Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #600733 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2023-02-03 17:05 -0800 |
| Last post | 2023-02-07 07:26 -0800 |
| Articles | 14 on this page of 134 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-03 17:05 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-02-03 22:19 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-02-04 12:31 +0100
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 22:23 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-02-04 04:07 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 04:39 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 04:55 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-02-04 08:37 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 06:15 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-04 18:43 -0500
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-02-04 18:21 -0600
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 16:41 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-02-04 16:52 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 17:22 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-02-05 02:29 +0100
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 17:35 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-05 04:55 -0500
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 22:25 -0800
Richard Hertz ihas been made to eat shit. Again. . "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 18:31 -0800
Re: Richard Hertz ihas been made to eat shit. Again. . Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 18:53 -0800
Re: Richard Hertz ihas been made to eat shit. Again. . "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 19:20 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 19:59 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-05 05:03 -0500
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 22:25 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 07:18 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 07:54 -0800
Richard Herz comes to grips with the fact he's an imbecile. "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 09:16 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-02-06 11:55 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-02-11 00:42 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-11 04:49 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-02-11 07:44 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-02-11 07:48 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-11 14:04 -0500
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-11 12:21 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-02-11 21:55 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-02-11 22:26 -0800
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. Lino Sebastiani <oala@ansllaeo.bo> - 2023-02-12 23:22 +0000
Re: According to Dono's mom, he's a product of inbreeding. She knows better. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-02-11 22:26 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 06:16 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 08:34 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-02-04 08:52 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-02-04 18:22 +0100
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2023-02-05 19:55 +0100
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-02-05 16:01 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 16:27 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-02-05 19:25 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 22:58 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-06 04:38 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-02-06 07:45 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-06 07:53 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-02-06 08:01 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-06 06:55 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-06 07:16 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-06 09:23 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-06 21:07 -0500
Re: Dono is a known plagiarist and one of many Einstein's parrot. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-06 19:13 -0800
Re: Dono is a known plagiarist and one of many Einstein's parrot. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-07 02:39 -0500
Re: Dono is a known plagiarist and one of many Einstein's parrot. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-02-07 00:30 -0800
Re: Dono is a known plagiarist and one of many Einstein's parrot. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-02-07 04:32 -0600
Re: Dono is a known plagiarist and one of many Einstein's parrot. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-07 13:49 -0500
Re: Dono is a known plagiarist and one of many Einstein's parrot. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-02-07 10:54 -0800
Re: Dono is a known plagiarist and one of many Einstein's parrot. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-07 11:13 -0800
Re: Dono is a known plagiarist and one of many Einstein's parrot. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-02-07 13:43 -0800
Re: Dono is a known plagiarist and one of many Einstein's parrot. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-07 17:33 -0500
Crank Richard Hertz frothes at the mouth "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-02-07 14:51 -0800
Re: Dono is a known plagiarist and one of many Einstein's parrot. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-02-07 22:32 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-02-06 23:38 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-07 04:41 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-02-07 04:58 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-02-06 08:41 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, Dick Hertz is a piece of shit Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 23:19 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-02-04 11:29 -0600
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 10:15 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-02-04 13:31 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-02-04 13:41 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 14:01 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 14:04 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 14:10 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-04 18:24 -0500
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 02:53 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 06:42 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-02-04 14:22 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-02-04 14:24 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2023-02-05 20:20 +0100
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-02-05 16:01 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2023-02-06 20:37 +0100
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-02-06 11:57 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2023-02-07 14:22 +0100
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-02-07 12:53 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-07 13:04 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-07 17:37 -0500
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2023-02-08 10:45 +0100
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-10 22:14 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-11 18:04 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-02-11 19:58 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-11 21:27 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2023-02-12 22:11 +0100
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-12 13:23 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-12 13:52 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2023-02-12 20:59 +0100
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Lino Sebastiani <oala@ansllaeo.bo> - 2023-02-12 20:20 +0000
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-12 13:12 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2023-02-13 20:08 +0100
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-13 20:27 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-17 00:21 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-17 00:40 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2023-02-17 13:35 +0100
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-02-17 14:52 +0100
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-17 14:48 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-17 14:56 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-02-18 10:31 +0100
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-02-18 10:04 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-18 13:54 -0500
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 15:03 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-02-05 09:09 +0100
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 01:35 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-02-05 01:44 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-02-07 17:53 +0100
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-02-07 09:49 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-02-06 06:34 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-02-06 10:10 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-06 14:28 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-02-06 18:36 -0600
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-06 16:53 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-02-06 20:27 -0600
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-06 21:14 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-02-06 23:48 -0600
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-07 01:19 -0500
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Donnell Costanzo <eldo@oactzo.an> - 2023-02-08 19:05 +0000
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-07 04:08 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-07 04:23 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-02-07 05:06 -0800
Re: According to Einstein, moving clocks run slow (SR), and elevated clocks run fast (GR) Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-02-07 06:11 -0800
Re: According to Richard Hertz, he's an imbecile "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-02-07 07:26 -0800
Page 7 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]
| From | "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-06 10:10 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <83d627dc-6536-44b3-a9c6-180f0c54a521n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #600733 |
Contractile curvature inner space reaches outer space gravity boundary. Equal strength gravity for the whole Earth is real. Beyond it is outer drop off strength. Equal strength gravity field surrounds the whole Earth. Feynman's correction of Einstein was wrong. There is no inner space drop off. How would a BH form if its gravity strength is headed mathematically toward infinite and zero together at the same time? Mitchell Raemsch
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-06 14:28 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <6f515813-a9c8-406d-b24d-4203ea89cd5bn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #600733 |
Let me see. If I rise a perfect atomic clock 22.2 m from ground level, and then move it around the Earth at exactly the same height, with a constant speed of 7.5E-07 m/sec, THERE IS NO CHANGE wrt the same clock being stationary on the ground?. Is that so?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-06 18:36 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <k4dkovF16jaU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #600914 |
On 2/6/2023 4:28 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: > Let me see. If I rise a perfect atomic clock 22.2 m from ground level, and then move it around the Earth at exactly > the same height, with a constant speed of 7.5E-07 m/sec, THERE IS NO CHANGE wrt the same clock being stationary > on the ground?. Is that so? You claim to know the theories regarding elevation (gravity) and motion so why are you asking this question? Are you uncertain about something? The first problem always is properly defining the experiment which is never as simple as it might superficially seem. For example, a stationary earth that is perfectly circular with no mountains in the path and so forth. It gets to be a rather lengthy description if done correctly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-06 16:53 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <eaafa0b5-afe2-44db-a4b9-0066d85219d2n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #600918 |
