Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #597999 > unrolled thread
| Started by | carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2022-12-21 14:19 -0800 |
| Last post | 2023-01-13 16:12 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 290 — 24 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-21 14:19 -0800
Re: climate change Michelle Africano <nccr@amenica.he> - 2022-12-21 22:45 +0000
Re: climate change Michelle Africano <nccr@amenica.he> - 2022-12-21 22:54 +0000
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-22 09:49 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-22 10:07 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-22 11:08 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-12-22 12:59 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-22 13:05 -0800
Re: climate change Rico Amato <toaa@araocco.rt> - 2022-12-22 22:04 +0000
Re: climate change Rico Amato <toaa@araocco.rt> - 2022-12-22 22:14 +0000
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-12-22 14:26 -0800
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2022-12-22 18:38 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-12-22 19:03 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-12-23 11:10 -0800
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2022-12-23 13:48 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-12-23 15:30 -0800
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2022-12-23 20:25 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-12-27 12:12 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-27 15:41 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-27 16:40 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-27 21:10 -0600
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-12-28 12:24 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-31 09:33 +0100
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-12-31 00:44 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-01 10:00 +0100
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-28 07:56 +0100
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-29 09:01 +0100
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-29 16:38 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-29 16:40 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-29 18:54 -0600
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-30 11:14 +0100
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-30 10:57 -0600
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-30 10:48 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-30 11:01 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-30 11:15 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-30 11:57 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-30 13:03 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-30 14:40 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-30 15:25 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-30 19:02 -0600
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-30 18:58 -0600
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-31 09:09 +0100
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-31 09:22 +0100
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-31 15:42 -0600
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-31 14:26 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-31 14:43 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-31 15:42 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-01 09:43 +0100
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-01 16:49 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-01 09:28 +0100
Re: climate change Doodnath Sarti <ttha@dnhnahan.nh> - 2023-01-01 08:49 +0000
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-01 06:21 -0600
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-01 15:56 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-01 16:02 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-01 16:19 -0800
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-01-01 17:10 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-01 17:56 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-02 03:36 -0500
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-03 07:36 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 12:24 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 12:27 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 13:30 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 13:46 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 13:48 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 17:14 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 17:29 -0800
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 18:13 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-04 10:12 +0100
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-04 12:59 -0500
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-05 07:40 +0100
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-04 11:17 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-04 11:49 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-04 14:40 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-05 14:40 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-04 12:51 -0500
Re: climate change Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-01-04 23:06 -0600
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-05 00:13 -0600
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-05 08:01 +0100
Re: climate change Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-01-05 11:47 -0600
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-05 10:17 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-05 16:33 -0600
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-07 09:42 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-07 15:21 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-07 15:47 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-07 15:58 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-07 16:04 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-07 18:31 -0800
Re: climate change Luigi Tumicelli <llei@cumiicli.lu> - 2023-01-08 13:47 +0000
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-08 15:16 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-08 16:49 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-08 17:09 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-09 08:53 +0100
Re: climate change Luigi Tumicelli <llei@cumiicli.lu> - 2023-01-09 08:30 +0000
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-09 10:11 -0800
Re: climate change Luigi Tumicelli <llei@cumiicli.lu> - 2023-01-09 18:58 +0000
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-09 12:47 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-09 22:18 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-10 15:49 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-10 10:58 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-10 21:45 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-10 12:58 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-10 22:12 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-10 14:26 -0800
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-10 21:56 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-10 22:17 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-10 22:32 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-11 01:34 -0500
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-10 22:49 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-11 12:44 -0500
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 10:53 -0800
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 11:54 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 12:03 -0800
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 12:39 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 14:21 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-11 22:06 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 14:20 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 14:23 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-12 10:23 +0100
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-12 03:46 -0500
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 00:58 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 16:53 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 17:07 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 15:02 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 15:09 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-12 17:57 -0600
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 16:26 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-12 18:32 -0600
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 17:23 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 17:31 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 18:06 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 18:12 -0800
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 19:20 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-13 11:39 -0500
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-12 20:44 -0600
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 18:52 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-13 04:06 -0500
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 01:20 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-13 12:04 -0500
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 10:20 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 12:11 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 12:23 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 12:27 -0800
Re: climate change Kobie Locatelli <be@cliietik.oo> - 2023-01-15 11:38 +0000
Re: climate change Kobie Locatelli <be@cliietik.oo> - 2023-01-15 13:23 +0000
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-15 13:14 -0600
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-15 13:10 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-15 13:14 -0800
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-01-15 14:48 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-15 16:44 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-16 17:44 +0100
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-16 12:36 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-16 13:31 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-16 13:39 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-16 14:19 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-17 00:55 -0500
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-16 22:24 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-17 09:58 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-17 13:16 -0500
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-17 10:58 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-18 16:55 -0500
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-19 12:07 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-19 12:11 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-19 12:18 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-19 15:18 -0600
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-19 13:51 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-19 13:52 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-19 18:47 -0600
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-20 10:23 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-20 14:47 -0500
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-20 21:36 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-20 14:14 -0600
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-20 12:22 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-20 19:40 -0600
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-21 01:54 -0500
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-21 20:35 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-21 15:26 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-21 21:46 -0600
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-22 12:08 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:37 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:39 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:39 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-23 23:10 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:45 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:50 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:52 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-23 17:24 -0500
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 14:35 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 14:37 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-24 08:48 +0100
Re: climate change Faustino Biondo <uinn@bfotboia.nt> - 2023-01-25 19:40 +0000
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-26 16:40 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-27 08:17 +0100
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-27 14:31 -0500
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-28 14:08 +0100
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-30 07:35 +0100
Re: climate change Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-01-30 07:38 -0600
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-31 09:34 +0100
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-31 13:19 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-02-03 11:13 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-02-03 21:49 +0100
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-02-03 19:23 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-02-04 21:10 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 12:06 -0800
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 22:06 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-23 16:55 -0600
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 16:52 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 17:36 -0800
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 18:39 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-23 23:10 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-17 09:57 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-17 10:28 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-17 16:20 -0500
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-18 00:10 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-18 16:57 -0500
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-19 11:57 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-16 23:25 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-16 15:40 -0800
Re: climate change Edurardo De felice <eduu@eiudece.co> - 2023-01-17 13:49 +0000
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-11 10:36 +0100
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 02:09 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-11 10:36 +0100
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 02:06 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-11 11:29 +0100
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-11 13:00 -0500
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 10:44 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-11 11:17 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 10:51 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-11 14:36 -0600
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-12 08:09 +0100
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-12 03:55 -0500
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-13 08:11 +0100
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-13 13:12 +0100
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 04:41 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-13 16:11 +0100
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 08:54 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-13 21:52 +0100
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-13 11:21 -0500
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-14 09:54 +0100
