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 241 — 23 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.) Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-19 07:23 +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> - 2023-05-19 08:28 -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> - 2023-05-20 21:05 +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> - 2023-05-20 17:59 -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: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Jane <Jane@home.com> - 2023-05-20 21:32 +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> - 2023-05-20 18:10 -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> - 2023-05-23 02:52 +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> - 2023-05-23 10:05 -0500
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-05-23 09:27 -0700
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> - 2023-05-24 00:58 +0000
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-05-23 19:16 -0700
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> - 2023-05-26 02:35 +0000
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> - 2023-05-24 00:54 +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> - 2023-05-23 21:20 -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> - 2023-05-25 23:35 +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> - 2023-05-25 19:50 -0500
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-05-24 12:57 -0500
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-05-24 11:44 -0700
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-05-25 09:18 +0200
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-05-25 13:45 -0400
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-05-25 20:02 +0200
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Ridge Schwarzenberg <szrr@sdirgwah.gs> - 2023-05-25 18:13 +0000
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> - 2023-05-25 23:49 +0000
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> - 2023-05-25 23:45 +0000
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-05-20 16:15 -0700
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-05-21 15:35 -0500
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-05-21 13:47 -0700
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> - 2023-05-23 02:05 +0000
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-05-22 20:11 -0700
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> - 2023-05-23 06:23 +0000
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-05-22 21:02 -0700
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> - 2023-05-23 06:25 +0000
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-05-21 13:53 -0700
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> - 2023-05-31 21:22 +0000
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-05-31 22:09 -0700
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-06-02 10:14 -0700
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-01 10:59 -0700
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> - 2023-06-02 00:17 +0000
Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-06-02 10:00 -0700
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 7 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 13 Next page →
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-18 22:14 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <kco7s0Fjo1mU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #611091 |
On 5/18/2023 8:39 PM, Jane wrote: > On Wed, 17 May 2023 19:20:30 -0500, whodat wrote: > >> On 5/17/2023 5:57 PM, Jane wrote: > >>>> What error? You have failed repeatedly to define your terms despite > >> >> Thanks for providing the explanation for your difficulties in this >> newsgroup. You provide a lot of opinion and precious few facts. >> The reason you don't provide realistic replies to questions is that you >> don't have the answers but in the meantime you keep trying to bluff your >> way through. > Garbage. I'm about the only person here who states any facts. Thank you for providing another perfect example of your bluffing. Three readers asked you to define "frequency" providing context to a particular question you asked. So far, only bluffing and as I keep repeating, all bun no beef. <snip>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jane <Jane@home.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-20 21:32 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <1760f770fc51e683$263$972675$c1d34bd6@news.newsgroupdirect.com> |
| In reply to | #611098 |
On Thu, 18 May 2023 22:14:02 -0500, whodat wrote: > On 5/18/2023 8:39 PM, Jane wrote: >> On Wed, 17 May 2023 19:20:30 -0500, whodat wrote: >> >>> On 5/17/2023 5:57 PM, Jane wrote: >> >>>>> What error? You have failed repeatedly to define your terms despite >> >> >>> Thanks for providing the explanation for your difficulties in this >>> newsgroup. You provide a lot of opinion and precious few facts. >>> The reason you don't provide realistic replies to questions is that >>> you don't have the answers but in the meantime you keep trying to >>> bluff your way through. > >> Garbage. I'm about the only person here who states any facts. > > Thank you for providing another perfect example of your bluffing. > > Three readers asked you to define "frequency" providing context to a > particular question you asked. So far, only bluffing and as I keep > repeating, all bun no beef. Gawd! The idiots talk about the frequency of light all the time. Surely they have some idea of its definition. I will remind them. The so-called 'frequency' of light is defined as its wave emission rate at the source, c/λ. Light's arrival rate at any object which is at rest with the source has the same value. To be consistent, the frequency of light arriving at an object that is moving at speed v relative to the source must therefore be defined as (c+v)/λ. Note, it is ignorance of this fact that caused Albert Michelson to make an absolute fool of himself when he performed his moving mirror experiment in 1913 in his attempt to rescue Einstein from eminent obscurity. > <snip> -- -- lover of truth
