Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #607821 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Jane <Jane@home.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2023-04-19 04:05 +0000 |
| Last post | 2023-05-10 14:17 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 202 — 22 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-19 04:05 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-04-18 22:05 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-04-21 13:19 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-19 10:07 +0200
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-19 16:14 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-19 19:37 +0200
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-19 17:51 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-20 10:30 +0200
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-04-20 01:56 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-04-19 22:23 +1000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-19 16:08 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-04-20 08:46 +1000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-04-19 17:25 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-04-29 09:46 +1000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-28 19:04 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-01 00:04 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-30 23:15 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-05-01 14:29 +1000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-30 23:40 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-05-01 14:44 +1000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-01 00:30 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-04-21 13:21 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2023-04-19 06:23 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-19 16:02 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2023-04-19 09:54 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-20 10:50 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-04-19 11:06 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-04-19 11:43 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-04-19 14:49 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-04-19 15:13 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-20 10:56 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-04-20 05:57 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-04-20 06:06 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2023-04-20 17:33 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-04-20 21:34 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-04-21 05:10 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2023-04-21 06:12 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-21 12:29 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2023-04-21 06:20 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. "gehan.am...@gmail.com" <gehan.ameresekere@gmail.com> - 2023-04-21 07:08 -0700
Mask falls off the face of hardened crank Amrit Gehan "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-04-22 07:04 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. "gehan.am...@gmail.com" <gehan.ameresekere@gmail.com> - 2023-04-21 02:07 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-22 00:23 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-21 22:52 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-22 09:48 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-22 09:17 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-04-22 08:15 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-22 12:08 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-04-22 10:26 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-24 12:01 +0200
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-04-22 11:00 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. "gehan.am...@gmail.com" <gehan.ameresekere@gmail.com> - 2023-04-22 17:55 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-04-22 18:27 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-04-22 19:31 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-04-22 22:23 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-04-22 23:16 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-04-23 07:02 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-04-23 08:40 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-23 14:30 +0200
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-26 17:24 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-22 15:33 +0200
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-24 00:17 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-04-24 01:58 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-25 00:53 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-04-24 18:18 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-25 17:56 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-04-26 11:11 -0400
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-04-26 08:34 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-26 13:20 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-26 19:21 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-26 21:21 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-28 02:29 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-27 23:08 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-28 13:47 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-04-28 07:39 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-04-28 09:29 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-28 22:09 +0200
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-28 16:51 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-28 00:37 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-28 07:21 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-28 16:01 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-04-27 10:33 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-28 02:19 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-04-28 10:37 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-28 16:47 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-30 23:57 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-30 23:01 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-04 20:50 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-04 16:51 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-06 00:06 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-05 21:54 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-07 00:51 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-06 21:54 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-08 02:44 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-07 23:48 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-08 23:22 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-05-08 20:08 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-10 04:37 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-08 22:54 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-10 04:45 +0000
Uncle Jane Discusses Science (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-10 00:24 -0500
Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-10 02:11 -0500
Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-10 23:57 +0000
Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-11 14:06 -0500
Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-11 23:35 +0000
Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-11 20:16 -0500
Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-15 00:34 +0000
Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-14 22:38 -0500
Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-16 02:01 +0000
Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-16 00:57 -0500
Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-16 06:31 +0000
Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-16 12:57 -0500
Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-17 22:57 +0000
Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-17 19:20 -0500
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-19 01:39 +0000
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-18 21:59 -0500
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-18 22:14 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-05-09 22:01 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-05-09 22:05 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-05-09 22:22 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-05-04 21:24 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-05-04 22:36 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-05-04 23:26 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-05-04 23:41 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-06 00:07 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-05-05 18:39 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-05-05 23:19 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-05 21:56 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-05-05 20:04 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-05-05 20:03 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-05-05 19:59 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-07 00:59 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-06 21:57 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-08 02:51 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-08 00:02 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-05-07 20:06 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-04-27 20:22 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-04-27 23:06 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-28 07:28 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-04-28 07:34 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-28 16:03 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Evenezer Nigro <veor@rnigeern.ne> - 2023-04-28 21:18 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-28 17:26 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Evenezer Nigro <veor@rnigeern.ne> - 2023-04-28 22:31 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-28 18:39 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-04-24 20:38 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-26 18:37 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2023-04-25 17:00 +0300
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-04-25 11:56 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-24 12:01 +0200
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-25 01:19 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-24 08:36 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-04-24 13:10 -0400
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-25 10:28 +0200
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-04-25 02:06 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-25 11:30 +0200
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-04-25 02:38 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-25 13:39 +0200
Railway puzzle (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein) nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-25 11:49 +0200
Re: Railway puzzle (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein) Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-04-25 03:11 -0700
Re: Railway puzzle nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-25 13:39 +0200
Re: Railway puzzle Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-04-25 05:19 -0700
Re: Railway puzzle nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-25 23:30 +0200
Re: Railway puzzle Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-04-25 22:12 -0400
Re: Railway puzzle whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-25 22:23 -0500
Re: Railway puzzle Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-26 18:50 +0000
Re: Railway puzzle nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-27 09:15 +0200
Re: Railway puzzle Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-28 02:53 +0000
Re: Railway puzzle RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-04-28 10:43 -0700
Re: Railway puzzle nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-28 22:09 +0200
Re: Railway puzzle "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-04-28 15:53 -0700
Re: Railway puzzle Evenezer Nigro <veor@rnigeern.ne> - 2023-04-30 16:24 +0000
Re: Railway puzzle nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-05-07 13:34 +0200
Re: Railway puzzle RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-04-29 10:55 -0700
Re: Railway puzzle "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-04-29 11:09 -0700
Re: Railway puzzle nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-29 21:27 +0200
Re: Railway puzzle Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-04-29 19:01 -0400
Re: Railway puzzle Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-04-30 11:11 +0200
Re: Railway puzzle RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-04-27 15:20 -0700
Re: Railway puzzle nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-28 14:18 +0200
Re: Railway puzzle nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-29 14:38 +0200
Re: Railway puzzle nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-26 23:15 +0200
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Tommy Africani <ffci@tiacyctm.mo> - 2023-04-26 13:39 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2023-04-24 12:44 +0300
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-04-24 17:44 +0200
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-04-24 13:20 -0400
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-04-21 12:59 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-22 00:31 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-04-21 17:49 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. "gehan.am...@gmail.com" <gehan.ameresekere@gmail.com> - 2023-04-21 23:43 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-22 09:42 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. "gehan.am...@gmail.com" <gehan.ameresekere@gmail.com> - 2023-04-22 03:30 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-04-22 07:01 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-24 00:19 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-24 08:37 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-04-25 01:21 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-04-25 17:41 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-05-06 18:01 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-05-06 18:59 -0700
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-05-06 22:36 -0500
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-10 04:33 +0000
Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity. carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-05-10 14:17 -0700
Page 8 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 Next page →
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-28 16:03 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <kb2qkoF5m8vU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #608790 |
On 4/28/2023 2:28 AM, Jane wrote: > On Thu, 27 Apr 2023 20:22:38 -0700, Paul Alsing wrote: > >> On Monday, April 24, 2023 at 6:18:51 PM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote: >>> On Monday, April 24, 2023 at 5:53:09 PM UTC-7, Jane wrote: >>> >>>> What if every vehicle on earth rapidly accelerated eastward for ten >>>> seconds at the same instant? >> >>> Never ask a question that you are not prepared to answer... show your >>> math... if you can... >> >> I repeat, Jane... Where is *your* math in support of *your* claim? > > Where is YOUR maths that give you the right and reason to be sceptical > about my important observation? Skepticism is the backbone of all science. >> I ask the question... evidence rules, Jane... got any? No? I didn't >> think so... > > > > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Evenezer Nigro <veor@rnigeern.ne> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-28 21:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <u2hd78$2j7m2$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #608905 |
whodat wrote: > On 4/28/2023 2:28 AM, Jane wrote: >> Where is YOUR maths that give you the right and reason to be sceptical >> about my important observation? > > Skepticism is the backbone of all science. not in mathematics, logic and so on. You can't have skepticism, idiot. I have to leak a wind. Another one. Good morning to you too.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-28 17:26 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <kb2vgeF5m8vU7@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #608906 |
On 4/28/2023 4:18 PM, Evenezer Nigro wrote: > whodat wrote: > >> On 4/28/2023 2:28 AM, Jane wrote: >>> Where is YOUR maths that give you the right and reason to be sceptical >>> about my important observation? >> >> Skepticism is the backbone of all science. > > not in mathematics, logic and so on. You can't have skepticism, idiot. I > have to leak a wind. Another one. Good morning to you too. Clearly you do not know the definition of "science" that is the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation, experimentation, and the testing of theories against the evidence obtained. Of course there are more modern definitions that incorporate "social science" and things like mathematics to the detriment of society not unlike calling a building janitor or garbage collector an "engineer." Yes indeed, science is reliant on skepticism, and if that's not necessary to some discipline or another then by definition that discipline is not a science at all. Do you think "computer science" is really a "science?" I do not. It belongs to the realm of technology. Janitors and garbage collectors are nothing more than laborer distinctions. Piggybacking descriptions of job categories is designed to enhance pay checks, nothing more. How about "Library Science?" A few years back I encountered a "Doctor of Physical Therapy." WHAT??? Show me a doctoral thesis that advances the state of the art for librarians or physical therapists. Sheesh!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Evenezer Nigro <veor@rnigeern.ne> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-28 22:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <u2hhgc$2j7m2$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #608916 |
whodat wrote: >> not in mathematics, logic and so on. You can't have skepticism, idiot. >> I have to leak a wind. Another one. Good morning to you too. > > Clearly you do not know the definition of "science" that is the > systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and > natural world through observation, experimentation, and the testing of > theories against the evidence obtained. you fucking cretin, don't even know your name. Is math not a science?? What an idiot. Here's more "science" for you. the *_climate_change_* "experts" doesn't know the percentage of CO2 in the air they breath. Lol. I fuck your ass. They run at speed of *_"science"_*. Farmer asks a simple question from the climate experts https://b%69%74%63%68ute.com/video/dpFz6YcPTbLc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-28 18:39 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <kb33psF7559U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #608918 |
On 4/28/2023 5:31 PM, Evenezer Nigro wrote: > whodat wrote: > >>> not in mathematics, logic and so on. You can't have skepticism, idiot. >>> I have to leak a wind. Another one. Good morning to you too. >> >> Clearly you do not know the definition of "science" that is the >> systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and >> natural world through observation, experimentation, and the testing of >> theories against the evidence obtained. > > you fucking cretin, don't even know your name. Is math not a science?? > What an idiot. Here's more "science" for you. > > the *_climate_change_* "experts" doesn't know the percentage of CO2 in the > air they breath. Lol. I fuck your ass. They run at speed of *_"science"_*. > > Farmer asks a simple question from the climate experts > https://b%69%74%63%68ute.com/video/dpFz6YcPTbLc So I wasted my time replying to an ignorant peon Russian propagandist. You're so stupid you don't know the difference between math and one of your own turds. You worship both equally not realizing that math doesn't stink like your leavings. Or is that stink your breath from rotting teeth?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-24 20:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <41b856c8-d1d6-448d-b0ee-ed96244bb2fen@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #608387 |
On Monday, April 24, 2023 at 7:53:09 PM UTC-5, Jane wrote: > On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 01:58:52 -0700, Prokaryotic Capase Homolog wrote: > > > On Sunday, April 23, 2023 at 7:17:16 PM UTC-5, Jane wrote: > >> On Sat, 22 Apr 2023 15:33:17 +0200, J. J. Lodder wrote: > >> > >> > Jane <Ja...@home.com> wrote: > > > >> >> Seeing you mentioned that topic, have you ever worked out how long > >> >> it will take for the Earth to stop spinning because of the > >> >> harnessing of wind power? Not many people would know that wind > >> >> energy comes mainly from the Earth's rotation with relatively little > >> >> from the sun. > >> > > >> > ROTFL, again. > >> > You are better at providing amusement than it seemed at first sight. > >> > Do keep it up. > >> I cannot believe this! A whole bunch of obviously 'wannabe' physicists > >> who have never heard of Coriolis. This provides even more evidence that > >> Einstein worshippers are all seriously short of grey matter. . > >> > >> The Earth's rotation creates Coriolis forces which are almost entirely > >> responsible for the existence of trade winds. These are favoured by > >> wind farmers because they run almost 24/7/52 and contain far more > >> energy than local sea breezes caused by the sun's heat. Extracting > >> energy from trade winds will inevitably slow the Earth. > >> This is therefore not fantasy but just another realism that I alone, > >> being apparently an exceptional physicist, has realised. > >> > >> If the total human energy supply is derived from wind energy, the Earth > >> will eventually stop spinning. Understand!!!!! > >> > >> Some of you pseudo-experts might like to do the simple calculations > >> that will reveal how long that will take. You should all be able to > >> roughly estimate the moment of inertia of a reasonably homogeneous > >> sphere. > >> > >> (To relieve you concerns, I can tell you we don't have to worry for a > >> while yet). > >> > I'll leave it to you to find your error, > >> > more educational that way, > > > > All wind energy is COMPLETELY converted to heat regardless of the extent > > of human activity, which does virtually nothing to affect the rate of > > this conversion. > > > > The generation of wind by differential heating of the Earth's surface by > > the Sun, the bending of the wind's motions into circular patterns due to > > Coriolis effects, and the conversion of wind energy into heat does > > nothing to slow down the Earth's rotation. Certainly nothing that humans > > do can significantly affect the rate at which wind energy converts to > > heat. > You are quite wrong. The energy driving most of the Earth's trade winds > comes from the Earth's rotation > > In any event, the relevant metric to follow is not energy, but angular > > momentum. The sun merely causes differential warming and density > gradients which in turn induce air movement towards and away from the > equator. Conservation of momentum explains the Coriolis effect and the > isobar lines we see on weather charts. > > Wind turbines extract energy that is mainly derived from the Earth's > rotation and turn it into heat. This upsets the tidal balance between > atmosphere and land and results in a 'drag' that MUSt ultimately result > in slowing of the Earth's spin rate. The only way that the angular momentum of the Earth can change is by EXCHANGE of angular momentum with objects or entities external to the Earth. Extraction of wind energy won't do it. Even if the wind energy is completely degraded to heat, biases in rotation persist down to the molecular level, and the Earth remains spinning. No, it is not perpetual motion. Rather, it is a basic conservation law. Do spend some time studying instead of making up your own fantasy version of physics. The Earth is not a closed system, however. Exchange of angular momentum with external entities such as the Moon, the Sun etc. does occur. That reminds me... Did you know that Einstein was joint author of two papers in experimental physics? The Einstein-de Haas experiment demonstrated a close relationship between the quantum notions of angular momentum (i.e. electron spin and electron orbital motion) and classical angular momentum. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein%E2%80%93de_Haas_effect After you read this article, you will understand why I am reminded of it. > Being a relativist you probably think perpetual motion is possible. > > The major sources of loss of angular momentum by the Earth arise from > > the fact that the Earth is not a closed system. The major effects are > > tidal influences by the Moon, Sun and other Solar System bodies. To a > > lesser extent there will be such influences as the torques exerted by > > the Sun's magnetic field as the Earth (and its conductive ionosphere) > > spins within the field. Gain/loss of mass from/to space due to meteor > > strikes and atmospheric losses, pushes from the solar wind etc. will > > have minor effects that are difficult to calculate. > That's correct... now do the calculation I asked and see how wind power > compares. > > The human contribution to angular momentum change is not significant. > Do the calculation and prove it. (Earth's rotational energy)/(annual > human consumption of energy) > > This is quite different from the human contribution to the Earth's heat > > balance. Launching of artificial satellites will cause the Earth to slow > > down lightly, because they are almost always launched in a direction to > > get a boost from the Earth's spin, but I think you will agree that the > > combined effect of the various space programs is not much. > What if every vehicle on earth rapidly accelerated eastward for ten > seconds at the same instant? > -- > -- lover of truth
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jane <Jane@home.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-26 18:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <17598ff893d2fea1$4$3048414$13d399db@news.newsgroupdirect.com> |
| In reply to | #608409 |
On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 20:38:20 -0700 (PDT), Prokaryotic Capase Homolog wrote: > On Monday, April 24, 2023 at 7:53:09 PM UTC-5, Jane wrote: >> On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 01:58:52 -0700, Prokaryotic Capase Homolog wrote: > >> > All wind energy is COMPLETELY converted to heat regardless of the >> > extent of human activity, which does virtually nothing to affect the >> > rate of this conversion. >> > >> > The generation of wind by differential heating of the Earth's surface >> > by the Sun, the bending of the wind's motions into circular patterns >> > due to Coriolis effects, and the conversion of wind energy into heat >> > does nothing to slow down the Earth's rotation. Certainly nothing >> > that humans do can significantly affect the rate at which wind energy >> > converts to heat. >> You are quite wrong. The energy driving most of the Earth's trade winds >> comes from the Earth's rotation >> > In any event, the relevant metric to follow is not energy, but >> > angular momentum. The sun merely causes differential warming and >> > density >> gradients which in turn induce air movement towards and away from the >> equator. Conservation of momentum explains the Coriolis effect and the >> isobar lines we see on weather charts. >> >> Wind turbines extract energy that is mainly derived from the Earth's >> rotation and turn it into heat. This upsets the tidal balance between >> atmosphere and land and results in a 'drag' that MUSt ultimately result >> in slowing of the Earth's spin rate. > > The only way that the angular momentum of the Earth can change is by > EXCHANGE of angular momentum with objects or entities external to the > Earth. This is basically true although there are obscure tidal ramifications involving the sun and moon. The atmosphere experiences tides too and since these are caused mainly by the moon they are continually reducing its orbit speed. I haven't calculated the moon's orbital momentum but I should imagine it is comparable with that due to the Earth rotation. If the moon ever escapes from the Earth or falls into it, the earth own rotation would be seriously affected. > Extraction of wind energy won't do it. Even if the wind energy is > completely degraded to heat, biases in rotation persist down to the > molecular level, and the Earth remains spinning. Ah! but consider the atmosphere to be separate object from the Earth's body. The total Momentum involved in wind movement is considerable. If energy is being extracted from the wind to create electricity, one would expect a reduction in the atmosphere's momentum. However all the electricity ends up as heat in the atmosphere and stays there for a very long time. It cannot get away and so temperature gradients tend to become greater, coriolis becomes more potent and we end up with what we are seeing right across the world today... More powerful tornadoes, stronger winds, devastating cyclones all due to higher temperatures caused by generation of electricity one way or another. As you should know, angular momentum is a funny kind of vector and in consideration of the above, its increase in the atmosphere would be balanced by a decrease in core rotation. > No, it is not perpetual motion. Rather, it is a basic conservation law. > Do spend some time studying instead of making up your own fantasy > version of physics. > > The Earth is not a closed system, however. Exchange of angular momentum > with external entities such as the Moon, the Sun etc. does occur. ..and so generating electricity from tidal movements generally would also slow the Earth down. > That reminds me... Did you know that Einstein was joint author of two > papers in experimental physics? The Einstein-de Haas experiment > demonstrated a close relationship between the quantum notions of angular > momentum (i.e. electron spin and electron orbital motion) and classical > angular momentum. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein%E2%80%93de_Haas_effect Yes but most electron spin is balanced. I should imagine iron and other magnetic substances are relevant to that theory > After you read this article, you will understand why I am reminded of > it. > > -- -- lover of truth
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-25 17:00 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <u28mei$t774$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #608387 |
On 2023-04-25 00:53:06 +0000, Jane said: > Do the calculation and prove it. (Earth's rotational energy)/(annual > human consumption of energy) 370 000 000 Mikko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-25 11:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8997524e-6911-4578-ac6b-54f211bca7e7n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #608445 |
On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 9:00:56 AM UTC-5, Mikko wrote: > On 2023-04-25 00:53:06 +0000, Jane said: > > > Do the calculation and prove it. (Earth's rotational energy)/(annual > > human consumption of energy) > 370 000 000 42
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-24 12:01 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1q9ou9l.11bqeb51h53r9tN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #608288 |
Jane <Jane@home.com> wrote: > On Sat, 22 Apr 2023 15:33:17 +0200, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > Jane <Jane@home.com> wrote: > > > >> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 02:07:15 -0700, gehan.am...@gmail.com wrote: > >> > >> > >> >> > brain doesn't work that way. > >> >> > . > >> >> -- > >> >> -- lover of truth > >> > > >> > What question? > >> > > >> > Nice videos, Jan. > >> > > >> > I bet you were wondering if the ground was moving relative to you or > >> > you were moving relative to the ground when > >> > you came in for a landing. It takes a lot more energy to slow the > >> > Earth down, though. > >> > >> Seeing you mentioned that topic, have you ever worked out how long it > >> will take for the Earth to stop spinning because of the harnessing of > >> wind power? Not many people would know that wind energy comes mainly > >> from the Earth's rotation with relatively little from the sun. > > > > ROTFL, again. > > You are better at providing amusement than it seemed at first sight. > > Do keep it up. > > I cannot believe this! A whole bunch of obviously 'wannabe' physicists > who have never heard of Coriolis. This provides even more evidence that > Einstein worshippers are all seriously short of grey matter. . > > The Earth's rotation creates Coriolis forces which are almost entirely > responsible for the existence of trade winds. These are favoured by wind > farmers because they run almost 24/7/52 and contain far more energy than > local sea breezes caused by the sun's heat. Extracting energy from trade > winds will inevitably slow the Earth. Real physicists will know that Coriolis forces are perpendicular to the velocity. Hence Coriolis forces can never do any work. > This is therefore not fantasy but just another realism that I alone, > being apparently an exceptional physicist, has realised. You are a most exceptional physicist indeed, unique in your kind. You easily beat all the nutters in here for amusement value. [-] > > I'll leave it to you to find your error, > > more educational that way, > > > > Jan Alas, in vain. No surprise there, Jan Hint: the blades of the windmill exert a force on the wind to slow the air down. That generates the power. By action = reaction the foundations of the mill exert an equal force on the Earth that precisely compensates. Overall angular momentum is conserved.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jane <Jane@home.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-25 01:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <175908c8b6a1095c$2$3048414$13d399db@news.newsgroupdirect.com> |
| In reply to | #608316 |
On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 12:01:03 +0200, J. J. Lodder wrote: > Jane <Jane@home.com> wrote: > >> >> The Earth's rotation creates Coriolis forces which are almost entirely >> responsible for the existence of trade winds. These are favoured by >> wind farmers because they run almost 24/7/52 and contain far more >> energy than local sea breezes caused by the sun's heat. Extracting >> energy from trade winds will inevitably slow the Earth. > > Real physicists will know that Coriolis forces are perpendicular to the > velocity. > Hence Coriolis forces can never do any work. The Coriolis force is actually imaginary and exists only in the Earth's rotating frame. Flat Earthers regarded it as the 'magic' behind trade winds. The real force in the ECI frame is a consequence of changes in angular momentum of circulating air. . .That force certainly can do work >> This is therefore not fantasy but just another realism that I alone, >> being apparently an exceptional physicist, has realised. > > You are a most exceptional physicist indeed, > unique in your kind. > You easily beat all the nutters in here for amusement value. [-] > >> > I'll leave it to you to find your error, >> > more educational that way, >> > >> > Jan > > Alas, in vain. No surprise there, > > Jan > > Hint: the blades of the windmill exert a force on the wind to slow the > air down. That generates the power. > By action = reaction the foundations of the mill exert an equal force on > the Earth that precisely compensates. No. It is the windmill's torque that does the work and extracts the energy > Overall angular momentum is conserved. Garbage...How many more perpetual motion machines have you built? -- -- lover of truth
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-24 08:36 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <kaneucFd3tmU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #608288 |