Re: climate change Athel Cornish-Bowden <acornish@imm.cnrs.fr> - 2023-01-14 10:07 +0100
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-01-14 12:03 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-14 12:24 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-14 12:26 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-15 08:11 +0100
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-10 07:18 +0100
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-02 08:06 +0100
Re: climate change Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-01-02 10:22 -0600
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-03 07:27 +0100
Re: climate change Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-01-02 10:43 -0600
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-02 14:54 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-02 14:57 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-02 15:03 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-02 15:10 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-02 17:29 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-01 16:20 -0800
Re: climate change Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-01-01 20:24 -0600
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-01 19:27 -0600
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-01 18:02 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-01 18:20 -0800
Re: climate change Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-01-01 20:48 -0600
Re: climate change Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-01-01 21:29 -0600
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-02 08:28 +0100
Re: climate change Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-01-01 20:29 -0600
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-01 19:26 -0600
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-01 06:16 -0600
Re: climate change "kellehe...@gmail.com" <kelleher.gerald@gmail.com> - 2022-12-23 01:59 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-28 08:10 +0100
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-28 11:34 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-29 08:45 +0100
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-28 11:47 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-28 12:18 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-12-28 12:34 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-28 13:06 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-28 15:29 -0800
Re: climate change Santos Anselmetti <ttln@niitstsm.sa> - 2022-12-28 23:33 +0000
Re: climate change Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-01-05 20:08 +1100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-05 16:17 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-06 08:11 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-06 11:29 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-06 11:30 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-06 13:21 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-06 14:20 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-06 14:09 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-06 14:29 -0800
Re: climate change George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 23:45 -0800
Re: climate change Otto Fiscella <tfit@tiselelc.it> - 2023-01-13 16:06 +0000
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-13 12:03 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 12:08 -0800
Re: climate change Otto Fiscella <tfit@tiselelc.it> - 2023-01-13 21:10 +0000
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 16:12 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 16:12 -0800
Page 12 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 … 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 Next page →
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-11 10:36 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1q4e0wp.w3l9u11tgi3odN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #599423 |
Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, 10 January 2023 at 22:12:57 UTC+1, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > carl eto <ccarleto4...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:45:06 PM UTC-8, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > > > > > > > If the stars of the constellations are always moving, how do you determine > > > Greenwich time. Ol Chap. Jolly good show. God save the King. > > Are you really this dumb, or are you just pretending? > > > > Time on Earth is determined using atomic clocks, > > adjusted by leap seconds to keep in sync with the sun, > > (for the forseeable future) > > Surely it's not determined by proper idiocies of > your bunch of idiots. Of course it is. Computing TAI, and hence UTC, takes relativistic corrections to the readings of the participating atomic clocks into account. (and has been doing this for fifty years by now) It is just that you are completely ignorant of how it is done, Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-11 02:06 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b57ee576-3e00-4e25-8998-ee96c5796a7en@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #599435 |
On Wednesday, 11 January 2023 at 10:36:49 UTC+1, J. J. Lodder wrote: > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tuesday, 10 January 2023 at 22:12:57 UTC+1, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > carl eto <ccarleto4...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 12:45:06 PM UTC-8, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > If the stars of the constellations are always moving, how do you determine > > > > Greenwich time. Ol Chap. Jolly good show. God save the King. > > > Are you really this dumb, or are you just pretending? > > > > > > Time on Earth is determined using atomic clocks, > > > adjusted by leap seconds to keep in sync with the sun, > > > (for the forseeable future) > > > > Surely it's not determined by proper idiocies of > > your bunch of idiots. > Of course it is. Computing TAI, and hence UTC, > takes relativistic corrections to the readings Of course it is not, of course you don't know what your "proper" is, ask your fellow idiots - Shit's "proper " means no corrections. It is just that you are completely ignorant of anything.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-11 11:29 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <k27hctFns7mU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #599396 |
Am 10.01.2023 um 21:45 schrieb J. J. Lodder: > carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 6:49:04 AM UTC-8, J. J. Lodder wrote: >> >> Has the Big Dipper chanced appearances in the past? > > Yes, and all constellations. > > I told you sometime ago that it is noways possible to measure parallaxes > and proper speeds of stars with accuracies in the microarcseconds, > hence out to 10 000 lightyears or so. > > So we can predict what the night sky will look like, > far into the past and the future. > 10000 years is quite far in the past. But can we also predict, how the universe looks like today? TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-11 13:00 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <tpmtfi$viq5$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #599439 |
On 1/11/2023 5:29 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 10.01.2023 um 21:45 schrieb J. J. Lodder: >> carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 6:49:04 AM UTC-8, J. J. Lodder wrote: >>> >>> Has the Big Dipper chanced appearances in the past? >> >> Yes, and all constellations. >> >> I told you sometime ago that it is noways possible to measure parallaxes >> and proper speeds of stars with accuracies in the microarcseconds, >> hence out to 10 000 lightyears or so. >> >> So we can predict what the night sky will look like, >> far into the past and the future. >> > > 10000 years is quite far in the past. The light may have been emitted 10000 years ago, but what matters is what we see today when looking at the sky. A star that distant will be seen to move extremely slowly even if its own motion in the galaxy is fast. A certain quasar, bright but billions of light years away, is considered a reference "stationary" source, others are considered to "move" (or not) relative to it. At such a distance motion would be undetectable. > > But can we also predict, how the universe looks like today? The universe or the visible constellations? No need to predict constellations today, just take a look. What's predicted is future appearance of constellations, or (without photographic evidence etc.), "predict" past appearances.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-11 10:44 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a282600f-3ebb-4d48-a481-35f204b1b5e6n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #599450 |
The greenhouse gas theory is based on infrared light resonating between the surface of the Earth and the upper atmosphere (ozone layer?) but the ozone layer is transparent which would inhibit the resonates of the infrared radiation that is said to be causing the greenhouse gas effect.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-11 11:17 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <63BF0B4F.3AFD@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #599456 |
carl eto wrote: > > The greenhouse gas theory is based on infrared light resonating between the surface of the Earth and the upper atmosphere (ozone layer?) but the ozone layer is transparent which would inhibit the resonates of the infrared radiation that is said to be causing the greenhouse gas effect. should i bring my umbrella out to work today???? i cannot figure out your weather report... -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-11 10:51 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ca0c7ca8-983e-4dae-ac1f-9037e7784494n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #599450 |
On Wednesday, January 11, 2023 at 10:00:32 AM UTC-8, Volney wrote: > On 1/11/2023 5:29 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: > > Am 10.01.2023 um 21:45 schrieb J. J. Lodder: > >> carl eto <ccarleto4...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 6:49:04 AM UTC-8, J. J. Lodder wrote: > >>> > >>> Has the Big Dipper chanced appearances in the past? > >> > >> Yes, and all constellations. How do you determine Greenwich time, if the stars are in motion. Also, is not the length of a day determine by the stars positions; consequently, the length of an hour, minute and second? This paper recaptures time (Greenwich time) and space (astronomy) from Einstein's special relativity. Cheers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-11 14:36 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <k28kv5Ft8nvU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #599457 |
On 1/11/2023 12:51 PM, carl eto wrote: > On Wednesday, January 11, 2023 at 10:00:32 AM UTC-8, Volney wrote: >> On 1/11/2023 5:29 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: >>> Am 10.01.2023 um 21:45 schrieb J. J. Lodder: >>>> carl eto <ccarleto4...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 6:49:04 AM UTC-8, J. J. Lodder wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Has the Big Dipper chanced appearances in the past? >>>> >>>> Yes, and all constellations. > > How do you determine Greenwich time, if the stars are in motion. Also, is not the length of a day determine by the stars positions; consequently, the length of an hour, minute and second? This paper recaptures time (Greenwich time) and space (astronomy) from Einstein's special relativity. Cheers. Why are you asking here? If you want the information don't you think a better approach would be to go to the people who are actually involved in establishing earth time. This is a place for discussion and here you will get multiple dissenting opinions on how long it takes to cook an egg. There is never consensus about anything here.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-12 08:09 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <k29q0mF43qbU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #599450 |
Am 11.01.2023 um 19:00 schrieb Volney: > On 1/11/2023 5:29 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: >> Am 10.01.2023 um 21:45 schrieb J. J. Lodder: >>> carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 6:49:04 AM UTC-8, J. J. Lodder wrote: >>>> >>>> Has the Big Dipper chanced appearances in the past? >>> >>> Yes, and all constellations. >>> >>> I told you sometime ago that it is noways possible to measure parallaxes >>> and proper speeds of stars with accuracies in the microarcseconds, >>> hence out to 10 000 lightyears or so. >>> >>> So we can predict what the night sky will look like, >>> far into the past and the future. >>> >> >> 10000 years is quite far in the past. > > The light may have been emitted 10000 years ago, but what matters is > what we see today when looking at the sky. I do not agree, because the image we see is a 'message from the past' and does not reflect a real thing. We are also not very import, here on planet Earth today, for the stars we see in remote history. So, actually neither the image we see nor we ourselves are improtant. What would matter, that are the star constellations today, which we cannot see. But we could eventually try to reconstruct the real picture, if we could figure out the distances, movements, stellar interactions and so forth of the stars, put that in a huge computer and let that machine reconstruct the unseen state of the universe today. ... >> But can we also predict, how the universe looks like today? > > The universe or the visible constellations? No need to predict > constellations today, just take a look. What's predicted is future > appearance of constellations, or (without photographic evidence etc.), > "predict" past appearances. No. What we see today does not reflect any reality, neither now nor from any time in the past, because the pictures are not only old, but also of different age. The picture we receive from the night sky today is 'layered in time', because further away means also longer ago. So, we can see stars today together, which had never existed at the same time, but millions of years apart. Therefore, the picture in the night sky does not reflect reality and never did. But we could try to figure out something closer to reality. But that is very difficult and only possible for a certain time in the past. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-12 03:55 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <tpohtg$17nib$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #599487 |