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-20 18:10 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <kct2c7FdippU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #611254 |
On 5/20/2023 4:32 PM, Jane wrote: > On Thu, 18 May 2023 22:14:02 -0500, whodat wrote: > >> On 5/18/2023 8:39 PM, Jane wrote: >>> On Wed, 17 May 2023 19:20:30 -0500, whodat wrote: >>> >>>> On 5/17/2023 5:57 PM, Jane wrote: >>> >>>>>> What error? You have failed repeatedly to define your terms despite >>> >>> >>>> Thanks for providing the explanation for your difficulties in this >>>> newsgroup. You provide a lot of opinion and precious few facts. >>>> The reason you don't provide realistic replies to questions is that >>>> you don't have the answers but in the meantime you keep trying to >>>> bluff your way through. >> >>> Garbage. I'm about the only person here who states any facts. >> >> Thank you for providing another perfect example of your bluffing. >> >> Three readers asked you to define "frequency" providing context to a >> particular question you asked. So far, only bluffing and as I keep >> repeating, all bun no beef. > > Gawd! The idiots talk about the frequency of light all the time. Surely > they have some idea of its definition. I will remind them. Doesn't matter what "they" know. The question was asked in the context of your questions related to an example you were making using initially golf balls then soon after using arrows. Any definition you now give without reverting to the original context in which you were asked is worthless. I am leaving the subsequent discourse by you in place to demonstrate the abject uselessness of this latest ploy. If you mean this put it in the context necessary to demonstrate its relevance to your questions. You should have answered then rather than now. And you still haven't nswered the actual question. The question then was not about "the so called 'frequency of light'" but about golf balls. So far all bun and still no beef. > The so-called 'frequency' of light is defined as its wave emission rate at > the source, c/λ. Light's arrival rate at any object which is at rest with > the source has the same value. To be consistent, the frequency of light > arriving at an object that is moving at speed v relative to the source > must therefore be defined as (c+v)/λ. > > Note, it is ignorance of this fact that caused Albert Michelson to make an > absolute fool of himself when he performed his moving mirror experiment in > 1913 in his attempt to rescue Einstein from eminent obscurity. > >> <snip>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jane <Jane@home.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-23 02:52 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <1761a6169aa531a5$1878$468409$cbd341d6@news.newsgroupdirect.com> |
| In reply to | #611266 |
On Sat, 20 May 2023 18:10:55 -0500, whodat wrote: > On 5/20/2023 4:32 PM, Jane wrote: >> On Thu, 18 May 2023 22:14:02 -0500, whodat wrote: >> >>> On 5/18/2023 8:39 PM, Jane wrote: >>>> On Wed, 17 May 2023 19:20:30 -0500, whodat wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 5/17/2023 5:57 PM, Jane wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> What error? You have failed repeatedly to define your terms >>>>>>> despite >>>> >>>> >>>>> Thanks for providing the explanation for your difficulties in this >>>>> newsgroup. You provide a lot of opinion and precious few facts. The >>>>> reason you don't provide realistic replies to questions is that you >>>>> don't have the answers but in the meantime you keep trying to bluff >>>>> your way through. >>> >>>> Garbage. I'm about the only person here who states any facts. >>> >>> Thank you for providing another perfect example of your bluffing. >>> >>> Three readers asked you to define "frequency" providing context to a >>> particular question you asked. So far, only bluffing and as I keep >>> repeating, all bun no beef. >> >> Gawd! The idiots talk about the frequency of light all the time. Surely >> they have some idea of its definition. I will remind them. > > Doesn't matter what "they" know. The question was asked in the context > of your questions related to an example you were making using initially > golf balls then soon after using arrows. Any definition you now give > without reverting to the original context in which you were asked is > worthless. > > I am leaving the subsequent discourse by you in place to demonstrate the > abject uselessness of this latest ploy. If you mean this put it in the > context necessary to demonstrate its relevance to your questions. You > should have answered then rather than now. And you still haven't nswered > the actual question. The question then was not about "the so called > 'frequency of light'" but about golf balls. > > So far all bun and still no beef. You wouldn't know beef from cowdung. >> The so-called 'frequency' of light is defined as its wave emission rate >> at the source, c/λ. Light's arrival rate at any object which is at rest >> with the source has the same value. To be consistent, the frequency of >> light arriving at an object that is moving at speed v relative to the >> source must therefore be defined as (c+v)/λ. >> >> Note, it is ignorance of this fact that caused Albert Michelson to make >> an absolute fool of himself when he performed his moving mirror >> experiment in 1913 in his attempt to rescue Einstein from eminent >> obscurity. Like all relativists you think procrastination will save you from eventually having to say, " Well done Jane! Everything you have taught us is absolutely brilliant and correct. Why has it taken 200 years for someone to get it right?" >>> <snip> -- -- lover of truth
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-23 10:05 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <kd431mFfsjhU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #611400 |
On 5/22/2023 9:52 PM, Jane wrote: > On Sat, 20 May 2023 18:10:55 -0500, whodat wrote: <...> >> So far all bun and still no beef. > > You wouldn't know beef from cowdung. <...> > Like all relativists you think procrastination will save you from > eventually having to say, " Well done Jane! Everything you have taught us > is absolutely brilliant and correct. Why has it taken 200 years for > someone to get it right?" Thanks, now there is nothing separating you from all the cranks that came before you. You have provided no support or authentication for your ideas nor are you submitting anything to peer reviewed journals. I am indeed a default relativist who accepts Einstein's work because of the support he has received in the intervening hundred plus years despite the fact that it appears kooky. GPS clocks alone are clear evidence for much. But then I am not attempting to convince anyone of anything and am not lashing out at people with insulting behavior. I wish you recovery despite the fact that you appear to be on a permanently one way street.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-23 09:27 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <b4e25c37-a0b8-45e1-91d7-d284462ff675n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #611434 |
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:06:47 AM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > On 5/22/2023 9:52 PM, Jane wrote: > > On Sat, 20 May 2023 18:10:55 -0500, whodat wrote: > <...> > >> So far all bun and still no beef. > > > > You wouldn't know beef from cowdung. > <...> > > Like all relativists you think procrastination will save you from > > eventually having to say, " Well done Jane! Everything you have taught us > > is absolutely brilliant and correct. Why has it taken 200 years for > > someone to get it right?" > Thanks, now there is nothing separating you from all the cranks that > came before you. You have provided no support or authentication for > your ideas nor are you submitting anything to peer reviewed journals. > > I am indeed a default relativist who accepts Einstein's work because > of the support he has received in the intervening hundred plus years > despite the fact that it appears kooky. GPS clocks alone are clear > evidence for much. But then I am not attempting to convince anyone > of anything and am not lashing out at people with insulting behavior. > > I wish you recovery despite the fact that you appear to be on a > permanently one way street. So, this piece of shit was once teaching?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jane <Jane@home.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-24 00:58 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <1761ee75a3fa8c25$1901$468409$cbd341d6@news.newsgroupdirect.com> |
| In reply to | #611443 |
On Tue, 23 May 2023 09:27:22 -0700, Dono. wrote: > On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:06:47 AM UTC-7, whodat wrote: >> On 5/22/2023 9:52 PM, Jane wrote: >> > On Sat, 20 May 2023 18:10:55 -0500, whodat wrote: >> <...> >> >> So far all bun and still no beef. >> > >> > You wouldn't know beef from cowdung. >> <...> >> > Like all relativists you think procrastination will save you from >> > eventually having to say, " Well done Jane! Everything you have >> > taught us is absolutely brilliant and correct. Why has it taken 200 >> > years for someone to get it right?" >> Thanks, now there is nothing separating you from all the cranks that >> came before you. You have provided no support or authentication for >> your ideas nor are you submitting anything to peer reviewed journals. >> >> I am indeed a default relativist who accepts Einstein's work because of >> the support he has received in the intervening hundred plus years >> despite the fact that it appears kooky. GPS clocks alone are clear >> evidence for much. But then I am not attempting to convince anyone of >> anything and am not lashing out at people with insulting behavior. >> >> I wish you recovery despite the fact that you appear to be on a >> permanently one way street. > So, this piece of shit was once teaching? You are being unkind calling Whodat 'a piece of shit'. He isn't as bad as most of your braindead colleagues. -- -- lover of truth
