On Wed, 8 Dec 2010 23:21:20 +0100, Sean Con
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 8 Dec 2010 20:52:21 +0100, Sean Con
wrote:

It is difficult to separate the report from the reporter here (if, in
fact, such a distinction exists):

some resistance leads to energy loss .. probably energy is being
converted to heat, not loss.

Heat is not loss if heat is your objective. This is a curious

boy... what is happening here - i feel lost



firstly, Art, temperature IS involved, when we are talking about solar
wind plasmas

second, richard, i guess my sentencing style is confusing

That is why I said separating the report from the reporter (who is the
author of what is being written?) is a strain.

"some resistance leads to energy loss .. " -- this is copied from art's
previous message (if you follow the messages, you would notice the
copying)

I have long since abandoned reading Art. If the sense of my response
to your post is any indicator, then you can well imagine the waste of
time in that pursuit.

Let's just look at this isolated, attributed quote you have re-framed.
Look between the quotes you offer - not much said there that isn't
already obvious. However, valid quotes in isolation are one thing,
but stringing them together does not bring any authenticity to a
"theory."

In other words, cut and paste phrases is not a logical argument.

"probably energy is being converted to heat, not loss." -- this is what
i commented

Then there is a problem that is attributable to you. If you want
heat, then that is not loss in the conventional sense. You have not
clarified your intent.

probably now you see why some other sentences appear self contradicting
because the first part is art's message, second part is what i write

You need to employ the conventions of newsgroup etiquette, then. The
fashion of my interlacing your comments and mine clearly distinguish
who is the author. This is done by the distinct characters that are
inserted by a news-reader. This is an automatic feature.

and sorry for writing "feel", english is not my mother language, but i
believe you understood what i wanted to express

But I could not distinguish you from Art to be able "to give you the
benefit of the doubt."

Art, can you please contact me to my email address directly, because i
feel people dont like us discussing something.

Why don't you email him directly?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC