Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #601306 > unrolled thread
| Started by | worm food <wormfood@compostpunk.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2023-02-12 13:29 -0500 |
| Last post | 2023-02-19 14:53 -0800 |
| Articles | 19 on this page of 79 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD worm food <wormfood@compostpunk.com> - 2023-02-12 13:29 -0500
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-02-12 19:46 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-02-14 11:51 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD worm food <wormfood@compostpunk.com> - 2023-02-14 16:00 -0500
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-02-16 15:17 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-02-17 01:39 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-02-17 10:28 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-02-17 15:52 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-02-17 22:11 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-02-18 12:06 -0600
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-02-18 19:38 +0100
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-02-19 03:57 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-02-24 02:08 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-02-24 03:07 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-02-25 12:55 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-02-25 16:40 -0600
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-02-28 01:21 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-02-28 10:45 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-03-01 00:35 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-03-02 17:59 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD Jeffrey Rubard <rehashedrubard@gmail.com> - 2023-03-03 13:54 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-03-03 14:47 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-03-04 12:57 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-03-04 18:26 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-03-04 23:13 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD Jeffrey Rubard <rehashedrubard@gmail.com> - 2023-03-05 08:28 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-03-05 22:06 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-03-06 00:43 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-03-06 12:10 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-03-06 17:18 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-03-06 22:58 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-03-08 01:01 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-03-08 10:08 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-03-08 16:51 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-03-08 22:13 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-03-09 02:22 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-03-09 12:00 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-03-09 12:11 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-03-10 06:29 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2023-03-10 06:58 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-03-10 17:47 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-03-11 18:15 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-03-11 19:16 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-03-15 19:26 -0700
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-03-18 07:40 -0700
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD Carmine Benedetti <iart@aatnen.ei> - 2023-03-19 16:50 +0000
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-03-19 12:10 -0700
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD Carmine Benedetti <iart@aatnen.ei> - 2023-03-19 19:21 +0000
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-03-19 14:49 -0700
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-03-21 00:30 -0700
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-04-06 14:32 -0700
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD John-Paul Mosconi <hmus@omsjcmcu.ao> - 2023-04-07 00:20 +0000
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-04-10 01:46 -0700
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD James Willi Negri <lnes@allligal.nr> - 2023-04-10 23:01 +0000
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-04-10 22:35 -0700
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-04-11 00:27 -0700
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD Dentcho Rustici <osin@icctcesd.do> - 2023-04-11 17:03 +0000
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-04-13 23:30 -0700
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-02-26 11:57 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-02-26 12:41 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-02-26 18:03 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD Bubba Pagano <nuan@bappn.bb> - 2023-02-26 21:17 +0000
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-02-18 12:33 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-02-18 14:47 -0600
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-02-17 10:40 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-02-17 22:16 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-02-13 08:21 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD worm food <wormfood@compostpunk.com> - 2023-02-14 11:55 -0500
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-02-15 02:40 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD worm food <wormfood@compostpunk.com> - 2023-02-15 11:33 -0500
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-02-15 09:52 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-02-17 10:50 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD worm food <wormfood@compostpunk.com> - 2023-02-18 14:40 -0500
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-02-18 12:02 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-02-18 14:29 -0600
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-02-18 17:55 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-02-19 12:22 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-02-19 14:48 -0800
Re: THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-02-19 14:53 -0800
Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]
| From | George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-26 18:03 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <1deda1b7-289e-49df-90ef-72c672e932f5n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #602330 |
On Sunday, February 26, 2023 at 3:41:38 PM UTC-5, The Starmaker wrote: > > > [STARMAKER] WROTE > > > I mean, who do you know that can listen to you talk for 12 minutes???? > > > > > [George E Hammond MS Physics]. > > ..................YOU GOTTA BE KIDDING !! > > I just got through telling you below that: – > > I SPOKE TO THIS AUDIENCE OF 200 PSYCHOLOGISTS > > FOR 35 MINUTES AND RECEIVED A RESOUNDING OVATION ! > [George E Hammond MS physics, Hyannis MA USA] HANS EYSENCK got up and spoke for 35 minutes AFTER ME to the same audience from the same podium. ' HANS EYSENCK generously referred to me as "Dr. Hammond" and indicated that my "Physics research Into Psychology" was likely the way towards finding long-lost HIPPOCRATIC PERSONALITY MODEL ! . Much of his speech was about Bosnia – Herzegovina, being in the news at that time! . Unfortunately the Dean of Harvard University in a private conversation a few years later at Harvard informed me that Hans Eysenck had just died that morning of a brain tumor ! . > > at the XXVI International Congress of Psychology > > in Montréal in 1996 where we were both invited speakers > > at the same podium and to the same audience. (photo > > taken by Prof. Peter F Merenda Chairman of the > > Psychology department at URI). > > . > > https://html.scribdassets.com/icjqusczk4alsap/images/1-c1c01b1d46.jpg > > . RE---THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics.relativity/c/EsKCSUHMmow/m/nCL2yjYbAAAJ AND https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics.relativity/c/EsKCSUHMmow/m/-yhYw3QeAAAJ . Geo
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bubba Pagano <nuan@bappn.bb> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-26 21:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ttgia0$315ib$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #602323 |
George Hammond wrote: > [George E Hammond MS Physics]. > . > ............................................................YOU GOTTA BE > KIDDING !! > . > I just got through telling you below that: – > . > I SPOKE TO THIS AUDIENCE OF 200 PSYCHOLOGISTS FOR 35 MINUTES AND > RECEIVED A RESOUNDING OVATION ! pull my finger. So I can leak a fart.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-18 12:33 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <63F1361D.3468@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #601639 |
whodat wrote: > > On 2/18/2023 12:11 AM, The Starmaker wrote: > > George Hammond wrote: > >> > >> On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 1:28:23 PM UTC-5, The Starmaker wrote: > >>> [GEORGE HAMMOND] WROTE: > >>> do you know some > >>> influential JEWS who might know some > >>> high-ranking Jewish ACADEMICS ?? > >>> > >>> [STARMAKER] WROTE: > >>> Their God is different...they worship a > >>> god who is...6 inches tall. > >>> > >> [GEORGE HAMMOND] wrote: > >> Here is a list of the top half dozen > >> ........ISRAELI UNIVERSITIES: – > >> 1 – Technion-Israel Institute of Technology – Haifa > >> 2 – University of Haifa > >> 3 – Hebrew University of Jerusalem > >> 4 – Weizmann Institute of Science – Tel Aviv > >> 5 – Tel Aviv University > >> 6 – Bar Ilan University – Tel Aviv > >> . > >> These Christian Physicists on SPR don't know > >> what God is! > >> . > >> I need to talk to some JEWISH PHYSICISTS > >> who know BOTH what Physics is, and God is ! > >> . > >> All of these universities teach in ENGLISH as well > >> as HEBREW. > >> . > >> If anyone reading this post besides Dum-Dum > >> STARMAKER knows any "Jewish Physicists" > >> who might understand both PHYSICS and GOD > >> please let them know about this discovery > >> of the world's first scientific proof of God > >> (relativistic metric of God) – and the fact > >> that GEORGE HAMMOND is desperately > >> looking for them ! > >> . > >> George > > > > A JEWISH PHYSICISTS who knows BOTH what Physics is, and God is...doesn't exist. > > ...and they certaintly don't want to have anything to > > do with scientists who aren't Jewish. > > > > And they will simply steal your idea and call it their own. > > > > Don't you know their history since the beginning? They are vampires. > > Haven't you ever wondered why nobody has ever considered stealing > any of your ideas? Luck has nothing to do with it. FDR would not bomb train lines to the concentration camps... -- 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 | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-18 14:47 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <k5crrdFroc6U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #601654 |
On 2/18/2023 2:33 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > whodat wrote: [...] >> Haven't you ever wondered why nobody has ever considered stealing >> any of your ideas? Luck has nothing to do with it. > FDR would not bomb train lines to the concentration camps... Answers, such as you imply here, come very easily when the person providing doesn't fully understand the question. You're doing such a nice job of hoisting yourself by your own petard that I don't feel any need to assist you further. <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/petard> But I'll be only too happy to point out what's happening.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-17 10:40 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <63EFCA28.6695@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #601562 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > worm food wrote: > > > > On 2/14/2023 2:51 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > > > George Hammond wrote: > > >> > > >> On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 1:30:01 PM UTC-5, worm food wrote: > > >>>> [George Hammond wrote]: – it has been scientifically proven > > >>>> and measured to 2 decimal point accuracy experimentally – that > > >>>> THERE IS A REAL GOD – and it is exactly the God described in the > > >>>> King James Bible and described in all 5 of the world's major religions! > > >>>> . > > >>> > > >>> [worm food wrote]: > > >>> George, you should really reach out to Hans Geesink > > >>> (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hans-Geesink). I believe you and > > >>> he may have a lot to talk about. > > >>> > > >> [George Hammond MS Physics] > > >> Dear "worm food", on the OUTSIDE chance > > >> that you might be a serious person – > > >> . > > >> I have the following questions for you: – > > >> . > > >> 1 – Why are there no other SPR postings under the > > >> name "worm food" – have you deliberately nymshifted > > >> for this specific post? > > >> . > > >> You seem to have read my post of 1/1/23 since > > >> you quoted the entire message in your post? > > >> . > > >> 2 – Therefore, what would make you think that I have > > >> ANYTHING in common with Dr. Geesink – since his work > > >> is entirely about : > > >> . > > >> QUANTUM THEORY and ELECTROMAGNETIC THEORY > > >> . > > >> while my work is all about : > > >> . > > >> RELATIVITY and PSYCHOMETRY > > >> . > > >> THERE SEEMS TO BE NO SCIENTIFIC > > >> COMMON GROUND WHATSOEVER ? > > >> . > > >> Truly yours, George > > > > > > > > > Objectivism is ...antiquated. > > > > > > Your proof of God > > > needs to be added > > > to that pile > > > of > > > burning books of history. > > > > > > Couldn't you come up with something new???? > > > > > > maybe a better mousetrap. > > > > > > throw yourself on dat fire.. > > > > > > food for fire. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I see Loki is out here doing [god's] work. > > I see you reference 'god' twice in one sentence....dats odd? Actually, your reference to 'god' is...thrice. [god's] Loki and... "I see..." The all seeing god. Now, it's dat odd? I mean Is dat odd? dat you would mentioned 'god' thrice in one sentence?? I mean, is dat odd? I mean, ...Yes, dat is Odd. I mean if others are wondering is dat odd? The answer is Yes... That is Odd. -- 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 | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-17 22:16 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <63F06D28.7AD1@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #601576 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > worm food wrote: > > > > > > On 2/14/2023 2:51 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > > > > George Hammond wrote: > > > >> > > > >> On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 1:30:01 PM UTC-5, worm food wrote: > > > >>>> [George Hammond wrote]: – it has been scientifically proven > > > >>>> and measured to 2 decimal point accuracy experimentally – that > > > >>>> THERE IS A REAL GOD – and it is exactly the God described in the > > > >>>> King James Bible and described in all 5 of the world's major religions! > > > >>>> . > > > >>> > > > >>> [worm food wrote]: > > > >>> George, you should really reach out to Hans Geesink > > > >>> (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hans-Geesink). I believe you and > > > >>> he may have a lot to talk about. > > > >>> > > > >> [George Hammond MS Physics] > > > >> Dear "worm food", on the OUTSIDE chance > > > >> that you might be a serious person – > > > >> . > > > >> I have the following questions for you: – > > > >> . > > > >> 1 – Why are there no other SPR postings under the > > > >> name "worm food" – have you deliberately nymshifted > > > >> for this specific post? > > > >> . > > > >> You seem to have read my post of 1/1/23 since > > > >> you quoted the entire message in your post? > > > >> . > > > >> 2 – Therefore, what would make you think that I have > > > >> ANYTHING in common with Dr. Geesink – since his work > > > >> is entirely about : > > > >> . > > > >> QUANTUM THEORY and ELECTROMAGNETIC THEORY > > > >> . > > > >> while my work is all about : > > > >> . > > > >> RELATIVITY and PSYCHOMETRY > > > >> . > > > >> THERE SEEMS TO BE NO SCIENTIFIC > > > >> COMMON GROUND WHATSOEVER ? > > > >> . > > > >> Truly yours, George > > > > > > > > > > > > Objectivism is ...antiquated. > > > > > > > > Your proof of God > > > > needs to be added > > > > to that pile > > > > of > > > > burning books of history. > > > > > > > > Couldn't you come up with something new???? > > > > > > > > maybe a better mousetrap. > > > > > > > > throw yourself on dat fire.. > > > > > > > > food for fire. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I see Loki is out here doing [god's] work. > > > > I see you reference 'god' twice in one sentence....dats odd? > > Actually, your reference to 'god' is...thrice. > > [god's] > Loki > and... > > "I see..." > > The all seeing god. > > Now, it's dat odd? > > I mean > > Is dat odd? dat you would mentioned 'god' thrice in one sentence?? > > I mean, is dat odd? > > I mean, ...Yes, > > dat is Odd. > > I mean > if others > are wondering > is dat odd? > > The answer is > Yes... > That is Odd. Worm food and odd bodkin are one and the same person. the odd bodkin is back. or at least tryin to slime back... but he cannot burn his ...fingerprints. -- 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 | George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-13 08:21 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <e3ab12a3-6967-49a7-861c-42ff79fb844fn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #601306 |
On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 1:30:01 PM UTC-5, worm food wrote: > On 1/1/2023 4:08 PM, George Hammond wrote: > > THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD > > January 1, 2023 > > FROM: George E Hammond MS physics > > . > > In 1920 Einstein found the universe was not > > "stable" as he had hoTped – it would collapse > > under its own gravity. > > . > > FRIEDMANN discovered a way out of this dilemma – he > > said the universe was EXPANDING. > > . > > He said you could simply multiply the space part (XYZ) > > of Einstein's metric: > > . > > | 1 o o o. | > > | o 1 o o. | = EINSTEIN METRIC > > | o o 1 o. | > > | o o o -1.| > > . > > by a "EXPANSION FACTOR", a = a(t), > > which would convert Einstein's metric to the > > Friedmann metric: – > > . > > |a² o o o. | > > |o a² o o. | = FRIEDMANN (FLRW) METRIC > > |o o a² o. | > > |o o o..-1.| > > . > > And today this metric, now referred to as the FLRW > > (Friedmann, LeMaitre, Robertson, Walker metric) > > rules all of Astrophysics. > > . > > a(t) is called the "scale factor" and expands with time > > thus providing an "expanding universe". > > . > > (da/dt) is known as the "Hubble constant" and is about > > 7%/gigayear . IOW it takes 1 billion years for the universe > > to expand by 7% > > . > > MORE RECENTLY HAMMOND has discovered that the > > phenomenon called "God" is actually a CONTRACTION > > of SUBJECTIVE SPACETIME caused by the growth of > > the human brain under the age of 20 at a rate of about > > 5%/year . > > . > > And, COPYING FRIEDMANN Hammond has proposed > > that this can be expressed by the HAMMOND METRIC: – > > . > > |a² o o o. | > > |o a² o o. | = HAMMOND METRIC OF GOD > > |o o a² o. | > > |ooo-1/a²| > > . > > Here the scale factor "a(t)" DECREASES WITH TIME and in fact > > begins at around a=3.5 at human birth, and falls to about > > a=1.18 at human adulthood. > > . > > The reason it does not fall to 1.0 at (age 18) is because no one > > ever reaches 100% full growth – in fact WHO, UNESCO data > > indicate that the world average of adult growth is only about 85%, > > of full growth, and since 1/.85=1.18 : – > > . > > the huge RIEMANN CURVATURE of the "GOD METRIC" leaves > > the average adult human being SEEING a World that APPEARS > > 18% LARGER AND FASTER than it actually is! > > . > > OBVIOUSLY, such a phenomenon can be terrifyingly frightening > > to every human being –and this perceptual phenomenon is known > > to history as the: – PHENOMENON OF GOD., > > including notably, the God of the Bible and the God of every other > > world religion. > > . > > As we can see from the above metrics that the > > "Hubble constant of God" (da/dt) is a BILLION times larger than > > the "Hubble constant of Astrophysics" – we see that the > > "curvature power" of God a BILLION TIMES larger than the > > "curvature power of Gravity" – save for the instance of being in > > the vicinity of a BLACK HOLE ! > > . > > Thus – debate over whether or not there is a real God is NOW OVER ! > > Richard Dawkins notwithstanding – it has been scientifically proven > > and measured to 2 decimal point accuracy experimentally – that > > THERE IS A REAL GOD – and it is exactly the God described in the > > King James Bible and described in all 5 of the world's major religions! > > . > > George E Hammond MS Physics, Hyannis Massachusetts > [worm food] wrote: – > George, you should really reach out to Hans Geesink > (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hans-Geesink). I believe you and > he may have a lot to talk about. > [George Hammond MS Physics] .... FURTHERMORE "worm food": – as you can see my "Scientific Proof of God" (SPOG) requires only A SINGLE DOUBLESPACED PAGE to explain it – as evidenced by my post of 1/1/23 which you quoted in your original message. . GEESINK'S theories require dozens if not hundreds of 20 page papers, with complicated diagrams, nested densely pack data tables: – to simply present his findings ! . FURTHERMORE I don't see him ANYWHERE mentioning the word GOD ! . Surely you must be joking that I should be talking to Hans Geesink !! . Richard Feynman was probably the last physicist on Earth who could possibly "instantly comprehend" my SPR post of 1/1/23 quoted above. . GET REAL "WORM FOOD": – YOU are the only one recently to recognize the HISTORIC SERIOUSNESS of the scientific discovery described in my SPR post of 1/1/23 and if you drop the – I guarantee you that you will live to regret it somewhere down the road in the future ! . George