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-23 19:16 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <d8f5dcd8-83a6-4702-8aab-82f76d42c334n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #611473 |
On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 5:58:47 PM UTC-7, Jane wrote: > On Tue, 23 May 2023 09:27:22 -0700, Dono. wrote: > > > On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:06:47 AM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > >> On 5/22/2023 9:52 PM, Jane wrote: > >> > On Sat, 20 May 2023 18:10:55 -0500, whodat wrote: > >> <...> > >> >> So far all bun and still no beef. > >> > > >> > You wouldn't know beef from cowdung. > >> <...> > >> > Like all relativists you think procrastination will save you from > >> > eventually having to say, " Well done Jane! Everything you have > >> > taught us is absolutely brilliant and correct. Why has it taken 200 > >> > years for someone to get it right?" > >> Thanks, now there is nothing separating you from all the cranks that > >> came before you. You have provided no support or authentication for > >> your ideas nor are you submitting anything to peer reviewed journals. > >> > >> I am indeed a default relativist who accepts Einstein's work because of > >> the support he has received in the intervening hundred plus years > >> despite the fact that it appears kooky. GPS clocks alone are clear > >> evidence for much. But then I am not attempting to convince anyone of > >> anything and am not lashing out at people with insulting behavior. > >> > >> I wish you recovery despite the fact that you appear to be on a > >> permanently one way street. > > So, this piece of shit was once teaching? > You are being unkind calling Whodat 'a piece of shit'. He isn't as bad as > most of your braindead colleagues. I'm pretty sure that Dono was not referencing Whodat...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jane <Jane@home.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-26 02:35 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <176290e5abcf70b6$33$891446$c5d34fd6@news.newsgroupdirect.com> |
| In reply to | #611477 |
On Tue, 23 May 2023 19:16:02 -0700, Paul Alsing wrote: > On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 5:58:47 PM UTC-7, Jane wrote: >> On Tue, 23 May 2023 09:27:22 -0700, Dono. wrote: >> >> I am indeed a default relativist who accepts Einstein's work because >> >> of the support he has received in the intervening hundred plus years >> >> despite the fact that it appears kooky. GPS clocks alone are clear >> >> evidence for much. But then I am not attempting to convince anyone >> >> of anything and am not lashing out at people with insulting >> >> behavior. >> >> >> >> I wish you recovery despite the fact that you appear to be on a >> >> permanently one way street. > >> > So, this piece of shit was once teaching? > >> You are being unkind calling Whodat 'a piece of shit'. He isn't as bad >> as most of your braindead colleagues. > > I'm pretty sure that Dono was not referencing Whodat... Well he must have been referring to himself...he used the word 'this' as though looking in a mirror. -- -- lover of truth
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jane <Jane@home.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-24 00:54 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <1761ee36bb17b5dd$1900$468409$cbd341d6@news.newsgroupdirect.com> |
| In reply to | #611434 |
On Tue, 23 May 2023 10:05:23 -0500, whodat wrote: > On 5/22/2023 9:52 PM, Jane wrote: >> On Sat, 20 May 2023 18:10:55 -0500, whodat wrote: > Thanks, now there is nothing separating you from all the cranks that > came before you. You have provided no support or authentication for your > ideas nor are you submitting anything to peer reviewed journals. The word 'peer' puts me off. It means 'the team of Einstein worshipping censors'. I have provided all the evidence needed to refute Einstein. You people are just too backward or stubborn to accept any of it. I have explained why the bogus light clock argumment about gamma and time dilation has managed to fool the experts for 200 years. I have explained why light does not carry a frequency during transit and I have fully explained why Michelcon's 1913 experiment refutes Einstein. Hpw much more proof do you want. -- -- lover of truth
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-23 21:20 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <kd5ajkFlvmuU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #611472 |
