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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #652664

Re: Getting there at last...

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show key headers only | View raw

Arindam Banerjee wrote:
> 
> Le 03/04/2024 à 03:31, "Chris M. Thomasson" a écrit :
> > On 4/2/2024 10:23 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
> >> Arindam Banerjee wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Le 02/04/2024 à 16:51, Thomas Heger a écrit :
> >>>> Am 30.03.2024 um 11:38 schrieb Arindam Banerjee:
> >>>>> Le 30/03/2024 à 18:48, Thomas Heger a écrit :
> >>>>>> Am 28.03.2024 um 08:09 schrieb Arindam Banerjee:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Maybe you like my 'book'
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Ur3_giuk2l439fxUa8QHX4wTDxBEaM6lOlgVUa0cFU4/edit?usp=sharing
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> TH
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>   From your book, the following quote
> >>>>>>> ***
> >>>>>>> This project was started as a search for the connection between QM and
> >>>>>>> GR. The connection was hypothesized and assumed to exist (without
> >>>>>>> knowing it's specific features), since nature has to be understood as an
> >>>>>>> undivided system. So all theories should describe the same world, but
> >>>>>>> possibly different aspects. Spacetime is a physical system, hence should
> >>>>>>> be build out of 'elements' (what are the 'building blocks'). ***
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Any connection between two theoretical (conjectural, impractical as yet)
> >>>>>>> notions as QM and GR must necessarily be theoretical as well.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Sure.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If you try to find a way between to spots (let's call them 'QM' and
> >>>>>> 'GR'), you need to assume, those spots do in fact exist.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> It's not the duty of the pathfinder, to prove the existence of the two
> >>>>>> endpoints of the way found.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If there is actually nothing at these positions, it's actually not his
> >>>>>> fault.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> In theory, the Moon is green cheese with cows jumping over it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> No, not really. At least I've never heard of such a theory.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> People were burnt to death for not believing that the stars moved in
> >>>>>>> crystal spheres, and the stars were holes in those spheres to let
> >>>>>>> heavenly light in.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Well, that's not quite true, neither.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Unfortunately, the catholic church had killed several scientists in
> >>>>>> the middle ages, but not because of their discoveries, but because
> >>>>>> they were questioning the authority of the church.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> That authority was meant to be absolute and ANY disobedience could be
> >>>>>> punished by death.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This has changed significantly and today the pope does not intervene
> >>>>>> in physics anymore.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The justification for QM and GR as practical let alone scientific is not
> >>>>>>> there.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Well, yes, because that was NOT my topic.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> While there is charm in seeing the moon as green cheese with cows
> >>>>>>> jumping around it, and there is profit in all the heaven stuff, I see
> >>>>>>> neither pleasure nor profit from QM and GR, save for the careerists and
> >>>>>>> their dupes blown by math mumbo-jumbo. I know this is the most powerful
> >>>>>>> nonsense ever to be globally accepted, in our times, and that deserves
> >>>>>>> respect.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> You may rightfully critizise QM and GR, and in a way I would
> >>>>>> understand you, but this was not the subject of my 'book'.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Those really into physics better study my videos and texts relating to
> >>>>>>> physics. The US Navy, I find, has appropriated my new design rail gun
> >>>>>>> for their ships. The Chinese are using a version of that to launch their
> >>>>>>> warplanes from navy carriers. Facebook is so useful, to present new
> >>>>>>> discoveries and inventions, and see how they get stolen.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> You invented the railgun? ? ? ?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes, I invented a new design railgun, where the bullet is heavy,
> >>>>> perpendicular to the rails, and the voltage is low. Overall, this design
> >>>>> is 10-100 more efficient than the earlier rail guns of the US as shown
> >>>>> in their pre 2015 videos. So it is practical and has been known since my
> >>>>> first paper on it in 2013. I showed that to my PhD supervisor in 2015,
> >>>>> and I suspect that it was transmitted to the relevant people from that
