PDA

View Full Version : Quantum Gravity Treatment of the Angel Density Problem


ORAC
3rd May 2012, 14:16
Quantum Gravity Treatment of the Angel Density Problem (http://www.neatorama.com/2012/05/01/quantum-gravity-treatment-of-the-angel-density-problem/) :ok::ok::ok:

Ancient Observer
3rd May 2012, 14:29
Stupid article. Of course Pauli does not apply to angels. What nit-wit ever thought that angels had to have any substance at all?

Cacophonix
3rd May 2012, 15:03
Ah exclude Pauli from this principle. The last angel I met was called nano and she was a fine particle indeed... or was her name Nina... whatever.. she was a fine angel?

Jackson Browne - Too Many Angels - YouTube

Caco

ArthurR
3rd May 2012, 15:16
Sorry about this, but these are the only Angels I know:

Hells Angels MC World (http://www.hells-angels.com/)

Cacophonix
3rd May 2012, 15:23
Arthur R

With your sense of irony, humour and music and I guess you woz always ... :ok:

Steppenwolf - Born To Be Wild - YouTube


Caco

OFSO
3rd May 2012, 16:36
I just read that as "..Treatment of the Anal Density Problem".

The mind boggles thinking about the piles of solutions to that one......

Ancient Observer
3rd May 2012, 16:52
It would be another crap article.

G&T ice n slice
3rd May 2012, 17:14
Non angeli sed angli ?

Loose rivets
4th May 2012, 03:31
Dr. Phil Schewe. He suggested that due to quantum gravity space is likely not infinitely divisible beyond the Planck length scale of 10exp-35 meters.


Haven't I been saying this for years? Kah! I only people would listen.

Dance Dynamics is just plain wrong. The Quantum points of reference might well be entered as a datum reference, but the electro-dynamic factors would require a frame of reference, and I propose angels are exempt from this requirement.

ORAC
4th May 2012, 10:19
What nit-wit ever thought that angels had to have any substance at all? But without mass, how can you have fallen angels? :8

and I propose angles are exempt from this requirement. But aren't Heaven and Hell just frames of reference rather than actual places? ;)

Cacophonix
4th May 2012, 10:35
Do angels have a dual nature? Is an angel a wave or a particle?

I think we should be told.

Caco

ThreadBaron
4th May 2012, 11:35
Is an angel a wave or a particle?

No, just a sine of the time!

radeng
4th May 2012, 12:00
That response is a bit of a cosh.

Ancient Observer
4th May 2012, 12:04
"fallen angels" indeed. No such thing.

When I was younger, and targetted nicely shaped pretty angels, it became clear once they had fallen that they had never been angels.

Once I got married, I had a paradigm shift. Now I have two young angels of my own, I can't stand their boyfriends, just in case they are like I was. (How's that for bad English?)

Loose rivets
4th May 2012, 15:59
You could have said, Like what I was.


Nobody picked me up on my angles angels thingie. Never seem to filter out that hiccup in me brain's word department.