On 4/23/2023 7:17 PM, Jane wrote: > On Sat, 22 Apr 2023 15:33:17 +0200, J. J. Lodder wrote: > >> Jane <Jane@home.com> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 02:07:15 -0700, gehan.am...@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>> >>>>>> brain doesn't work that way. >>>>>> . >>>>> -- >>>>> -- lover of truth >>>> >>>> What question? >>>> >>>> Nice videos, Jan. >>>> >>>> I bet you were wondering if the ground was moving relative to you or >>>> you were moving relative to the ground when >>>> you came in for a landing. It takes a lot more energy to slow the >>>> Earth down, though. >>> >>> Seeing you mentioned that topic, have you ever worked out how long it >>> will take for the Earth to stop spinning because of the harnessing of >>> wind power? Not many people would know that wind energy comes mainly >>> from the Earth's rotation with relatively little from the sun. >> >> ROTFL, again. >> You are better at providing amusement than it seemed at first sight. >> Do keep it up. > > I cannot believe this! A whole bunch of obviously 'wannabe' physicists > who have never heard of Coriolis. This provides even more evidence that > Einstein worshippers are all seriously short of grey matter. . Uncle Al thought that on east-west rail lines one track wore more than the other. Too many eggs, too small a basket, in his case as well as yours. > The Earth's rotation creates Coriolis forces which are almost entirely > responsible for the existence of trade winds. What means "almost entirely??? Without the sun providing a thermal element there would be be wind whatever. > These are favoured by wind > farmers because they run almost 24/7/52 and contain far more energy than > local sea breezes caused by the sun's heat. Extracting energy from trade > winds will inevitably slow the Earth. As the cranks have been told time and again, where's your support for such ideas? Sayso doesn't work, period. > This is therefore not fantasy but just another realism that I alone, > being apparently an exceptional physicist, has realised. And yes, eventually the narcissism had to emerge. Got any more? Go argue with arindam banerjee in sci.physics, or stroke him, whatever suits your fancy. > > If the total human energy supply is derived from wind energy, the Earth > will eventually stop spinning. Understand!!!!! > > Some of you pseudo-experts might like to do the simple calculations that > will reveal how long that will take. You should all be able to roughly > estimate the moment of inertia of a reasonably homogeneous sphere. > > (To relieve you concerns, I can tell you we don't have to worry for a > while yet). > > > > >> I'll leave it to you to find your error, >> more educational that way, >> >> Jan > > > > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-24 13:10 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <u26d6r$duj2$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #608327 |
On 4/24/2023 9:36 AM, whodat wrote: > On 4/23/2023 7:17 PM, Jane wrote: >> On Sat, 22 Apr 2023 15:33:17 +0200, J. J. Lodder wrote: >> >>> Jane <Jane@home.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 02:07:15 -0700, gehan.am...@gmail.com wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>>> brain doesn't work that way. >>>>>>> . >>>>>> -- >>>>>> -- lover of truth >>>>> >>>>> What question? >>>>> >>>>> Nice videos, Jan. >>>>> >>>>> I bet you were wondering if the ground was moving relative to you or >>>>> you were moving relative to the ground when >>>>> you came in for a landing. It takes a lot more energy to slow the >>>>> Earth down, though. >>>> >>>> Seeing you mentioned that topic, have you ever worked out how long it >>>> will take for the Earth to stop spinning because of the harnessing of >>>> wind power? Not many people would know that wind energy comes mainly >>>> from the Earth's rotation with relatively little from the sun. >>> >>> ROTFL, again. >>> You are better at providing amusement than it seemed at first sight. >>> Do keep it up. >> >> I cannot believe this! A whole bunch of obviously 'wannabe' physicists >> who have never heard of Coriolis. This provides even more evidence that >> Einstein worshippers are all seriously short of grey matter. . > > > Uncle Al thought that on east-west rail lines one track wore more than > the other. Too many eggs, too small a basket, in his case as well as > yours. I believe that was north-south rail lines, because N/S trains toward the equator have a perpendicular motion of 1000 mph compared to a train toward the north pole. I never tried to work out whether he was correct but I do remember that he said it didn't matter whether the train headed north or south, the same rail wore more than the other.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-25 10:28 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1q9qknf.1ya9jaz1f64s2vN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #608338 |
Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> wrote: > On 4/24/2023 9:36 AM, whodat wrote: > > On 4/23/2023 7:17 PM, Jane wrote: > >> On Sat, 22 Apr 2023 15:33:17 +0200, J. J. Lodder wrote: > >> > >>> Jane <Jane@home.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 02:07:15 -0700, gehan.am...@gmail.com wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>>> brain doesn't work that way. > >>>>>>> . > >>>>>> -- > >>>>>> -- lover of truth > >>>>> > >>>>> What question? > >>>>> > >>>>> Nice videos, Jan. > >>>>> > >>>>> I bet you were wondering if the ground was moving relative to you or > >>>>> you were moving relative to the ground when > >>>>> you came in for a landing. It takes a lot more energy to slow the > >>>>> Earth down, though. > >>>> > >>>> Seeing you mentioned that topic, have you ever worked out how long it > >>>> will take for the Earth to stop spinning because of the harnessing of > >>>> wind power? Not many people would know that wind energy comes mainly > >>>> from the Earth's rotation with relatively little from the sun. > >>> > >>> ROTFL, again. > >>> You are better at providing amusement than it seemed at first sight. > >>> Do keep it up. > >> > >> I cannot believe this! A whole bunch of obviously 'wannabe' physicists > >> who have never heard of Coriolis. This provides even more evidence that > >> Einstein worshippers are all seriously short of grey matter. . > > > > > > Uncle Al thought that on east-west rail lines one track wore more than > > the other. Too many eggs, too small a basket, in his case as well as > > yours. > > I believe that was north-south rail lines, because N/S trains toward the > equator have a perpendicular motion of 1000 mph compared to a train > toward the north pole. > > I never tried to work out whether he was correct but I do remember that > he said it didn't matter whether the train headed north or south, the > same rail wore more than the other. If so, he was wrong about it. (and about East-West rails too) I'll leave it as an excercise for those who want to amuse themselves with it, Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-25 02:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <93d03242-cbe8-488a-aacc-cd33324e6fc9n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #608428 |
On Tuesday, 25 April 2023 at 10:28:42 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote: > Volney <vol...@invalid.invalid> wrote: > > > On 4/24/2023 9:36 AM, whodat wrote: > > > On 4/23/2023 7:17 PM, Jane wrote: > > >> On Sat, 22 Apr 2023 15:33:17 +0200, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > >> > > >>> Jane <Ja...@home.com> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 02:07:15 -0700, gehan.am...@gmail.com wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>>>>> brain doesn't work that way. > > >>>>>>> . > > >>>>>> -- > > >>>>>> -- lover of truth > > >>>>> > > >>>>> What question? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Nice videos, Jan. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I bet you were wondering if the ground was moving relative to you or > > >>>>> you were moving relative to the ground when > > >>>>> you came in for a landing. It takes a lot more energy to slow the > > >>>>> Earth down, though. > > >>>> > > >>>> Seeing you mentioned that topic, have you ever worked out how long it > > >>>> will take for the Earth to stop spinning because of the harnessing of > > >>>> wind power? Not many people would know that wind energy comes mainly > > >>>> from the Earth's rotation with relatively little from the sun. > > >>> > > >>> ROTFL, again. > > >>> You are better at providing amusement than it seemed at first sight. > > >>> Do keep it up. > > >> > > >> I cannot believe this! A whole bunch of obviously 'wannabe' physicists > > >> who have never heard of Coriolis. This provides even more evidence that > > >> Einstein worshippers are all seriously short of grey matter. . > > > > > > > > > Uncle Al thought that on east-west rail lines one track wore more than > > > the other. Too many eggs, too small a basket, in his case as well as > > > yours. > > > > I believe that was north-south rail lines, because N/S trains toward the > > equator have a perpendicular motion of 1000 mph compared to a train > > toward the north pole. > > > > I never tried to work out whether he was correct but I do remember that > > he said it didn't matter whether the train headed north or south, the > > same rail wore more than the other. > If so, he was wrong about it. (and about East-West rails too) As a knigt of The Shit, our JJ is, of course, an unfaliable expert in any field, including the wear of rails.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-25 11:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1q9qpxj.1u1j3xh1v64gkN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #608430 |
Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, 25 April 2023 at 10:28:42 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > Volney <vol...@invalid.invalid> wrote: > > > > > On 4/24/2023 9:36 AM, whodat wrote: > > > > On 4/23/2023 7:17 PM, Jane wrote: > > > >> On Sat, 22 Apr 2023 15:33:17 +0200, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> Jane <Ja...@home.com> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>>> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 02:07:15 -0700, gehan.am...@gmail.com wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>>>>> brain doesn't work that way. > > > >>>>>>> . > > > >>>>>> -- > > > >>>>>> -- lover of truth > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> What question? > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Nice videos, Jan. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> I bet you were wondering if the ground was moving relative to you or > > > >>>>> you were moving relative to the ground when > > > >>>>> you came in for a landing. It takes a lot more energy to slow the > > > >>>>> Earth down, though. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Seeing you mentioned that topic, have you ever worked out how long it > > > >>>> will take for the Earth to stop spinning because of the harnessing of > > > >>>> wind power? Not many people would know that wind energy comes mainly > > > >>>> from the Earth's rotation with relatively little from the sun. > > > >>> > > > >>> ROTFL, again. > > > >>> You are better at providing amusement than it seemed at first sight. > > > >>> Do keep it up. > > > >> > > > >> I cannot believe this! A whole bunch of obviously 'wannabe' physicists > > > >> who have never heard of Coriolis. This provides even more evidence that > > > >> Einstein worshippers are all seriously short of grey matter. . > > > > > > > > > > > > Uncle Al thought that on east-west rail lines one track wore more than > > > > the other. Too many eggs, too small a basket, in his case as well as > > > > yours. > > > > > > I believe that was north-south rail lines, because N/S trains toward the > > > equator have a perpendicular motion of 1000 mph compared to a train > > > toward the north pole. > > > > > > I never tried to work out whether he was correct but I do remember that > > > he said it didn't matter whether the train headed north or south, the > > > same rail wore more than the other. > > If so, he was wrong about it. (and about East-West rails too) > > As a knigt of The Shit, our JJ is, of course, an unfaliable expert > in any field, including the wear of rails. Don't whine, do the excercise, if you can. You can tell me if I'm wrong or not afterwards. Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-25 02:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <55eacb9d-fcfd-4942-9347-9e356218c2bfn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #608431 |
On Tuesday, 25 April 2023 at 11:30:17 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote: > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tuesday, 25 April 2023 at 10:28:42 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > Volney <vol...@invalid.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > > On 4/24/2023 9:36 AM, whodat wrote: > > > > > On 4/23/2023 7:17 PM, Jane wrote: > > > > >> On Sat, 22 Apr 2023 15:33:17 +0200, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >>> Jane <Ja...@home.com> wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 02:07:15 -0700, gehan.am...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>>>> brain doesn't work that way. > > > > >>>>>>> . > > > > >>>>>> -- > > > > >>>>>> -- lover of truth > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> What question? > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> Nice videos, Jan. > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> I bet you were wondering if the ground was moving relative to you or > > > > >>>>> you were moving relative to the ground when > > > > >>>>> you came in for a landing. It takes a lot more energy to slow the > > > > >>>>> Earth down, though. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Seeing you mentioned that topic, have you ever worked out how long it > > > > >>>> will take for the Earth to stop spinning because of the harnessing of > > > > >>>> wind power? Not many people would know that wind energy comes mainly > > > > >>>> from the Earth's rotation with relatively little from the sun. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> ROTFL, again. > > > > >>> You are better at providing amusement than it seemed at first sight. > > > > >>> Do keep it up. > > > > >> > > > > >> I cannot believe this! A whole bunch of obviously 'wannabe' physicists > > > > >> who have never heard of Coriolis. This provides even more evidence that > > > > >> Einstein worshippers are all seriously short of grey matter. . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Uncle Al thought that on east-west rail lines one track wore more than > > > > > the other. Too many eggs, too small a basket, in his case as well as > > > > > yours. > > > > > > > > I believe that was north-south rail lines, because N/S trains toward the > > > > equator have a perpendicular motion of 1000 mph compared to a train > > > > toward the north pole. > > > > > > > > I never tried to work out whether he was correct but I do remember that > > > > he said it didn't matter whether the train headed north or south, the > > > > same rail wore more than the other. > > > If so, he was wrong about it. (and about East-West rails too) > > > > As a knigt of The Shit, our JJ is, of course, an unfaliable expert > > in any field, including the wear of rails. > Don't whine, do the excercise, if you can. I can't. I'm not a knight of The Shit knowing everything about everything, I know very little about the wearing of railways.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-25 13:39 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1q9qrvr.quln0s1kxdcadN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #608432 |
Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, 25 April 2023 at 11:30:17 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Tuesday, 25 April 2023 at 10:28:42 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > > Volney <vol...@invalid.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 4/24/2023 9:36 AM, whodat wrote: > > > > > > On 4/23/2023 7:17 PM, Jane wrote: > > > > > >> On Sat, 22 Apr 2023 15:33:17 +0200, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> Jane <Ja...@home.com> wrote: > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 02:07:15 -0700, gehan.am...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> brain doesn't work that way. > > > > > >>>>>>> . > > > > > >>>>>> -- > > > > > >>>>>> -- lover of truth > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> What question? > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> Nice videos, Jan. > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> I bet you were wondering if the ground was moving relative > > > > > >>>>> to you or you were moving relative to the ground when you > > > > > >>>>> came in for a landing. It takes a lot more energy to slow > > > > > >>>>> the Earth down, though. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Seeing you mentioned that topic, have you ever worked out how > > > > > >>>> long it will take for the Earth to stop spinning because of > > > > > >>>> the harnessing of wind power? Not many people would know that > > > > > >>>> wind energy comes mainly from the Earth's rotation with > > > > > >>>> relatively little from the sun. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> ROTFL, again. > > > > > >>> You are better at providing amusement than it seemed at first > > > > > >>> sight. Do keep it up. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> I cannot believe this! A whole bunch of obviously 'wannabe' > > > > > >> physicists who have never heard of Coriolis. This provides even > > > > > >> more evidence that Einstein worshippers are all seriously short > > > > > >> of grey matter. . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Uncle Al thought that on east-west rail lines one track wore > > > > > > more than the other. Too many eggs, too small a basket, in his > > > > > > case as well as yours. > > > > > > > > > > I believe that was north-south rail lines, because N/S trains > > > > > toward the equator have a perpendicular motion of 1000 mph > > > > > compared to a train toward the north pole. > > > > > > > > > > I never tried to work out whether he was correct but I do remember > > > > > that he said it didn't matter whether the train headed north or > > > > > south, the same rail wore more than the other. > > > > If so, he was wrong about it. (and about East-West rails too) > > > > > > As a knigt of The Shit, our JJ is, of course, an unfaliable expert > > > in any field, including the wear of rails. > > Don't whine, do the excercise, if you can. > > I can't. That's an honest answer. > I'm not a knight of The Shit knowing everything > about everything, I know very little about the wearing of > railways. A thought experiment only. No real rails were worn out to perform this expereriment, Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-25 11:49 +0200 |
| Subject | Railway puzzle (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein) |
| Message-ID | <1q9qql5.gxdt4d1ck3iwpN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #608430 |
> > > I believe that was north-south rail lines, because N/S trains toward the > > > equator have a perpendicular motion of 1000 mph compared to a train > > > toward the north pole. > > > > > > I never tried to work out whether he was correct but I do remember that > > > he said it didn't matter whether the train headed north or south, the > > > same rail wore more than the other. [Science Quizz stuff] Somewhere in this world there is a stretch of straight high speed railway line that is perfectly levelled. (WRT to the geoid of course) So the weight is equally divided over the left and right wheels, It is two way railway line, with separate tracks. Now trains start moving on it. Someone says that Coriolis forces will push moving trains to one side, and that therefore the rails will wear unequally, independently of which way the trains are going. Is this true? Choose from: A) No, there will be no unequal wear, because Coriolis forces don't really exist. B) Yes, there will be unequal wear, and it will be on the same side on both of the tracks. C) Yes, there will be unequal wear, and it will be on the opposite sides of the tracks. And next: Is it the same for east-west and north-south railways? Jan -- PS Unfortunately the effect is of order 10^-5, and too small to actually measure it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-04-25 03:11 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Railway puzzle (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein) |
| Message-ID | <242606c5-476d-45b9-80e5-9df9ea3aa703n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #608433 |
On Tuesday, 25 April 2023 at 11:49:32 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > > I believe that was north-south rail lines, because N/S trains toward the > > > > equator have a perpendicular motion of 1000 mph compared to a train > > > > toward the north pole. > > > > > > > > I never tried to work out whether he was correct but I do remember that > > > > he said it didn't matter whether the train headed north or south, the > > > > same rail wore more than the other. > [Science Quizz stuff] > > Somewhere in this world there is a stretch > of straight high speed railway line that is perfectly levelled. > (WRT to the geoid of course) > So the weight is equally divided over the left and right wheels, Doesn't it depend on - how a train is loaded? > It is two way railway line, with separate tracks. > > Now trains start moving on it. > Someone says that Coriolis forces will push moving trains to one side, > and that therefore the rails will wear unequally, > independently of which way the trains are going. > Is this true? Do you mean - independently of whether a train goes from the equator to a pole or oppositely? > > Choose from: > > A) No, there will be no unequal wear, > because Coriolis forces don't really exist. > > > B) Yes, there will be unequal wear, > and it will be on the same side on both of the tracks. > > C) Yes, there will be unequal wear, > and it will be on the opposite sides of the tracks. > > And next: > Is it the same for east-west and north-south railways? What is the wind?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web