> >>>>> time. In 2017 I published the details of the invention in a series of
> >>>>> youtube videos.
> >>>>> My idea behind my PhD work (btw I am not a PhD as in the final viva they
> >>>>> said I had not made a working model of a rail gun, which was not what my
> >>>>> supervisor had been saying) was to show that the Lorentz force
> >>>>> accelerating the bullet had no ELECTRICAL reaction.  (Since I have used
> >>>>> a rolling bullet/armature in my videos, there is apparently some
> >>>>> reaction but that is mechanical, due to the treadmill effect.) My
> >>>>> detailed analysis shows inertia violation.
> >>>>
> >>>> I had always thought, that my 'book' was 'revolutionary'.
> >>>>
> >>>> But your research is far more revolutionary than mine.
> >>>
> >>> The research period was from 1998 - 2015.  It is development time now.
> >>> Thanks very much.
> >>>>
> >>>> So, hope the best for you, but see trouble ahead, because you are
> >>>> stepping on a lot of feet.
> >>>
> >>> Never a truer word was said.  I am glad that at least one physicist in the
> >>> universe is not mocking or ignoring me.  That is a start.
> >>>>
> >>>> It's interesting, anyhow.
> >>>
> >>> Well, it will take a lot of money to make a working prototype of an
> >>> internal force machine that will replace all rockets and jet engines.
> >>> How I can earn that money, is my present concern.  Let us see if my next
> >>> project (making a very cheap "free energy" drive) works as my
> >>> maths/intuition says is should. I have found no patents for that, and that
> >>> is good.
> >>>>
> >>>> btw: I had 'published' my 'book' as google doc presentation, which
> >>>> worked quite well.
> >>>
> >>> My book "To the Stars" was published in Jan 2000 in my new "adda" website.
> >>> I presented my new formula e=0.5mVVN(N-k) to explain mass and energy
> >>> relationships on a kinetic and non-destructive basis. It got some
> >>> attention when in 2003 there was a global news release about this work
> >>> relating to updating Newtonian laws, with deliberate inertia violation
> >>> using Lorentz force, it that had no reaction.  Had I been taken seriously
> >>> then, we would have been making daily trips to the Moon by now, and
> >>> gearing up for space mining, etc.
> >>>
> >>> Unfortunately for "modern physicists", as I right (from my inertia
> >>> violation experiments) they are all wrong. I don't expect them to like
> >>> being wrong, so resistance from their side is to be expected.  I can only
> >>> appeal to their commitment to the scientific method, which has it that all
> >>> knowledge is provisional, and so subject to revision or expulsion.
> >>>
> >>> Look at the gains. Burning all the e=mcc=hv stuff and updating physics
> >>> will create plenty of jobs for physicists and engineers, for all time to
> >>> come!  No end of learning and finding, with new machines always going for
> >>> new things.  Why stick to the old and rotten, the senseless and the
> >>> constricting? May truth overcome the cunning of the globally established
> >>> liars. With my physics, the universe gets infinite like human potential.
> >>> Courage!
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Arindam Banerjee
> >>>
> >>> The violation of inertia with a new design rail gun in motor mode
> >>> Arindam Banerjee,
> >>> HTN Research Pty Ltd. Melbourne
> >>> 10 Nov 2023
> >>> (All rights reserved)
> >>>
> >>> https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/VtFeGAkIABg/m/CLPzLRElAwAJ
> >>>
> >>> ***
> >>>
> >>> Experiments (2022) showing my invention of a new kind of rail gun
> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYtyOMbgiZ0
> >>>
> >>> Which is improved upon in, and its potential for ejecting matter into near
> >>> space , and horizontal tunneling shown in
> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6pjy0Wvujs&t=19s
> >>>
> >>> and the following shows how a new class of linear motor violating inertia
> >>> can be developed by arresting the momentum of the armature and imparting
> >>> that to the whole system, giving it an increased velocity
> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idsIuzEajTc&t=2s
> >>>
> >>> *****
> >>>
> >>> Introduction to "A New Look Towards the Principles of Motion"
> >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/1wmee5C8mFs/kJMPdnFkAwAJ
> >>>
> >>> Section 1
> >>> Linear Motion, Momentum, Force, Energy, Internal Force Engines, and the
> >>> design of Interstellar Spacecraft
> >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/GbpQC3a2d1Q/jSXQeb9kAwAJ
> >>>
> >>> Section 1 (contd.)
> >>> Linear Motion, Momentum, Force, Energy, Internal Force Engines, and the
> >>> design of Interstellar Spacecraft
> >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/P9ZiinIDhHU/ZtMQVyliBQAJ
> >>>
> >>> Section 2
> >>> The Creation and Destruction of Energy
> >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/wY6_9V8ucSY/3nnJQk9iBQAJ
> >>>
> >>> Section 3
> >>> The Structure of Heavenly Bodies
> >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/8jH-SQIFFDo/O1jn3HpiBQAJ
> >>>
> >>> Section 4
> >>> The Nature of Explosion
> >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/7TkOVZigFHg/uv43_aZiBQAJ
> >>>
> >>> Section 5
> >>> The forces involved in rotational motion