On 1/12/2023 2:09 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 11.01.2023 um 19:00 schrieb Volney: >> On 1/11/2023 5:29 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: >>> Am 10.01.2023 um 21:45 schrieb J. J. Lodder: >>>> carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 6:49:04 AM UTC-8, J. J. Lodder wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Has the Big Dipper chanced appearances in the past? >>>> >>>> Yes, and all constellations. >>>> >>>> I told you sometime ago that it is noways possible to measure >>>> parallaxes >>>> and proper speeds of stars with accuracies in the microarcseconds, >>>> hence out to 10 000 lightyears or so. >>>> >>>> So we can predict what the night sky will look like, >>>> far into the past and the future. >>>> >>> >>> 10000 years is quite far in the past. >> >> The light may have been emitted 10000 years ago, but what matters is >> what we see today when looking at the sky. > > > I do not agree, because the image we see is a 'message from the past' > and does not reflect a real thing. > > We are also not very import, here on planet Earth today, for the stars > we see in remote history. > > So, actually neither the image we see nor we ourselves are improtant. > What would matter, that are the star constellations today, which we > cannot see. > > But we could eventually try to reconstruct the real picture, if we could > figure out the distances, movements, stellar interactions and so forth > of the stars, put that in a huge computer and let that machine > reconstruct the unseen state of the universe today. > ... > >>> But can we also predict, how the universe looks like today? >> >> The universe or the visible constellations? No need to predict >> constellations today, just take a look. What's predicted is future >> appearance of constellations, or (without photographic evidence etc.), >> "predict" past appearances. > > > No. What we see today does not reflect any reality, neither now nor from > any time in the past, because the pictures are not only old, but also of > different age. It doesn't matter. The constellations are determined by what you see when you go outside and look. No matter how old the light is. > > > The picture we receive from the night sky today is 'layered in time', > because further away means also longer ago. > > So, we can see stars today together, which had never existed at the same > time, but millions of years apart. > > Therefore, the picture in the night sky does not reflect reality and > never did. > > But we could try to figure out something closer to reality. But that is > very difficult and only possible for a certain time in the past. Constellations are unimportant other than an old way to find stars/whatever of interest. Constellations we see are earth specific. Go to Alpha Centauri and the constellations will shift somewhat. But more importantly there will be no Alpha Centauri in the Centaurus system, instead there will be three suns. There will also be a new somewhat bright star in another constellation. We know it as our Sun, but there it's just another star. Travel further and the constellations will be unrecognizable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-13 08:11 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <k2ceg8FghcrU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #599495 |
Am 12.01.2023 um 09:55 schrieb Volney: > On 1/12/2023 2:09 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: >> Am 11.01.2023 um 19:00 schrieb Volney: >>> On 1/11/2023 5:29 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: >>>> Am 10.01.2023 um 21:45 schrieb J. J. Lodder: >>>>> carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 6:49:04 AM UTC-8, J. J. Lodder wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Has the Big Dipper chanced appearances in the past? >>>>> >>>>> Yes, and all constellations. >>>>> >>>>> I told you sometime ago that it is noways possible to measure >>>>> parallaxes >>>>> and proper speeds of stars with accuracies in the microarcseconds, >>>>> hence out to 10 000 lightyears or so. >>>>> >>>>> So we can predict what the night sky will look like, >>>>> far into the past and the future. >>>>> >>>> >>>> 10000 years is quite far in the past. >>> >>> The light may have been emitted 10000 years ago, but what matters is >>> what we see today when looking at the sky. >> >> >> I do not agree, because the image we see is a 'message from the past' >> and does not reflect a real thing. >> >> We are also not very import, here on planet Earth today, for the stars >> we see in remote history. >> >> So, actually neither the image we see nor we ourselves are improtant. >> What would matter, that are the star constellations today, which we >> cannot see. >> >> But we could eventually try to reconstruct the real picture, if we >> could figure out the distances, movements, stellar interactions and so >> forth of the stars, put that in a huge computer and let that machine >> reconstruct the unseen state of the universe today. >> ... >> >>>> But can we also predict, how the universe looks like today? >>> >>> The universe or the visible constellations? No need to predict >>> constellations today, just take a look. What's predicted is future >>> appearance of constellations, or (without photographic evidence etc.), >>> "predict" past appearances. >> >> >> No. What we see today does not reflect any reality, neither now nor >> from any time in the past, because the pictures are not only old, but >> also of different age. > > It doesn't matter. The constellations are determined by what you see > when you go outside and look. No matter how old the light is. ????? If you are not an astrologist, you wouldn't care that much about constellations. Everybody knows, that e.g. 'The Great Bear' is not really a bear but a picture in the night sky, which is made from stars of different depth in space. ... TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-13 13:12 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1q4hr41.1cx231g1n1ikdxN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #599542 |
Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote: > Am 12.01.2023 um 09:55 schrieb Volney: > > On 1/12/2023 2:09 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: > >> Am 11.01.2023 um 19:00 schrieb Volney: > >>> On 1/11/2023 5:29 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: > >>>> Am 10.01.2023 um 21:45 schrieb J. J. Lodder: > >>>>> carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 6:49:04 AM UTC-8, J. J. Lodder wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Has the Big Dipper chanced appearances in the past? > >>>>> > >>>>> Yes, and all constellations. > >>>>> > >>>>> I told you sometime ago that it is noways possible to measure > >>>>> parallaxes > >>>>> and proper speeds of stars with accuracies in the microarcseconds, > >>>>> hence out to 10 000 lightyears or so. > >>>>> > >>>>> So we can predict what the night sky will look like, > >>>>> far into the past and the future. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> 10000 years is quite far in the past. > >>> > >>> The light may have been emitted 10000 years ago, but what matters is > >>> what we see today when looking at the sky. > >> > >> > >> I do not agree, because the image we see is a 'message from the past' > >> and does not reflect a real thing. > >> > >> We are also not very import, here on planet Earth today, for the stars > >> we see in remote history. > >> > >> So, actually neither the image we see nor we ourselves are improtant. > >> What would matter, that are the star constellations today, which we > >> cannot see. > >> > >> But we could eventually try to reconstruct the real picture, if we > >> could figure out the distances, movements, stellar interactions and so > >> forth of the stars, put that in a huge computer and let that machine > >> reconstruct the unseen state of the universe today. > >> ... > >> > >>>> But can we also predict, how the universe looks like today? > >>> > >>> The universe or the visible constellations? No need to predict > >>> constellations today, just take a look. What's predicted is future > >>> appearance of constellations, or (without photographic evidence etc.), > >>> "predict" past appearances. > >> > >> > >> No. What we see today does not reflect any reality, neither now nor > >> from any time in the past, because the pictures are not only old, but > >> also of different age. > > > > It doesn't matter. The constellations are determined by what you see > > when you go outside and look. No matter how old the light is. > > > ????? > > If you are not an astrologist, you wouldn't care that much about > constellations. > > Everybody knows, that e.g. 'The Great Bear' is not really a bear but a > picture in the night sky, which is made from stars of different depth in > space. Not really. (Most) of those stars do belong together, being members of the Ursa Major Moving Group. This is an open cluster of stars moving together. They probably have a common origin, about 300 My ago. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ursa_Major_moving_group> You shouldn't generalise when you know nothing about it. Most constellation are just random collections of stars that happen to lie in roughly the same direction, as seen from Earth. But not all stars in all of them, Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-13 04:41 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <547d3b78-0903-4e70-9169-f7e6d13d9083n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #599549 |