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | worm food <wormfood@compostpunk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-14 11:55 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <tsgedn$2iqdh$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #601351 |
On 2/13/2023 11:21 AM, George Hammond wrote: > On Sunday, February 12, 2023 at 1:30:01 PM UTC-5, worm food wrote: >> On 1/1/2023 4:08 PM, George Hammond wrote: >>> THE RIEMANN CURVATURE OF GOD >>> January 1, 2023 >>> FROM: George E Hammond MS physics >>> . >>> In 1920 Einstein found the universe was not >>> "stable" as he had hoTped – it would collapse >>> under its own gravity. >>> . >>> FRIEDMANN discovered a way out of this dilemma – he >>> said the universe was EXPANDING. >>> . >>> He said you could simply multiply the space part (XYZ) >>> of Einstein's metric: >>> . >>> | 1 o o o. | >>> | o 1 o o. | = EINSTEIN METRIC >>> | o o 1 o. | >>> | o o o -1.| >>> . >>> by a "EXPANSION FACTOR", a = a(t), >>> which would convert Einstein's metric to the >>> Friedmann metric: – >>> . >>> |a² o o o. | >>> |o a² o o. | = FRIEDMANN (FLRW) METRIC >>> |o o a² o. | >>> |o o o..-1.| >>> . >>> And today this metric, now referred to as the FLRW >>> (Friedmann, LeMaitre, Robertson, Walker metric) >>> rules all of Astrophysics. >>> . >>> a(t) is called the "scale factor" and expands with time >>> thus providing an "expanding universe". >>> . >>> (da/dt) is known as the "Hubble constant" and is about >>> 7%/gigayear . IOW it takes 1 billion years for the universe >>> to expand by 7% >>> . >>> MORE RECENTLY HAMMOND has discovered that the >>> phenomenon called "God" is actually a CONTRACTION >>> of SUBJECTIVE SPACETIME caused by the growth of >>> the human brain under the age of 20 at a rate of about >>> 5%/year . >>> . >>> And, COPYING FRIEDMANN Hammond has proposed >>> that this can be expressed by the HAMMOND METRIC: – >>> . >>> |a² o o o. | >>> |o a² o o. | = HAMMOND METRIC OF GOD >>> |o o a² o. | >>> |ooo-1/a²| >>> . >>> Here the scale factor "a(t)" DECREASES WITH TIME and in fact >>> begins at around a=3.5 at human birth, and falls to about >>> a=1.18 at human adulthood. >>> . >>> The reason it does not fall to 1.0 at (age 18) is because no one >>> ever reaches 100% full growth – in fact WHO, UNESCO data >>> indicate that the world average of adult growth is only about 85%, >>> of full growth, and since 1/.85=1.18 : – >>> . >>> the huge RIEMANN CURVATURE of the "GOD METRIC" leaves >>> the average adult human being SEEING a World that APPEARS >>> 18% LARGER AND FASTER than it actually is! >>> . >>> OBVIOUSLY, such a phenomenon can be terrifyingly frightening >>> to every human being –and this perceptual phenomenon is known >>> to history as the: – PHENOMENON OF GOD., >>> including notably, the God of the Bible and the God of every other >>> world religion. >>> . >>> As we can see from the above metrics that the >>> "Hubble constant of God" (da/dt) is a BILLION times larger than >>> the "Hubble constant of Astrophysics" – we see that the >>> "curvature power" of God a BILLION TIMES larger than the >>> "curvature power of Gravity" – save for the instance of being in >>> the vicinity of a BLACK HOLE ! >>> . >>> Thus – debate over whether or not there is a real God is NOW OVER ! >>> Richard Dawkins notwithstanding – it has been scientifically proven >>> and measured to 2 decimal point accuracy experimentally – that >>> THERE IS A REAL GOD – and it is exactly the God described in the >>> King James Bible and described in all 5 of the world's major religions! >>> . >>> George E Hammond MS Physics, Hyannis Massachusetts >> > [worm food] wrote: – >> George, you should really reach out to Hans Geesink >> (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hans-Geesink). I believe you and >> he may have a lot to talk about. >> > [George Hammond MS Physics] > .... FURTHERMORE "worm food": – as you can see my > "Scientific Proof of God" (SPOG) requires only > A SINGLE DOUBLESPACED PAGE to explain it – as evidenced > by my post of 1/1/23 which you quoted in your original message. > . > GEESINK'S theories require dozens if not hundreds of > 20 page papers, with complicated diagrams, nested densely > pack data tables: – to simply present his findings ! > . > FURTHERMORE I don't see him ANYWHERE > mentioning the word GOD ! > . > Surely you must be joking that I should be talking to > Hans Geesink !! > . > Richard Feynman was probably the last physicist on Earth > who could possibly "instantly comprehend" my SPR post of > 1/1/23 quoted above. > . > GET REAL "WORM FOOD": – YOU are the only one recently > to recognize the HISTORIC SERIOUSNESS of the scientific > discovery described in my SPR post of 1/1/23 and if you > drop the – I guarantee you that you will live to regret it > somewhere down the road in the future ! > . > George George, The issue of my identity aside, I did read your post, and I do suggest that consider Dr. Geesink's work. To me, this is a question of translation. You, and he, and others, have clearly "seen something" and you are utilizing what you consider the best and most relevant known language to describe that "something". This is likely the source of the frustration of those who oppose your theory. People tend to take any symbolic system as if it accurately portrays what it intends to, i.e., that it has absolute meaning. But this is ridiculous. Symbols can only tangentially approach meaning. They are merely a compression algorithm: information is lost. And worse, the less the specific the language, the more precariously open to interpretation. All this is to say, that I believe you mean what you have described, in the sense that you have a strong intuitive understanding of it, and are using the best known language to describe it. I believe it would benefit you to examine how others who have similarly "seen things" work to describe what they have seen. In your case, in a scientific context. -wf
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-15 02:40 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b2f9c56f-7ea0-446c-b5b2-9ee41bd7487dn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #601403 |
On Tuesday, February 14, 2023 at 11:55:21 AM UTC-5, worm food wrote: > [worm food] wrote: > You, and he, (Hans Geesink) and others, have > clearly "seen something" and you are utilizing > what you consider the best and most relevant > known language to describe that "something". > -wf . (hmm... Notice the perfect typographical "justification" of that paragraph... g.e.h.) . [George E Hammond MS Physics] HISTORIC discoveries can be described in a few words. Hammond's Scientific Proof of God is a HISTORIC discovery. . ROUTINE scientific research discoveries requires dozens of pages. of explanation. Hans Geesink's QM/EM/BIO discoveries require voluminous description. . The SPOG can be understood by a High School student – assuming that he: WANTS TO UNDERSTAND IT ! . Frankly, I'm more interested in YOUR opinion of the SPOG then I am in Hans Geesink's opinion. . That is, assuming you are actually CURIOUS as to what "God" actually is! BECAUSE if you are actually interested in what God is – that would make you the 2nd most interested person in the world; – after ME ! . George
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | worm food <wormfood@compostpunk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-15 11:33 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <tsj1ha$2uadd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #601456 |
On 2/15/2023 5:40 AM, George Hammond wrote: > On Tuesday, February 14, 2023 at 11:55:21 AM UTC-5, worm food wrote: >> [worm food] wrote: >> You, and he, (Hans Geesink) and others, have >> clearly "seen something" and you are utilizing >> what you consider the best and most relevant >> known language to describe that "something". >> -wf > . > (hmm... Notice the perfect typographical > "justification" of that paragraph... g.e.h.) > . > [George E Hammond MS Physics] > HISTORIC discoveries can be > described in a few words. > Hammond's Scientific Proof of God > is a HISTORIC discovery. > . > ROUTINE scientific research discoveries > requires dozens of pages. of explanation. > Hans Geesink's QM/EM/BIO discoveries > require voluminous description. > . > The SPOG can be understood by a High > School student – assuming that he: > WANTS TO UNDERSTAND IT ! > . > Frankly, I'm more interested in YOUR > opinion of the SPOG then I am in > Hans Geesink's opinion. > . > That is, assuming you are actually > CURIOUS as to what "God" actually is! > BECAUSE if you are actually interested > in what God is – that would make you > the 2nd most interested person in the > world; – after ME ! > . > George George, I cannot comment on the mathematical accuracy of your theory, nor on the scientific rigor. I can only comment that I believe you are earnest. -wf
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-15 09:52 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <1c1f0333-cc91-48a4-855b-6d91bcab3a75n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #601465 |
On Wednesday, February 15, 2023 at 11:33:49 AM UTC-5, worm food wrote: > [worm food] wrote: > George, > I cannot comment on accuracy or rigor. > I only believe you are earnest. > -wf > [George Hammond MS ... I'm saying there are ORDERS of scientific IMPORTANTCE between ARCHIMEDES PRINCIPLE which is a HISTORIC (and SIMPLE) discovery and something like DENNIS GABOR'S multivolume treatise on HOLOGRAPHY. . Same difference between Hammond and Geesink – you don't know the difference – You've MISSED THE MARK COMPLETELY!! . I don't think you would know what "ERNEST" means ! . George
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-17 10:50 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <63EFCC83.55E5@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #601465 |
worm food wrote: > > On 2/15/2023 5:40 AM, George Hammond wrote: > > On Tuesday, February 14, 2023 at 11:55:21 AM UTC-5, worm food wrote: > >> [worm food] wrote: > >> You, and he, (Hans Geesink) and others, have > >> clearly "seen something" and you are utilizing > >> what you consider the best and most relevant > >> known language to describe that "something". > >> -wf > > . > > (hmm... Notice the perfect typographical > > "justification" of that paragraph... g.e.h.) > > . > > [George E Hammond MS Physics] > > HISTORIC discoveries can be > > described in a few words. > > Hammond's Scientific Proof of God > > is a HISTORIC discovery. > > . > > ROUTINE scientific research discoveries > > requires dozens of pages. of explanation. > > Hans Geesink's QM/EM/BIO discoveries > > require voluminous description. > > . > > The SPOG can be understood by a High > > School student – assuming that he: > > WANTS TO UNDERSTAND IT ! > > . > > Frankly, I'm more interested in YOUR > > opinion of the SPOG then I am in > > Hans Geesink's opinion. > > . > > That is, assuming you are actually > > CURIOUS as to what "God" actually is! > > BECAUSE if you are actually interested > > in what God is – that would make you > > the 2nd most interested person in the > > world; – after ME ! > > . > > George > > George, > I cannot comment on the mathematical accuracy of your theory, nor on the > scientific rigor. I can only comment that I believe you are earnest. > -wf yeahhh, when you say the word "earnest"...you make it sound like an insult! (which is your M.O.) -- 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 | worm food <wormfood@compostpunk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-18 14:40 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <tsr9k2$3r7q$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #601578 |