On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 9:36:51 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote: > On 2/6/2023 4:28 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: > > Let me see. If I rise a perfect atomic clock 22.2 m from ground level, and then move it around the Earth at exactly > > the same height, with a constant speed of 7.5E-07 m/sec, THERE IS NO CHANGE wrt the same clock being stationary > > on the ground?. Is that so? > You claim to know the theories regarding elevation > (gravity) and motion so why are you asking this question? > Are you uncertain about something? > > The first problem always is properly defining the experiment > which is never as simple as it might superficially seem. > > For example, a stationary earth that is perfectly circular > with no mountains in the path and so forth. It gets to be > a rather lengthy description if done correctly. It's a connection with an old HOAX, but you didn't get it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-06 20:27 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <k4dr7qF2abjU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #600919 |
On 2/6/2023 6:53 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: > On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 9:36:51 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote: >> On 2/6/2023 4:28 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: >>> Let me see. If I rise a perfect atomic clock 22.2 m from ground level, and then move it around the Earth at exactly >>> the same height, with a constant speed of 7.5E-07 m/sec, THERE IS NO CHANGE wrt the same clock being stationary >>> on the ground?. Is that so? >> You claim to know the theories regarding elevation >> (gravity) and motion so why are you asking this question? >> Are you uncertain about something? >> >> The first problem always is properly defining the experiment >> which is never as simple as it might superficially seem. >> >> For example, a stationary earth that is perfectly circular >> with no mountains in the path and so forth. It gets to be >> a rather lengthy description if done correctly. > > It's a connection with an old HOAX, but you didn't get it. You're looking at this wrong. I choose not to play but my remarks are valid in any case. Alas I'm not so certain you actually appreciate the shortcomings of your "scenario,"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-06 21:14 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <7c0bc601-1b77-4dad-93e8-a7e82ddee912n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #600919 |
On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:53:35 PM UTC-6, Richard Hertz wrote: > On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 9:36:51 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote: > > On 2/6/2023 4:28 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: > > > Let me see. If I rise a perfect atomic clock 22.2 m from ground level, and then move it around the Earth at exactly > > > the same height, with a constant speed of 7.5E-07 m/sec, THERE IS NO CHANGE wrt the same clock being stationary > > > on the ground?. Is that so? > > You claim to know the theories regarding elevation > > (gravity) and motion so why are you asking this question? > > Are you uncertain about something? > > > > The first problem always is properly defining the experiment > > which is never as simple as it might superficially seem. > > > > For example, a stationary earth that is perfectly circular > > with no mountains in the path and so forth. It gets to be > > a rather lengthy description if done correctly. > It's a connection with an old HOAX, but you didn't get it. 7.5E-07 m/sec [sic] is insufficient to keep an atomic clock in orbit at 22.2 m from the ground, so there is ***NO*** connection between your scenario and GNSS systems. GNSS satellite clocks *DO* require relativistic frequency offsets to maintain sync with the ground. There is *NO* miraculous canceling out of gravitational time dilation by SR time dilation. And your calculation is wrong anyway.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-06 23:48 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <k4e70nF41laU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #600934 |
On 2/6/2023 11:14 PM, Prokaryotic Capase Homolog wrote: > On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:53:35 PM UTC-6, Richard Hertz wrote: >> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 9:36:51 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote: >>> On 2/6/2023 4:28 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: >>>> Let me see. If I rise a perfect atomic clock 22.2 m from ground level, and then move it around the Earth at exactly >>>> the same height, with a constant speed of 7.5E-07 m/sec, THERE IS NO CHANGE wrt the same clock being stationary >>>> on the ground?. Is that so? >>> You claim to know the theories regarding elevation >>> (gravity) and motion so why are you asking this question? >>> Are you uncertain about something? >>> >>> The first problem always is properly defining the experiment >>> which is never as simple as it might superficially seem. >>> >>> For example, a stationary earth that is perfectly circular >>> with no mountains in the path and so forth. It gets to be >>> a rather lengthy description if done correctly. >> It's a connection with an old HOAX, but you didn't get it. > > 7.5E-07 m/sec [sic] is insufficient to keep an atomic clock > in orbit at 22.2 m from the ground, so there is ***NO*** > connection between your scenario and GNSS systems. You seem to forget, magic is permitted. > GNSS satellite clocks *DO* require relativistic frequency > offsets to maintain sync with the ground. There is *NO* > miraculous canceling out of gravitational time dilation by > SR time dilation. And your calculation is wrong anyway.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-07 01:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <trsqhi$3f2u4$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #600934 |
On 2/7/2023 12:14 AM, Prokaryotic Capase Homolog wrote: > On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:53:35 PM UTC-6, Richard Hertz wrote: >> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 9:36:51 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote: >>> On 2/6/2023 4:28 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: >>>> Let me see. If I rise a perfect atomic clock 22.2 m from ground level, and then move it around the Earth at exactly >>>> the same height, with a constant speed of 7.5E-07 m/sec, THERE IS NO CHANGE wrt the same clock being stationary >>>> on the ground?. Is that so? >>> You claim to know the theories regarding elevation >>> (gravity) and motion so why are you asking this question? >>> Are you uncertain about something? >>> >>> The first problem always is properly defining the experiment >>> which is never as simple as it might superficially seem. >>> >>> For example, a stationary earth that is perfectly circular >>> with no mountains in the path and so forth. It gets to be >>> a rather lengthy description if done correctly. >> It's a connection with an old HOAX, but you didn't get it. > > 7.5E-07 m/sec [sic] is insufficient to keep an atomic clock > in orbit at 22.2 m from the ground, As is usual, Dick doesn't really know what he's talking about. His little situation won't maintain orbit. > There is *NO* > miraculous canceling out of gravitational time dilation by > SR time dilation. There is a certain orbital altitude where SR time dilation is equal and opposite to the gravitational time dilation. Below this altitude, the satellite clock will appear to run slow as seen from earth, while above it (including GPS satellites) it will appear to run fast. Didn't you make the Wikipedia graph showing time dilation vs. orbital height? It's where the total dilation crosses 0. > And your calculation is wrong anyway. Dick never disappoints us when it comes to failing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Donnell Costanzo <eldo@oactzo.an> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-08 19:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ts0rou$a05c$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #600939 |
Volney wrote: > On 2/7/2023 12:14 AM, Prokaryotic Capase Homolog wrote: >> There is *NO* miraculous canceling out of gravitational time dilation >> by SR time dilation. > > There is a certain orbital altitude where SR time dilation is equal and > opposite to the gravitational time dilation. Below this altitude, the > satellite clock will appear to run slow as seen from earth, while above that's of course is not true. Not only that you had *_a_man_* you called *_america's_first_lady_*, but you also had 8 years *_a_man_called_president_* which was *_the_female_part_* in that gay couple in white house, calling his wife *_my_husband_Michael_* . so in principle, you had *_a_man_female_gay_president_*, not even born in america, which had from white house *_a_big_dick_in_his_ass_*, probably every day, before addressing to the american people.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-07 04:08 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <c8a76cdb-efef-4284-bcf9-150996aed69dn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #600934 |
On Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 2:14:37 AM UTC-3, prokaryotic.c...@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:53:35 PM UTC-6, Richard Hertz wrote: > > On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 9:36:51 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote: > > > On 2/6/2023 4:28 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: > > > > Let me see. If I rise a perfect atomic clock 22.2 m from ground level, and then move it around the Earth at exactly > > > > the same height, with a constant speed of 7.5E-07 m/sec, THERE IS NO CHANGE wrt the same clock being stationary > > > > on the ground?. Is that so? > > > You claim to know the theories regarding elevation > > > (gravity) and motion so why are you asking this question? > > > Are you uncertain about something? > > > > > > The first problem always is properly defining the experiment > > > which is never as simple as it might superficially seem. > > > > > > For example, a stationary earth that is perfectly circular > > > with no mountains in the path and so forth. It gets to be > > > a rather lengthy description if done correctly. > > It's a connection with an old HOAX, but you didn't get it. > 7.5E-07 m/sec [sic] is insufficient to keep an atomic clock > in orbit at 22.2 m from the ground, so there is ***NO*** > connection between your scenario and GNSS systems. > GNSS satellite clocks *DO* require relativistic frequency > offsets to maintain sync with the ground. There is *NO* > miraculous canceling out of gravitational time dilation by > SR time dilation. And your calculation is wrong anyway. It's a thought experiment, like the Pound-Rebka. I didn't do any calculations. It's on Wikipedia. By the way, in the P&R gedanke, the exact speed to cancel Einstein's blue-shifting is an INSTANTANEOUS speed, that happens ONLY in one instant, in the sinusoidal motion of the source. And yet, they managed to measure EVERYTHING THAT THEY REQUIRED on such exact moment. MAGIC!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-07 04:23 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <efbe1aba-d0cb-4060-84c9-f9ab41459661n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #600953 |
On Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 6:08:04 AM UTC-6, Richard Hertz wrote: > On Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 2:14:37 AM UTC-3, prokaryotic.c...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:53:35 PM UTC-6, Richard Hertz wrote: > > > On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 9:36:51 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote: > > > > On 2/6/2023 4:28 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: > > > > > Let me see. If I rise a perfect atomic clock 22.2 m from ground level, and then move it around the Earth at exactly > > > > > the same height, with a constant speed of 7.5E-07 m/sec, THERE IS NO CHANGE wrt the same clock being stationary > > > > > on the ground?. Is that so? > > > > You claim to know the theories regarding elevation > > > > (gravity) and motion so why are you asking this question? > > > > Are you uncertain about something? > > > > > > > > The first problem always is properly defining the experiment > > > > which is never as simple as it might superficially seem. > > > > > > > > For example, a stationary earth that is perfectly circular > > > > with no mountains in the path and so forth. It gets to be > > > > a rather lengthy description if done correctly. > > > It's a connection with an old HOAX, but you didn't get it. > > 7.5E-07 m/sec [sic] is insufficient to keep an atomic clock > > in orbit at 22.2 m from the ground, so there is ***NO*** > > connection between your scenario and GNSS systems. > > GNSS satellite clocks *DO* require relativistic frequency > > offsets to maintain sync with the ground. There is *NO* > > miraculous canceling out of gravitational time dilation by > > SR time dilation. And your calculation is wrong anyway. > It's a thought experiment, like the Pound-Rebka. > I didn't do any calculations. It's on Wikipedia. Where? > By the way, in the P&R gedanke, the exact speed to cancel Einstein's blue-shifting is an INSTANTANEOUS speed, > that happens ONLY in one instant, in the sinusoidal motion of the source. The source modulation was in the up-and-down direction, not transversely. And your figure of 7.5E-07 m/sec is still wrong. > And yet, they managed to measure EVERYTHING THAT THEY REQUIRED on such exact moment. MAGIC! Not *one* exact moment. They analyzed something on the order of 10^12 photons.