On Friday, 13 January 2023 at 13:12:24 UTC+1, J. J. Lodder wrote: > Thomas Heger <ttt...@web.de> wrote: > > > Am 12.01.2023 um 09:55 schrieb Volney: > > > On 1/12/2023 2:09 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: > > >> Am 11.01.2023 um 19:00 schrieb Volney: > > >>> On 1/11/2023 5:29 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: > > >>>> Am 10.01.2023 um 21:45 schrieb J. J. Lodder: > > >>>>> carl eto <ccarleto4...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 6:49:04 AM UTC-8, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Has the Big Dipper chanced appearances in the past? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Yes, and all constellations. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I told you sometime ago that it is noways possible to measure > > >>>>> parallaxes > > >>>>> and proper speeds of stars with accuracies in the microarcseconds, > > >>>>> hence out to 10 000 lightyears or so. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> So we can predict what the night sky will look like, > > >>>>> far into the past and the future. > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> 10000 years is quite far in the past. > > >>> > > >>> The light may have been emitted 10000 years ago, but what matters is > > >>> what we see today when looking at the sky. > > >> > > >> > > >> I do not agree, because the image we see is a 'message from the past' > > >> and does not reflect a real thing. > > >> > > >> We are also not very import, here on planet Earth today, for the stars > > >> we see in remote history. > > >> > > >> So, actually neither the image we see nor we ourselves are improtant. > > >> What would matter, that are the star constellations today, which we > > >> cannot see. > > >> > > >> But we could eventually try to reconstruct the real picture, if we > > >> could figure out the distances, movements, stellar interactions and so > > >> forth of the stars, put that in a huge computer and let that machine > > >> reconstruct the unseen state of the universe today. > > >> ... > > >> > > >>>> But can we also predict, how the universe looks like today? > > >>> > > >>> The universe or the visible constellations? No need to predict > > >>> constellations today, just take a look. What's predicted is future > > >>> appearance of constellations, or (without photographic evidence etc.), > > >>> "predict" past appearances. > > >> > > >> > > >> No. What we see today does not reflect any reality, neither now nor > > >> from any time in the past, because the pictures are not only old, but > > >> also of different age. > > > > > > It doesn't matter. The constellations are determined by what you see > > > when you go outside and look. No matter how old the light is. > > > > > > ????? > > > > If you are not an astrologist, you wouldn't care that much about > > constellations. > > > > Everybody knows, that e.g. 'The Great Bear' is not really a bear but a > > picture in the night sky, which is made from stars of different depth in > > space. > Not really. (Most) of those stars do belong together, Oh, most? How many of how many? > You shouldn't generalise And you shouldn't fabricate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-13 16:11 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1q4i2k4.q0sc4l1ja5ucfN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #599551 |
Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> wrote: > On Friday, 13 January 2023 at 13:12:24 UTC+1, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > Thomas Heger <ttt...@web.de> wrote: > > > > > Am 12.01.2023 um 09:55 schrieb Volney: > > > > On 1/12/2023 2:09 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: > > > >> Am 11.01.2023 um 19:00 schrieb Volney: > > > >>> On 1/11/2023 5:29 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: > > > >>>> Am 10.01.2023 um 21:45 schrieb J. J. Lodder: > > > >>>>> carl eto <ccarleto4...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 6:49:04 AM UTC-8, J. J. Lodder: > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> Has the Big Dipper chanced appearances in the past? > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Yes, and all constellations. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> I told you sometime ago that it is noways possible to measure > > > >>>>> parallaxes > > > >>>>> and proper speeds of stars with accuracies in the microarcseconds, > > > >>>>> hence out to 10 000 lightyears or so. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> So we can predict what the night sky will look like, > > > >>>>> far into the past and the future. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> 10000 years is quite far in the past. > > > >>> > > > >>> The light may have been emitted 10000 years ago, but what matters is > > > >>> what we see today when looking at the sky. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> I do not agree, because the image we see is a 'message from the past' > > > >> and does not reflect a real thing. > > > >> > > > >> We are also not very import, here on planet Earth today, for the stars > > > >> we see in remote history. > > > >> > > > >> So, actually neither the image we see nor we ourselves are improtant. > > > >> What would matter, that are the star constellations today, which we > > > >> cannot see. > > > >> > > > >> But we could eventually try to reconstruct the real picture, if we > > > >> could figure out the distances, movements, stellar interactions and so > > > >> forth of the stars, put that in a huge computer and let that machine > > > >> reconstruct the unseen state of the universe today. > > > >> ... > > > >> > > > >>>> But can we also predict, how the universe looks like today? > > > >>> > > > >>> The universe or the visible constellations? No need to predict > > > >>> constellations today, just take a look. What's predicted is future > > > >>> appearance of constellations, or (without photographic evidence etc.), > > > >>> "predict" past appearances. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> No. What we see today does not reflect any reality, neither now nor > > > >> from any time in the past, because the pictures are not only old, but > > > >> also of different age. > > > > > > > > It doesn't matter. The constellations are determined by what you see > > > > when you go outside and look. No matter how old the light is. > > > > > > > > > ????? > > > > > > If you are not an astrologist, you wouldn't care that much about > > > constellations. > > > > > > Everybody knows, that e.g. 'The Great Bear' is not really a bear but a > > > picture in the night sky, which is made from stars of different depth in > > > space. > > Not really. (Most) of those stars do belong together, > > Oh, most? How many of how many? Do your own homework, Jan > > You shouldn't generalise > > And you shouldn't fabricate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-13 08:54 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <59ac6a71-6f01-4a47-bd56-c362e6080450n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #599554 |