On 2/17/2023 1:50 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > worm food wrote: >> >> On 2/15/2023 5:40 AM, George Hammond wrote: >>> On Tuesday, February 14, 2023 at 11:55:21 AM UTC-5, worm food wrote: >>>> [worm food] wrote: >>>> You, and he, (Hans Geesink) and others, have >>>> clearly "seen something" and you are utilizing >>>> what you consider the best and most relevant >>>> known language to describe that "something". >>>> -wf >>> . >>> (hmm... Notice the perfect typographical >>> "justification" of that paragraph... g.e.h.) >>> . >>> [George E Hammond MS Physics] >>> HISTORIC discoveries can be >>> described in a few words. >>> Hammond's Scientific Proof of God >>> is a HISTORIC discovery. >>> . >>> ROUTINE scientific research discoveries >>> requires dozens of pages. of explanation. >>> Hans Geesink's QM/EM/BIO discoveries >>> require voluminous description. >>> . >>> The SPOG can be understood by a High >>> School student – assuming that he: >>> WANTS TO UNDERSTAND IT ! >>> . >>> Frankly, I'm more interested in YOUR >>> opinion of the SPOG then I am in >>> Hans Geesink's opinion. >>> . >>> That is, assuming you are actually >>> CURIOUS as to what "God" actually is! >>> BECAUSE if you are actually interested >>> in what God is – that would make you >>> the 2nd most interested person in the >>> world; – after ME ! >>> . >>> George >> >> George, >> I cannot comment on the mathematical accuracy of your theory, nor on the >> scientific rigor. I can only comment that I believe you are earnest. >> -wf > > > yeahhh, when you say the word "earnest"...you make it sound like an > insult! (which is your M.O.) > > > > > > > Text-based communication media are particularly interesting because, in the absence of context (and sometimes in spite of it), one can impose one's own psychoemotional context onto the words. But, I can see what you mean about my communication style. Perhaps I should retrain the algorithm. Thanks for the tip, Loki. Anyway, you're both correct. To my thinking, the concept of "god" cannot be understood without experiencing a change in "magnification". It's akin to the idea that causality actually doesn't break down at any level, despite the protestations of several generations of scientists. Our ignorance of the cause of a phenomenon is simply that: ignorance. Objectivism tends to break down in the face of this realization, due not least in part to our seemingly ingrained reductionist tendencies. In short, not one of us knows anything about anything.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-18 12:02 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <63F12EC7.6BBC@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #601648 |
worm food wrote: > > On 2/17/2023 1:50 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > > worm food wrote: > >> > >> On 2/15/2023 5:40 AM, George Hammond wrote: > >>> On Tuesday, February 14, 2023 at 11:55:21 AM UTC-5, worm food wrote: > >>>> [worm food] wrote: > >>>> You, and he, (Hans Geesink) and others, have > >>>> clearly "seen something" and you are utilizing > >>>> what you consider the best and most relevant > >>>> known language to describe that "something". > >>>> -wf > >>> . > >>> (hmm... Notice the perfect typographical > >>> "justification" of that paragraph... g.e.h.) > >>> . > >>> [George E Hammond MS Physics] > >>> HISTORIC discoveries can be > >>> described in a few words. > >>> Hammond's Scientific Proof of God > >>> is a HISTORIC discovery. > >>> . > >>> ROUTINE scientific research discoveries > >>> requires dozens of pages. of explanation. > >>> Hans Geesink's QM/EM/BIO discoveries > >>> require voluminous description. > >>> . > >>> The SPOG can be understood by a High > >>> School student – assuming that he: > >>> WANTS TO UNDERSTAND IT ! > >>> . > >>> Frankly, I'm more interested in YOUR > >>> opinion of the SPOG then I am in > >>> Hans Geesink's opinion. > >>> . > >>> That is, assuming you are actually > >>> CURIOUS as to what "God" actually is! > >>> BECAUSE if you are actually interested > >>> in what God is – that would make you > >>> the 2nd most interested person in the > >>> world; – after ME ! > >>> . > >>> George > >> > >> George, > >> I cannot comment on the mathematical accuracy of your theory, nor on the > >> scientific rigor. I can only comment that I believe you are earnest. > >> -wf > > > > > > yeahhh, when you say the word "earnest"...you make it sound like an > > insult! (which is your M.O.