phhandooh at - poll: continue phhandooh-at? pg.147 - Page 83

Yea Meera, we have Harshad on our side!! (a note of consideration - this all consists of my overly active imagination. 🤣)

Yeah I figured that! 😛😃😳

Ummmm it sadly does make a difference! 😛

Now Meera is smacking her head to the computer because now she's being emotionally blackmailed. 🤣

So..Meera's a phrebel now? Yes? Ok good. Meera you can't change your mind now. You're one of us😊

^^Yes yes I'm one of you...the things my mental mind makes me do! 😛

i am soooooooo dead!! 'm here in the middle of school hours, which i've taken oaths before multiple sacred idols to not do!!!! thank (god) preet for lunch hour!

(god) preet told me -- ('kay, 'kay! my pcp messaged me! 😆) -- that the phhandooh-mutineers' were invoking the ''laws of physics'' to defend their side' in the phight!!!! and i had to loook!

kimmmieeeee, shabz!!!! physics and chemistry???? *suppressing the urge to grab your heads and knock 'em together and slapping my forehead instead!* you... you ... tall glasses of hot milk! you're not using the right phorces here!

😛

*btw, shabz -- 'course my vote counts! if you can do the pooja led by a person who hears (god) preet voices in her head, you can definitely accept her vote. you're just jealous i get (god) preet talking to me - when he doesn't talk to you. 😛*

*btw2, kimz, i'd written 'bout the ''laws of physics'' in the 12th feb bt,lt! --- check!
am i cool, or am i supercool!? 😎 of course, i'm supercool -- after all, i am (the one, the only, the real! 😛) preetstess of (god) preet!*

physics and chemistry???? when what you should be using is phemistry?

*phemistry == prem-heer chemistry, of course! koi shaq??!!! especially 'cause phemistry also includes the study of how phemistry influences physics -- ie, the laws of motion in prem-heer's world!*

*rubbing hands in wild glee as i get ready to use my phscience guns on kimz, shabz*

1. while it is correct to invoke the third law of motion to explain how the phhandooh stopped -- otherwise, imagine! we'd have infinitely lived phhandooh!!! ooooooooh! infinitely lived phhandooh!! now where can we find that universe??! --- it is neither necessary nor sufficient to explain the start or existence of either phhandoooooh!

ie, it is not true that you needed phhandooh#4 for phhandooh#3 to happen! or vice versa! either can have existed by 'emselves!

so, your invoking either the first or the third law of motion (btw, which one are you using to explain there is only one phhandooh, not two? 🤣) does not conclusively prove there was just one phhandooh at that moment!

other than make poor newton turn in his grave to see where-where his laws are being applied 🤣, this was just sooooooooo weak to support the phrebel-side of the phorce!

*totally loved phrebel, btw... much cooler than ph-mutineer. even though mutineer reminds me of capt. jack sparrow...sigh! wondering how to get mutineer to sound as cool as phrebel... *

2. on acid-base reactions: liked the invocation of phemistry better.

but shabz, check your phacts. *ie, pg1 of this thread* phirstly, it is not true that phand starts all phhandoohs. just most phhandoohs.

phsecondly and more importantly - as we all on the phorum know - there is absolutely no neutralisation that happens when phand meets hhand! huh!!! in fact, phand meeting hhand starts a rapidly escalating chain reaction that causes meltdown of whatever substance is in, like, a one km radius around it and watching it! *although, 😆 it sounded uber-cool and convincing when i first started reading it...! 😆*

*peering suspiciously at shabz, kimz* are you trying to con us 'bout having a good reason for why there was only one and not two phhandoohs in that segment????

do you really - down-down - have no real argument for having started this phight??

did you *gasp!* start this phight just for the pheck of it??! * 'cause if you did, you just went from tall glasses of milk to ... tall glasses of hot chocolate! 🤣 yeah, yeah, kimz, that can be mochachino if you prefer it...😆*

'cmon guys! *trying desperately to project my voice into kimz, shabz, ravz, meeruz head*

look to the phemistry, look to the phemistry!

the reason -- the absolutely compelling, no-one-can-argue-with-it reason! -- for why that moment really had just one phhandoooh, and not two, is in the phemistry. the evidence is all there right in front of you! it is subtle - but once you have seen it, it's indisputable! use the phorce, guys! phind the reason! 🤣

er.... not that i'm trying to bias the poll that's running just now or anything... just... waiting to see what the evidence is that the phrebels claim for saying that there was one and not two phhandoohs in the phriday-the-13th segment-by-gayatri-mom's bed....

w&w. w&w. and ... missing lunch while w&w. 😆 i am sooo dead if i'm caught doing this... *hastily switching off....*

E, *clearing throat for bhashan starting*

Your pcp was stalking us in if.com 😲I don't know weather to feel loved or scared.

But yesh, there was a couple of mistakes in our phroofs, but you can't point fingers at that you know why? Because we are human. We can not be as good as the (god) Preet. We bow shamefaced in front of his picture, ashamed at our hasty actions but we still stand by it..

Let's start with the neutralization phact shall we? Yes, it was our mistake to say that they were neutralized. We were using the word *nueatrulized* in the context that they were now complete, whole, together, at peace.

Now moving on to the law of motion, let's keep this simple shall we? Cuz me and Kimz have not gone past gr.10/9 worth of science. 😆 But there is an begining and an end to everything. Take this world for example. It started, we don't know how, religions differ, but it did start huh? And it will end. Again, lots of contervosaty, but it will end, someway or another. So if there can be a begining and an end to the world, why not phhandoohs?

And yesh, not all the laws are realted directly to the (multiple?) phhandooo's that occured, but more of a general defination of a phhandooh in whole. Sue me, I was on a roll.

But you are right about how the phhandooh could have occured seperatly, but the question is if they would have occured the same way? In the same delicay? In the same beauty? No. It couldn't have. If you understand the messgae that the hands conyved then you would agree with me on this.

E, you said yourself that the (for the sake of differeing moments) first phhandooh was a call, from Prem-hand to Heer-hand, a possesive call, a shout telling she-hand to come. The creatives could have shut the scene there. But no. They were generous! In turn, for our patience, they showed us Prem-hand telling Heer-hand that now that she had sat, she would suffer the consequences. Now if this scene had been played seperatly at a different time, place, slot it would not have the same effect the same message. So there must be a reason that these motions were put together. Because they are one.

w&w...let's see how the rest of the votes come out. And out of curiosity E, what side is you pcp on?😆

Well since Kimz and Shabz used physics and phemistry to prove their points, I'll use biol- I mean phiology to explain my theory. Just gimme a sec to review my biology terms phirst🤣

Originally posted by: ravioli_11

Well since Kimz and Shabz used physics and phemistry to prove their points, I'll use biol- I mean phiology to explain my theory. Just gimme a sec to review my biology terms phirst🤣

ravzie... 😆 man, i can hardly wait!!!! ''review my biology terms phirst'' indeed.... get off watching all those old prem-heer moments this instant, and put your case for your choice together! 🤣

and here's a clue: kimz and shabz used physics and chemistry -- and not enough phemistry. i'm guessing that's why they're taking a little longer than expected to getting there... 🤣