On Friday, 13 January 2023 at 16:11:56 UTC+1, J. J. Lodder wrote: > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Friday, 13 January 2023 at 13:12:24 UTC+1, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > Thomas Heger <ttt...@web.de> wrote: > > > > > > > Am 12.01.2023 um 09:55 schrieb Volney: > > > > > On 1/12/2023 2:09 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: > > > > >> Am 11.01.2023 um 19:00 schrieb Volney: > > > > >>> On 1/11/2023 5:29 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: > > > > >>>> Am 10.01.2023 um 21:45 schrieb J. J. Lodder: > > > > >>>>> carl eto <ccarleto4...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 6:49:04 AM UTC-8, J. J. Lodder: > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> Has the Big Dipper chanced appearances in the past? > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> Yes, and all constellations. > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> I told you sometime ago that it is noways possible to measure > > > > >>>>> parallaxes > > > > >>>>> and proper speeds of stars with accuracies in the microarcseconds, > > > > >>>>> hence out to 10 000 lightyears or so. > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> So we can predict what the night sky will look like, > > > > >>>>> far into the past and the future. > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> 10000 years is quite far in the past. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> The light may have been emitted 10000 years ago, but what matters is > > > > >>> what we see today when looking at the sky. > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> I do not agree, because the image we see is a 'message from the past' > > > > >> and does not reflect a real thing. > > > > >> > > > > >> We are also not very import, here on planet Earth today, for the stars > > > > >> we see in remote history. > > > > >> > > > > >> So, actually neither the image we see nor we ourselves are improtant. > > > > >> What would matter, that are the star constellations today, which we > > > > >> cannot see. > > > > >> > > > > >> But we could eventually try to reconstruct the real picture, if we > > > > >> could figure out the distances, movements, stellar interactions and so > > > > >> forth of the stars, put that in a huge computer and let that machine > > > > >> reconstruct the unseen state of the universe today. > > > > >> ... > > > > >> > > > > >>>> But can we also predict, how the universe looks like today? > > > > >>> > > > > >>> The universe or the visible constellations? No need to predict > > > > >>> constellations today, just take a look. What's predicted is future > > > > >>> appearance of constellations, or (without photographic evidence etc.), > > > > >>> "predict" past appearances. > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> No. What we see today does not reflect any reality, neither now nor > > > > >> from any time in the past, because the pictures are not only old, but > > > > >> also of different age. > > > > > > > > > > It doesn't matter. The constellations are determined by what you see > > > > > when you go outside and look. No matter how old the light is. > > > > > > > > > > > > ????? > > > > > > > > If you are not an astrologist, you wouldn't care that much about > > > > constellations. > > > > > > > > Everybody knows, that e.g. 'The Great Bear' is not really a bear but a > > > > picture in the night sky, which is made from stars of different depth in > > > > space. > > > Not really. (Most) of those stars do belong together, > > > > Oh, most? How many of how many? > Do your own homework, No, lying trash. Tell us. How many of how many?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-13 21:52 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1q4imnm.ppefq515eevf5N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #599563 |
Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> wrote: > On Friday, 13 January 2023 at 16:11:56 UTC+1, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Friday, 13 January 2023 at 13:12:24 UTC+1, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > > Thomas Heger <ttt...@web.de> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Am 12.01.2023 um 09:55 schrieb Volney: > > > > > > On 1/12/2023 2:09 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: > > > > > >> Am 11.01.2023 um 19:00 schrieb Volney: > > > > > >>> On 1/11/2023 5:29 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: > > > > > >>>> Am 10.01.2023 um 21:45 schrieb J. J. Lodder: > > > > > >>>>> carl eto <ccarleto4...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 6:49:04 AM UTC-8, J. J. Lodder: > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> Has the Big Dipper chanced appearances in the past? > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> Yes, and all constellations. > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> I told you sometime ago that it is noways possible to measure > > > > > >>>>> parallaxes > > > > > >>>>> and proper speeds of stars with accuracies in the > > > > > >>>>> microarcseconds, hence out to 10 000 lightyears or so. > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> So we can predict what the night sky will look like, far > > > > > >>>>> into the past and the future. > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> 10000 years is quite far in the past. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> The light may have been emitted 10000 years ago, but what > > > > > >>> matters is what we see today when looking at the sky. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> I do not agree, because the image we see is a 'message from the > > > > > >> past' and does not reflect a real thing. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> We are also not very import, here on planet Earth today, for > > > > > >> the stars we see in remote history. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> So, actually neither the image we see nor we ourselves are > > > > > >> improtant. What would matter, that are the star constellations > > > > > >> today, which we cannot see. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> But we could eventually try to reconstruct the real picture, if > > > > > >> we could figure out the distances, movements, stellar > > > > > >> interactions and so forth of the stars, put that in a huge > > > > > >> computer and let that machine reconstruct the unseen state of > > > > > >> the universe today. ... > > > > > >> > > > > > >>>> But can we also predict, how the universe looks like today? > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> The universe or the visible constellations? No need to predict > > > > > >>> constellations today, just take a look. What's predicted is > > > > > >>> future appearance of constellations, or (without photographic > > > > > >>> evidence etc.), "predict" past appearances. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> No. What we see today does not reflect any reality, neither now > > > > > >> nor from any time in the past, because the pictures are not > > > > > >> only old, but also of different age. > > > > > > > > > > > > It doesn't matter. The constellations are determined by what you > > > > > > see when you go outside and look. No matter how old the light > > > > > > is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ????? > > > > > > > > > > If you are not an astrologist, you wouldn't care that much about > > > > > constellations. > > > > > > > > > > Everybody knows, that e.g. 'The Great Bear' is not really a bear > > > > > but a picture in the night sky, which is made from stars of > > > > > different depth in space. > > > > Not really. (Most) of those stars do belong together, > > > > > > Oh, most? How many of how many? > > Do your own homework, > > No, lying trash. Tell us. How many of how many? "The keys to. Given!" Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-13 11:21 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <tps0e8$1lc9e$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #599542 |