On 5/23/2023 7:54 PM, Jane wrote: > On Tue, 23 May 2023 10:05:23 -0500, whodat wrote: > >> On 5/22/2023 9:52 PM, Jane wrote: >>> On Sat, 20 May 2023 18:10:55 -0500, whodat wrote: > >> Thanks, now there is nothing separating you from all the cranks that >> came before you. You have provided no support or authentication for your >> ideas nor are you submitting anything to peer reviewed journals. > > The word 'peer' puts me off. It means 'the team of Einstein worshipping > censors'. > > I have provided all the evidence needed to refute Einstein. You people > are just too backward or stubborn to accept any of it. I have explained > why the bogus light clock argumment about gamma and time dilation has > managed to fool the experts for 200 years. I have explained why light > does not carry a frequency during transit and I have fully explained why > Miche > lcon's 1913 experiment refutes Einstein. Hpw much more proof do you > want. Really. You've given us links to experiments you've performed demonstrating your "thesis?" I must have missed them somehow. Would you mind very much posting the links to your experiments again? Pretty please!!!!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jane <Jane@home.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-25 23:35 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <17628714f2857b66$5$1029791$c1d34bd6@news.newsgroupdirect.com> |
| In reply to | #611479 |
On Tue, 23 May 2023 21:20:33 -0500, whodat wrote: > On 5/23/2023 7:54 PM, Jane wrote: >> >> I have provided all the evidence needed to refute Einstein. You people >> are just too backward or stubborn to accept any of it. I have explained >> why the bogus light clock argumment about gamma and time dilation has >> managed to fool the experts for 200 years. I have explained why light >> does not carry a frequency during transit and I have fully explained >> why Miche > lcon's 1913 experiment refutes Einstein. Hpw much more >> proof do you want. > > Really. You've given us links to experiments you've performed > demonstrating your "thesis?" I must have missed them somehow. Would you > mind very much posting the links to your experiments again? > > Pretty please!!!! You sound like a little kid who had not learnt to feed itself... -- -- lover of truth
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-25 19:50 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <kdae31FferpU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #611611 |
On 5/25/2023 6:35 PM, Jane wrote: > On Tue, 23 May 2023 21:20:33 -0500, whodat wrote: > >> On 5/23/2023 7:54 PM, Jane wrote: > >>> >>> I have provided all the evidence needed to refute Einstein. You people >>> are just too backward or stubborn to accept any of it. I have explained >>> why the bogus light clock argumment about gamma and time dilation has >>> managed to fool the experts for 200 years. I have explained why light >>> does not carry a frequency during transit and I have fully explained >>> why Miche > lcon's 1913 experiment refutes Einstein. Hpw much more >>> proof do you want. >> >> Really. You've given us links to experiments you've performed >> demonstrating your "thesis?" I must have missed them somehow. Would you >> mind very much posting the links to your experiments again? >> >> Pretty please!!!! > > You sound like a little kid who had not learnt to feed itself... There is no cogent reply to someone so far gone as you've just demonstrated. My only complaint with your postings was that you failed to legitimately support your claims, but you've demonstrated that not only do you have no thesis worthy of consideration but also that you've lost your marbles. I know that at this stage of life you can't help yourself. I'll remember the person you once were and forgive and forget this stage of your life.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-24 12:57 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <z-SdnXKKrJGMzfP5nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #611472 |
On 5/23/23 7:54 PM, Jane wrote: > I have provided all the evidence needed to refute Einstein. With practically everything you write you display colossal ignorance of physics, science, and the experimental record. One does not refute a person, one refutes a theory (aka model), and that requires an experiment, not just prattling on and on about waves and how you fantasize they should behave. > You people are just too backward or stubborn to accept any of it. You have provided nothing substantial to "accept". You just make unsubstantiated claims. > [... more unsubstantiated claims] When you reference an actual EXPERIMENT with a result that differs significantly from the prediction of SR (within its domain), then I will listen. Or an EXPERIMENT with a result that differs significantly from the prediction of classical electrodynamics (within its domain). So far you have only shown how useless it is to reply to you, so I will stop doing so until you have something real to offer. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-24 11:44 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <d91ef022-b003-4eb9-a09f-a77efb7f6d24n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #611506 |
On Wednesday, 24 May 2023 at 19:57:49 UTC+2, Tom Roberts wrote: > On 5/23/23 7:54 PM, Jane wrote: > > I have provided all the evidence needed to refute Einstein. > With practically everything you write you display colossal ignorance of > physics, science, and the experimental record. And in the meantime in the real world, forbidden by your bunch of idiots "improper" clocks keep measuring improper t'=t in improper seconds.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-25 09:18 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <kd8gdvF6f3bU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #611514 |