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Text-based communication media are particularly interesting because, in > the absence of context (and sometimes in spite of it), one can impose > one's own psychoemotional context onto the words. "psychoemotional"???? is dat a compliment? or just your ...M.O.? > > But, I can see what you mean about my communication style. Perhaps I > should retrain the algorithm. > > Thanks for the tip, Loki. > > Anyway, you're both correct. To my thinking, the concept of "god" cannot > be understood without experiencing a change in "magnification". It's > akin to the idea that causality actually doesn't break down at any > level, despite the protestations of several generations of scientists. > Our ignorance of the cause of a phenomenon is simply that: ignorance. > Objectivism tends to break down in the face of this realization, due not > least in part to our seemingly ingrained reductionist tendencies. In > short, not one of us knows anything about anything. I know everthing about everything, go ahead..ask me any question on...Relativity. -- 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 | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-18 14:29 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <k5cqq4Frk5iU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #601650 |
On 2/18/2023 2:02 PM, The Starmaker wrote: [...] > I know everthing about everything, [...] You think you know at least as much as or perhaps more than Arindam Banerjee? That begs the question which of you two has more human failings?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-18 17:55 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <cbb004bd-dd93-4fe7-bcef-7ea2251a4408n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #601648 |
On Saturday, February 18, 2023 at 2:40:53 PM UTC-5, worm food wrote: > > [WORM FOOD] wrote: > To my thinking, the concept of "god" > cannot be understood without experiencing > a change in "magnification". > [GEORGE HAMMOND MS Physics] wrote: OK-- "Worm Food" --- Go to the Head of the Class ! . You're EXACTLY CORRECT except that God is a . 1-- A magnification of the SIZE of the World .............................AND 2-- A magnification of the SPEED of the World . Everything you look at (including notably People) APPEARS to be about 20% LARGER and 20% FASTER than they ACTUALLY ARE !! . This is the fundamental phenomenon of "GOD" ! . And YOU are the first person I've ever run into who RECOGNIZES it (besides me of course, who has actually succeeded in scientifically proving it!)! . George
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-19 12:22 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <63F28510.663@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #601670 |
George Hammond wrote: > > On Saturday, February 18, 2023 at 2:40:53 PM UTC-5, worm food wrote: > > > > [WORM FOOD] wrote: > > To my thinking, the concept of "god" > > cannot be understood without experiencing > > a change in "magnification". > > > [GEORGE HAMMOND MS Physics] wrote: > OK-- "Worm Food" --- Go to the Head of the Class ! > . > You're EXACTLY CORRECT except that God is a > . > 1-- A magnification of the SIZE of the World > .............................AND > 2-- A magnification of the SPEED of the World > . > Everything you look at (including notably People) > APPEARS to be > about 20% LARGER and 20% FASTER than they > ACTUALLY ARE !! > . > This is the fundamental phenomenon of "GOD" ! > . > And YOU are the first person I've ever run into who > RECOGNIZES it (besides me of course, who has > actually succeeded in scientifically proving it!)! > . > George What scientifically METHOD did you use to proving it???? i see no methods. -- 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 | George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-19 14:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <195c97aa-bc58-4356-b44c-a93493af1422n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #601704 |
On Sunday, February 19, 2023 at 3:22:24 PM UTC-5, The Starmaker wrote: > George Hammond wrote: > > . > > Everything you look at (including notably People) > > APPEARS to be > > about 20% LARGER and 20% FASTER than they > > ACTUALLY ARE !! > > This is the fundamental phenomenon of "GOD" ! > > George > > [STARMAKER] wrote:-- > what scientifically METHOD did you use to proving it???? > i see no methods. > [George E Hammond MS Physics] HERE IS THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION STARMAKER:-- . ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ .....PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE .....OF THE PHENOMENON: – https://groups.google.com/g/sci. physics.relativity/c/EsKCSUHM mow/m/bWVQwHiPCAAJ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ .....PROOF THE PHENOMENON .....ACTUALLY IS GOD: – https://youtu.be/GXRA_vrZMYk (YouTube 12-min) ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ . George
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-19 14:53 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b847b05c-2f11-4093-b118-db2d5e9e55a7n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #601712 |
On Sunday, February 19, 2023 at 5:48:27 PM UTC-5, George Hammond wrote: > [George E Hammond MS Physics] > HERE IS THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION STARMAKER:-- > . >ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ .....PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE .....OF THE PHENOMENON: – https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics.relativity/c/EsKCSUHMmow/m/bWVQwHiPCAAJ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ .....PROOF THE PHENOMENON .....ACTUALLY IS GOD: – https://youtu.be/GXRA_vrZMYk (YouTube 12-min) ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ > . > George
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web