowledge or errors of fact that they are unaware of until someone else points them out. You might, in short, simply recognize that people are human and fuck up sometimes, and that they don’t do it specifically to annoy you.
My first visit back into this thread since yesterday.
I will email the Moderators of the Pit right now to request that this thread be locked.
Cartooniverse
–cackle-- Not hardly.
Let it not be said that the right to tell someone they are A Class Act was lost at the turn of the Millenium.
apology accepted
Sent mail to Giraffe and fluiddruid, both of whom are listed as Moderators in The Pit. Sent it at about 5:31pm, EST.
No idea when it will be locked, but I did as I said I would do.
None offered.
