Cecil Moore wrote:
Gene Fuller wrote:
You quite clearly said that "steady state" is not really steady.

No I didn't. You either misunderstood or are trying
to set up a straw man.

The meaning of steady state is not controversial.

I never said it was so this is just another one of
your straw men.


Cecil,

Your exact words we

***
Steady-state had a beginning and it will have an end. It cannot be
analyzed without knowing what happened in the beginning and what will
happen in the end. Steady-state is the rug under which you and others
try to sweep the laws of physics including the conservation of energy
principle. I'm doing what I can to call your bluff.
***

This says that steady state depends on something else, namely the
beginning and the end of the steady state condition. That is simply
incorrect. In steady state conditions there is no concept of beginning
or end.

ad hominem

If you don't know the rules, you can't play the game.

/ad hominem

73,
Gene
W4SZ