Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #593652

Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead)

Show all headers | View raw

Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
> 
> On Monday, October 17, 2022 at 11:14:15 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> > Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
> > >
> > > On Monday, October 17, 2022 at 9:50:14 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
> > > > On Monday, October 17, 2022 at 8:14:22 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > > Julio Di Egidio wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For the rubric Tom Roberts is a fucking resident disgrace,
> > > > > > and other amenities along that line.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am quoting from sci.physics.relativity since I doubt they'll let my
> > > > > > message through. And, this is my last post to Usenet anyway!
> > > > > > ESAD, you fucking monsters, I will just vouch for your extinction.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Monday, 17 October 2022 at 09:10:38 UTC+2, Tom Roberts wrote:
> > > > > > > On 10/16/22 7:09 AM, Richard Livingston wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Thursday, October 13, 2022 at 2:59:07 PM UTC-5, Austin Fearnley
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >> [...]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You are both overthinking this.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > No, they were both not even wrong!! And *you*
> > > > > > keep adding even more nonsense and confusion
> > > > > > on top of any actual answers and explanations
> > > > > > I happen to give, yet again...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Everybody: I thought this as a moderated group
> > > > > > would be different, instead a post of mine on a
> > > > > > line of research for foundations was rejected as
> > > > > > "too speculative", meanwhile we have to endure
> > > > > > just this daily nonsense and institutional spam.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am out of here: Usenet is dead.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *Plonk*
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Julio
> > > > > The only place in the world left for 'absolute free speech' is
> > > > > ...Usenet.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > I agree with this. This is the most advanced relativity gedanken facility in the world. Well beyond every University seminar program. Cyber archeologists will document this one day. I would hate to be Dono when that day comes.
> > > > > --
> > > > > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > > > > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > > > > and challenge
> > > > > the unchallengeable.
> > >
> > > No....
> > >
> > > Same for Dono, just another say nothing, be right.
> > >
> > > I carefully fought everybody pretty hard while writing my thesis that
> > > physics has a mathematics.
> > >
> > > This way I earned their respect, including through fear.
> > >
> > > I mean, come on StarMaker, I mean Patty, here it's that
> > > you are just talking about parallel Galilean frames in the
> > > space they are moving, their space contraction due
> > > their alignment has them seeing each other's image, carried
> > > along with them, as much as it is in terms of when the image
> > > starts rolling and for example lensing.
> > There is *no place* in the universe where 'mathematics' exist...except
> > in the mind, same place where only 'evil' exist....in the mind.
> > --
> > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > and challenge
> > the unchallengeable.
> 
> But, what if you hold your hands together?
> 
> If they're together you can't say there's not mathematics, ....
> 
> Then look, open your hands, put them back together, nope, no way
> to tell there's not mathematics.
> 
> Now, look around and just imagine behind what you see.
> See, easy, no mathematics at all.
> 
> Look in front of what you see:  yep, no mathematics at all.
> 
> See, everywhere.

what?

-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
 to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge
 the unchallengeable.

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2022-10-17 02:46 -0700
  Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-10-17 20:14 -0700
    Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2022-10-17 21:01 -0700
    Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2022-10-17 21:50 -0700
      Old fart, uber crank Pat Dolan is having wet dreams once again "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2022-10-17 22:15 -0700
        Re: Old fart, uber crank Pat Dolan is having wet dreams once again The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-10-17 23:07 -0700
      Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2022-10-17 22:16 -0700
        Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2022-10-17 22:19 -0700
        Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-10-17 23:14 -0700
          Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2022-10-17 23:33 -0700
            Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-10-17 23:51 -0700
              Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2022-10-18 00:18 -0700
                Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2022-10-18 02:43 -0700
                Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2022-10-18 13:49 -0700
      Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2022-10-18 02:36 -0700
    Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2022-10-18 02:27 -0700
      Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2022-10-18 14:05 +0200
        Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2022-10-18 10:44 -0400
      Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2022-10-18 08:38 -0700
  Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-10-18 10:50 +0200
    Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2022-10-18 02:47 -0700
      Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-10-18 14:26 +0200
  Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2022-10-18 17:03 -0500
    Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2022-10-18 19:53 -0700
    Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2022-10-19 01:41 -0700
      Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) Athel Cornish-Bowden <acornish@imm.cnrs.fr> - 2022-10-19 11:13 +0200
      Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2022-10-19 08:09 -0700
        Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2022-10-19 17:19 -0400
      Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-10-19 14:26 -0700
        Re: Tom Roberts is a fucking disgrace (and Usenet is dead) "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2022-10-19 17:13 -0700

csiph-web