On 1/13/2023 2:11 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 12.01.2023 um 09:55 schrieb Volney: >> On 1/12/2023 2:09 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: >>> Am 11.01.2023 um 19:00 schrieb Volney: >>>> On 1/11/2023 5:29 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: >>>>> Am 10.01.2023 um 21:45 schrieb J. J. Lodder: >>>>>> carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 6:49:04 AM UTC-8, J. J. Lodder >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Has the Big Dipper chanced appearances in the past? >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, and all constellations. >>>>>> >>>>>> I told you sometime ago that it is noways possible to measure >>>>>> parallaxes >>>>>> and proper speeds of stars with accuracies in the microarcseconds, >>>>>> hence out to 10 000 lightyears or so. >>>>>> >>>>>> So we can predict what the night sky will look like, >>>>>> far into the past and the future. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 10000 years is quite far in the past. >>>> >>>> The light may have been emitted 10000 years ago, but what matters is >>>> what we see today when looking at the sky. >>> >>> >>> I do not agree, because the image we see is a 'message from the past' >>> and does not reflect a real thing. >>> >>> We are also not very import, here on planet Earth today, for the stars >>> we see in remote history. >>> >>> So, actually neither the image we see nor we ourselves are improtant. >>> What would matter, that are the star constellations today, which we >>> cannot see. >>> >>> But we could eventually try to reconstruct the real picture, if we >>> could figure out the distances, movements, stellar interactions and so >>> forth of the stars, put that in a huge computer and let that machine >>> reconstruct the unseen state of the universe today. >>> ... >>> >>>>> But can we also predict, how the universe looks like today? >>>> >>>> The universe or the visible constellations? No need to predict >>>> constellations today, just take a look. What's predicted is future >>>> appearance of constellations, or (without photographic evidence etc.), >>>> "predict" past appearances. >>> >>> >>> No. What we see today does not reflect any reality, neither now nor >>> from any time in the past, because the pictures are not only old, but >>> also of different age. >> >> It doesn't matter. The constellations are determined by what you see >> when you go outside and look. No matter how old the light is. > > > ????? > > If you are not an astrologist, you wouldn't care that much about > constellations. > > Everybody knows, that e.g. 'The Great Bear' is not really a bear but a > picture in the night sky, which is made from stars of different depth in > space. Exactly. Most constellations are just random patterns caused by the happenstance relative positions of stars in space and time. I don't know why you and Carl make a big deal over that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-14 09:54 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <k2f8umFts96U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #599559 |
Am 13.01.2023 um 17:21 schrieb Volney: >>>> No. What we see today does not reflect any reality, neither now nor >>>> from any time in the past, because the pictures are not only old, but >>>> also of different age. >>> >>> It doesn't matter. The constellations are determined by what you see >>> when you go outside and look. No matter how old the light is. >> >> >> ????? >> >> If you are not an astrologist, you wouldn't care that much about >> constellations. >> >> Everybody knows, that e.g. 'The Great Bear' is not really a bear but a >> picture in the night sky, which is made from stars of different depth >> in space. > > > Exactly. Most constellations are just random patterns caused by the > happenstance relative positions of stars in space and time. > > I don't know why you and Carl make a big deal over that. I wanted to insist on the character of the pictures in the night sky as 'not real'. The pictures we see do not reflect reality, because the pictures stem from stars, which partically do not exist anymore and which all are now at different positions then where we see them. So: the night sky shows pictures from the past, which are also layered in time. This is important to know, because some cosmological concepts would require to know the positions of stars at the same time but at different depth in space. But we do not have these posistion, because we cannot wait millions of years for the pictures from further away. This is a serious problem for cosmologists, which cannot be solved by taking the apparent positions, which we see today here on Earth. We can't, because interactions between celestial objects would most likely depend on temporal coexistence of these objects. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Athel Cornish-Bowden <acornish@imm.cnrs.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-14 10:07 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <k2f9mlFtvkmU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #599582 |
On 2023-01-14 08:54:42 +0000, Thomas Heger said: > Am 13.01.2023 um 17:21 schrieb Volney: > >>>>> No. What we see today does not reflect any reality, neither now nor >>>>> from any time in the past, because the pictures are not only old, but >>>>> also of different age. >>>> >>>> It doesn't matter. The constellations are determined by what you see >>>> when you go outside and look. No matter how old the light is. >>> >>> >>> ????? >>> >>> If you are not an astrologist, you wouldn't care that much about >>> constellations. >>> >>> Everybody knows, that e.g. 'The Great Bear' is not really a bear but a >>> picture in the night sky, which is made from stars of different depth >>> in space. >> >> >> Exactly. Most constellations are just random patterns caused by the >> happenstance relative positions of stars in space and time. >> >> I don't know why you and Carl make a big deal over that. > > > I wanted to insist on the character of the pictures in the night sky as > 'not real'. > > The pictures we see do not reflect reality, because the pictures stem > from stars, which partically do not exist anymore and which all are now > at different positions then where we see them. > > So: the night sky shows pictures from the past, which are also layered in time. > > This is important to know, because some cosmological concepts such as? > would require to know the positions of stars at the same time but at > different depth in space. > > But we do not have these posistion, because we cannot wait millions of > years for the pictures from further away. > > This is a serious problem for cosmologists, Have you talked to any cosmologists about this? Do they agree that it is a serious problem? > which cannot be solved by taking the apparent positions, which we see > today here on Earth. > > We can't, because interactions between celestial objects would most > likely depend on temporal coexistence of these objects. > > > TH -- Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 36+ years; mainly in England until 1987.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-14 12:03 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <9628d832-adcb-49cc-9bdb-6f0ce7ec043an@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #599582 |
On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 12:54:50 AM UTC-8, Thomas Heger wrote: > The pictures we see do not reflect reality, because the pictures stem > from stars, which partically do not exist anymore and which all are now > at different positions then where we see them. > > So: the night sky shows pictures from the past, which are also layered > in time. > > This is important to know, because some cosmological concepts would > require to know the positions of stars at the same time but at different > depth in space. So, which cosmological concepts would those be, exactly? I believe that you are simply making this up...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 12 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 … 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web