> >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/jhgcsTq-NrQ/ZBwG8S9jBQAJ
> >>>
> >>> *******
> >>>
> >>> 2017 videos of rail gun experiments with theory in detail
> >>>
> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqBfwAClVlg
> >>> IFE - 1 Ground Experiments
> >>>
> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9eGq4Oiv9s
> >>> IFE - 2 Experimental setups
> >>>
> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3hC48BMrno
> >>> IFE - 3 Pendulum experiments
> >>>
> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sSPxGsLkws
> >>> IFE - 4 Evolution of spaceship
> >>>
> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJdM6UDPauU
> >>> IFE - 5 Hydrogen Transmission Network
> >>>
> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUAcx7rAplc
> >>> IFE - 6 Spaceship Design
> >>>
> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5Zbpvc3fdA
> >>> IFE - 7 Anti-Gravity
> >>>
> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VA9LUwqMhxY
> >>> IFE - 8 New Physics
> >>>
> >>> ****
> >>> The physics aphorisms of Arindam
> >>> https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/8HgH3sbRe94/m/gYzu9OAkAgAJ
> >>>
> >>> The cause of gravity
> >>> https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/mmigkl3yZYc/m/8Rs16NCXAAAJ
> >>>
> >>> Explaining the nova and supernova phenomena with new physics theories - 1
> >>> https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/6UIGDNHH7n0/m/U0t-kYqgAAAJ
> >>>
> >>> Explaining the nova and supernova phenomena with new physics theories - 2
> >>> https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/CffbGTXV72c/m/5ONP6J6gAAAJ
> >>>
> >>> *****
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> This format is a little bit similar to usual websites. That's why I took it.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> TH
> >>
> >>
> >> i haven't looked at any of your 'youtubes', your titles are ...insane.
> 
> No, they are purely scientific, backed with facts, logic, maths,
> experiment... well, all that may not suit theologians posing as
> scientists!
> >>
> >> It's like going to a resturant and seeing the menu on the board and I'm
> >> thinking..
> >>
> >> "I'm not going to eat anything here!"
> 
> Okay. Each to his own. If I am serving dal, to a carnivore, I cannot
> pretend it is bone broth.
> Honesty above all.
> One can take a donkey to the water, but cannot make it drink, what.
> 
> >> "Spaceship Design"? ? ? ?   How about "Flying Saucer Design"? Have you 'em, come
> >> up with one? ?
> 
> Oh yes, with internal force you have something like that as shown in the
> film "Independence Day".
> Fiction becomes fact, sometimes.
> 
> And yes, I have come up with the amoeba of one, with inertia violation.
> That updates Newton and throws out Einstein. Science is clear and
> technology will follow.
> 
> It will take billions to make a practical engine. I don't have billions.
> So let us see if I can make billions to develop one, that is the goal for
> me.
> 
> My key point is that the law of conservation of energy is wrong. Energy is
> always created and destroyed in our infinite universe, while it may change
> form in the process.
> 
> So, before it gets destroyed, we can use it, like we use solar power.
> 
> How to create energy, is the issue. Sun does that, now let us make Earth
> do it for us.
> 
> in short, permanent motion machines created by the Divine (like the Sun,
> Earth, atoms) may perhaps be created by man.
> 
> Since da Vinci said that was impossible, it is up to me to fix that issue.
> And very simply too, in a way he could have done.
> 
> >
> > This popped out of one of my experimental n-ary vector fields:
> >
> > https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=529502021542134&set=a.110008616824812
> >
> > Can you get to the link and see the image?
> 
> Why?  Will it help me to make the billions that I need to make the IFE,
> and replace rockets and jet engines for space conquest and faster travel
> on and near Earth?
> 
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Come on, the math is easy..just get the spaceship going from one planet to
> >> another...celestrial mechanics.
> 
> Abuse of mathematics, reducing it to gibberish, is what can be expected by
> those trying theological tricks relating to mystery.
> >>
> >>
> >> BTW, have you ever thought about improving on Albert Einstein's Quantum
> >> Teleportation? ? ?
> 
> No. My thoughts about Einstein follows what Tesla thought about Einstein
> and Einstein's cohorts.
> While relativity is totally rubbish, quantum is merely wrong - that is my
> point.
> "Up Newton, Down Einstein" is the cry from me!
> It is not a profitable slogan at this stage, but honesty trumps
> opportunism, at least for me.
> 
> >> Einstein was working on...Quantum Teleportation. Called "The Einstein's
> >> Continuum of Spatio-Temporal"
> >>
> >> "The Einstein's continuum of spatio-temporal which enabled idea of quantum
> >> teleportation, which
> >> represents technique of dematerialization of the matter, in one location and
> >> 'faxing', namely, electronic transmission to quantum state on the other
> >> location, in order to be materialized there."
> 
> Gibberish. It is like telling a lie a million times and expecting it will