On 2023-05-24 18:44:02 +0000, Maciej Wozniak said: > On Wednesday, 24 May 2023 at 19:57:49 UTC+2, Tom Roberts wrote: >> On 5/23/23 7:54 PM, Jane wrote: >>> I have provided all the evidence needed to refute Einstein. >> With practically everything you write you display colossal ignorance of >> physics, science, and the experimental record. > > And in the meantime in the real world, forbidden > by your bunch of idiots "improper" clocks keep > measuring improper t'=t in improper seconds. That makes 725. You're getting there, but if you want to reach 1000 before the end of the year you need to work harder, or learn how to program your computer to do it for you. Twice a day will be more than enough. -- athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-25 13:45 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <u4o6rg$3k41l$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #611554 |
On 5/25/2023 3:18 AM, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote: > On 2023-05-24 18:44:02 +0000, Maciej Wozniak said: > >> On Wednesday, 24 May 2023 at 19:57:49 UTC+2, Tom Roberts wrote: >>> On 5/23/23 7:54 PM, Jane wrote: >>>> I have provided all the evidence needed to refute Einstein. >>> With practically everything you write you display colossal ignorance of >>> physics, science, and the experimental record. >> >> And in the meantime in the real world, forbidden >> by your bunch of idiots "improper" clocks keep >> measuring improper t'=t in improper seconds. > > That makes 725. You're getting there, but if you want to reach 1000 > before the end of the year you need to work harder, or learn how to > program your computer to do it for you. Twice a day will be more than > enough. > > The parrot parroted that squawk twice in one post a week or so ago. Did that count as one or two?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-25 20:02 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <kd9m5fFc49sU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #611577 |
On 2023-05-25 17:45:18 +0000, Volney said: > On 5/25/2023 3:18 AM, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote: >> On 2023-05-24 18:44:02 +0000, Maciej Wozniak said: >> >>> On Wednesday, 24 May 2023 at 19:57:49 UTC+2, Tom Roberts wrote: >>>> On 5/23/23 7:54 PM, Jane wrote: >>>>> I have provided all the evidence needed to refute Einstein. >>>> With practically everything you write you display colossal ignorance of >>>> physics, science, and the experimental record. >>> >>> And in the meantime in the real world, forbidden >>> by your bunch of idiots "improper" clocks keep >>> measuring improper t'=t in improper seconds. >> >> That makes 725. You're getting there, but if you want to reach 1000 >> before the end of the year you need to work harder, or learn how to >> program your computer to do it for you. Twice a day will be more than >> enough. >> >> > The parrot parroted that squawk twice in one post a week or so ago. Did > that count as one or two? Only one. I try to be fair. On the other hand when he's in his cups he posts incoherent messages that may or may not convey the same idea. I use my discretion whether to count those. -- athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ridge Schwarzenberg <szrr@sdirgwah.gs> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-25 18:13 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <u4o8ga$18vuf$1@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #611577 |
Volney wrote: > The parrot parroted that squawk twice in one post a week or so ago. Did > that count as one or two? why the polakers love uKraine. It's not the war. Azov Necrophiliac Did Dark Deeds To Corpse in Mariupol https://bi%74%63%68ute.com/video/bi0C6jMSdUJt moreover, they demands compensation for damages from another war Germany ‘cowardly hiding’ over WWII compensation – Poland https://%72t.com/news/576886-poland-germany-reparations-mularczyk/ Poland has been demanding that Germany pay up since last autumn, when the country’s parliament voted to seek 6.2 trillion zlotys ($1.36 trillion) over the damage suffered during World War II. moreover, the former traitor electrician "president", says is suffering with no money to buy food. Ohh boy, what the fuck capitalism is that?? Ex-Polish president complains about pension The cost of living is too high, Lech Walesa has insisted https://%72t.com/news/576741-poland-lech-walesa-pension/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jane <Jane@home.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-05-25 23:49 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Uncle Jane's Dementia (was Re: Uncle Jane dodges the issues (was Re: The Experiment that Resccued Einstein from Obscurity.) |
| Message-ID | <176287d8b181c8eb$7$1029791$c1d34bd6@news.newsgroupdirect.com> |
| In reply to | #611577 |
On Thu, 25 May 2023 13:45:18 -0400, Volney wrote: > On 5/25/2023 3:18 AM, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote: >> >> That makes 725. You're getting there, but if you want to reach 1000 >> before the end of the year you need to work harder, or learn how to >> program your computer to do it for you. Twice a day will be more than >> enough. >> >> > The parrot parroted that squawk twice in one post a week or so ago. Did > that count as one or two? Don't rubbish him. He is living proof that even a person with an intellectual handicap knows intuitively that SR is crap. -- -- lover of truth
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 13 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web