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-07 05:06 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b6d78c65-f6fd-4337-ae24-780fd73c1671n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #600954 |
On Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 9:23:28 AM UTC-3, prokaryotic.c...@gmail.com wrote: > On Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 6:08:04 AM UTC-6, Richard Hertz wrote: > > On Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 2:14:37 AM UTC-3, prokaryotic.c...@gmail.com wrote: > > > On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:53:35 PM UTC-6, Richard Hertz wrote: > > > > On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 9:36:51 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote: > > > > > On 2/6/2023 4:28 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: > > > > > > Let me see. If I rise a perfect atomic clock 22.2 m from ground level, and then move it around the Earth at exactly > > > > > > the same height, with a constant speed of 7.5E-07 m/sec, THERE IS NO CHANGE wrt the same clock being stationary > > > > > > on the ground?. Is that so? > > > > > You claim to know the theories regarding elevation > > > > > (gravity) and motion so why are you asking this question? > > > > > Are you uncertain about something? > > > > > > > > > > The first problem always is properly defining the experiment > > > > > which is never as simple as it might superficially seem. > > > > > > > > > > For example, a stationary earth that is perfectly circular > > > > > with no mountains in the path and so forth. It gets to be > > > > > a rather lengthy description if done correctly. > > > > It's a connection with an old HOAX, but you didn't get it. > > > 7.5E-07 m/sec [sic] is insufficient to keep an atomic clock > > > in orbit at 22.2 m from the ground, so there is ***NO*** > > > connection between your scenario and GNSS systems. > > > GNSS satellite clocks *DO* require relativistic frequency > > > offsets to maintain sync with the ground. There is *NO* > > > miraculous canceling out of gravitational time dilation by > > > SR time dilation. And your calculation is wrong anyway. > > It's a thought experiment, like the Pound-Rebka. > > I didn't do any calculations. It's on Wikipedia. > Where? > > By the way, in the P&R gedanke, the exact speed to cancel Einstein's blue-shifting is an INSTANTANEOUS speed, > > that happens ONLY in one instant, in the sinusoidal motion of the source. > The source modulation was in the up-and-down direction, not > transversely. And your figure of 7.5E-07 m/sec is still wrong. > > And yet, they managed to measure EVERYTHING THAT THEY REQUIRED on such exact moment. MAGIC! > Not *one* exact moment. They analyzed something on the > order of 10^12 photons. I repeat, as you didn't care to read: I used the data from Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound%E2%80%93Rebka_experiment Do yourself the corrections, if you think they are wrong. Regarding the INSTANT at which both effects cancel, you forgot that the amount of gamma photons hitting the detector in that instant produces several chain events, like some of them ionizing atoms and some exciting atoms to non-ionized states that cause photons to be emitted, some photons are registered in the scintillator, some electrons from there are amplified 30,000 times, some of the 30,000 x 1 electrons form short electric pulses in the nano-micro volts range, such pulses are amplified by "low-noise" amplifiers, such output is integrated with a heavy filtering, such integral averaging is registered on paper, such paper is thoroughly studied to detect hills and valleys, such study provides information along a 73 Hz period, such information is accumulated to be averaged with long term time constants and, finally, with all the indirect-indirect-indirect-indirect heavy data filtering, COOKING and FUDGING, datasets are COOKED even more with "temperature corrections" averaging 80%. Finally, after further cooking on the 14 datasets, a shift of 2.4E-15 is DETECTED from all that NOISE. MAGIC, and "Einstein's right" proven in 1960-1965 by some cretins. This HOAX, however, PALES IN COMPARISON with the Ives-Stillway 1938 HOAX, about time dilation found in traverse Doppler effect. A FRAUD that inspired Dono to write NNN papers about it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-07 06:11 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <86d7d486-fdd1-4103-b0a5-e9d5ac53c1f8n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #600958 |
On Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 7:06:29 AM UTC-6, Richard Hertz wrote: > Do yourself the corrections, if you think they are wrong. Sorry, I was using the four-function calculator program on my computer, and there was apparently a residual value that I forgot to clear out.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-02-07 07:26 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: According to Richard Hertz, he's an imbecile |
| Message-ID | <28ead22d-46c3-4bb6-a04e-0a917d305593n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #600958 |
On Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 5:06:29 AM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote: > This HOAX, however, PALES IN COMPARISON with the Ives-Stillway Riiight, "Ives-Stillway". You hit another 500 points on the crank index, Dick. Thanks for the entertainment, dumbestfuck!
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web