What do you mean by "Gibberish", it's all here:


https://www.history.navy.mil/research/library/online-reading-room/title-list-alphabetically/p/philadelphia-experiment.html
https://www.history.navy.mil/research/library/online-reading-room/title-list-alphabetically/p/philadelphia-experiment/philadelphia-experiment-onr-info-sheet.html





> turn to top truth after that.
> We can go to the stars, by travelling faster than light with internal
> force. As I showed in my book "To the Stars!" published online in 2000.
> 
> My videos, above, make that clear.
> 
> Cheers,
> Arindam Banerjee
> 
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>

-- 
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

Thread

Re: ? ? ? bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (bertitaylor) - 2024-03-21 13:05 +0000
  Re: ? ? ? Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-03-23 08:18 +0100
    Re: ? ? ? bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (bertitaylor) - 2024-03-23 10:24 +0000
      Re: ? ? ? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-26 07:19 +0000
        Re: ? ? ? Thean Nogushi Hatoyama <nllah@eeele.jp> - 2024-03-26 12:05 +0000
          Re: ? ? ? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-26 23:53 +0000
            Re: ? ? ? Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> - 2024-03-27 09:18 +0100
              Re: ? ? ? nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2024-03-27 12:43 +0100
              Re: ? ? ? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-27 13:00 +0000
              Re: ? ? ? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-27 13:01 +0000
            Re: ? ? ? Jed László Barabás <sx@sajd.hu> - 2024-03-27 11:24 +0000
              Re: ? ? ? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-27 12:47 +0000
                Re: ? ? ? Thaddeus Horiatis Demetrious <sit@ssdiet.gr> - 2024-03-27 14:56 +0000
                Re: ? ? ? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-27 23:02 +0000
                Re: ? ? ? Yasmani Hasekura <asna@unnsmahua.jp> - 2024-03-28 02:38 +0000
                Re: ? ? ? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-28 03:14 +0000
                Re: ? ? ? Leland Behtenev Basov <ene@thdnt.ru> - 2024-03-28 04:02 +0000
                Re: ? ? ? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-28 04:35 +0000
                Re: ? ? ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-27 21:49 -0700
      Getting there at last... Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-26 23:49 +0000
        Re: Getting there at last... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-03-28 07:14 +0100
          Re: Getting there at last... Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-28 07:09 +0000
            Re: Getting there at last... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-03-30 08:54 +0100
              Re: Getting there at last... Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-30 10:38 +0000
                Re: Getting there at last... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-04-02 07:56 +0200
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-02 00:07 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-04-03 08:03 +0200
                Re: Getting there at last... Yusney Turaev Momotov <tnoyn@ou.ru> - 2024-04-03 06:53 +0000
                Re: Getting there at last... Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-04-04 02:18 +0000
                Re: Getting there at last... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-04-05 09:54 +0200
                Re: Getting there at last... Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-04-06 00:07 +0000
                Re: Getting there at last... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-04-06 09:03 +0200
                Re: Getting there at last... Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-04-06 13:54 +0200
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-06 12:11 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2024-04-06 12:51 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-06 16:01 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-06 15:03 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-06 16:05 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-04-07 01:25 +0000
                Re: Getting there at last... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-04-07 21:03 +0200
                Re: Getting there at last... Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-04-08 01:36 +0000
                Re: Getting there at last... Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-04-02 07:38 +0000
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-02 10:23 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-04-02 11:31 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-04-03 00:16 +0000
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-03 00:38 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-03 01:02 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-03 22:58 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-04 11:11 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-04-08 20:08 +0200
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-08 21:19 -0700
    Re: ? ? ? Yatzyk Trampotova <ezyey@kynyrt.ru> - 2024-03-23 17:39 +0000
      Re: ? ? ? Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-03-25 08:06 +0100
        Re: ? ? ? Evasio Alexandropoulos <ouep@seood.gr> - 2024-03-25 17:48 +0000
        Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-03-26 22:30 -0700
          Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-03-27 16:31 -0700
            Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-03-27 17:26 -0700
              Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-03-29 17:05 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-03-31 12:27 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-03-31 14:46 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-01 10:15 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-01 21:36 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-02 00:15 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-02 09:52 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2024-04-02 10:16 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-02 12:26 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2024-04-02 12:48 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-03 23:03 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2024-04-04 05:57 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-04 09:00 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2024-04-04 10:45 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? Colin Mcdonald <mna@aincmic.uk> - 2024-04-04 22:59 +0000
                Re: ? ? ? Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2024-04-04 16:20 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-05 00:45 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-05 01:20 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2024-04-05 06:24 -0700

csiph-web