Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #654922 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-07-14 22:30 +0000 |
| Last post | 2024-08-10 10:40 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 234 — 30 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-07-14 22:30 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-07-15 02:52 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-07-15 07:15 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-07-15 13:04 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-07-15 15:08 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-07-15 11:58 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-07-15 12:33 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-07-15 12:55 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-07-15 16:12 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-07-15 18:53 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-07-15 17:01 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-07-15 17:08 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-07-15 20:24 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-07-15 20:59 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-07-15 21:54 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-07-15 22:30 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-07-15 23:21 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-07-16 12:18 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-07-16 14:47 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-07-17 09:05 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-07-17 12:05 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-07-17 14:16 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-07-17 20:26 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-07-17 23:34 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-07-18 02:10 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-07-18 05:41 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-07-31 15:23 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Reign Batura <nuinr@giu.ru> - 2024-07-18 14:30 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-10 16:20 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-10 18:34 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-11 13:08 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-11 15:36 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-11 14:32 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-11 17:25 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-11 17:49 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-11 20:07 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-11 20:19 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-08-11 13:35 -0700
Re: Relativistic aberration Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-08-11 13:39 -0700
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-11 22:49 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-12 02:42 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-12 06:34 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-08-12 13:50 -0700
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-12 06:33 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-12 12:53 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-12 15:21 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-12 15:27 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-12 15:57 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-12 16:06 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-12 16:15 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-12 16:22 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-12 14:23 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-12 17:30 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-12 17:36 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-12 17:42 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-12 17:46 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-12 17:51 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-12 20:05 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-12 23:44 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-13 01:49 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-08-12 17:08 -0700
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-13 02:14 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-08-12 18:32 -0700
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-13 03:46 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-08-12 19:46 -0700
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-13 04:48 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Javis Orbán <tsnb@sia.hu> - 2024-08-13 10:25 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-08-14 10:09 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-14 10:22 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Balabaanoff Bibitinsky <yyinsy@krtikb.ru> - 2024-08-14 17:36 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-14 10:30 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-08-15 08:36 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Mozhar Bairamkulov <aueail@oroamlt.ru> - 2024-08-13 07:30 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-13 12:38 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-13 15:27 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-13 13:47 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-13 15:54 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-13 15:15 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> - 2024-08-13 16:29 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-13 18:08 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> - 2024-08-13 22:09 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-13 23:31 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> - 2024-08-13 22:26 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-08-13 17:43 -0700
Re: Relativistic aberration "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2024-08-13 20:21 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2024-08-13 20:24 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-14 14:04 +0200
His passion is to persecute scapegoats, but he fears evidences... JC_Lavau <jacques.lavau@free.fr> - 2024-08-14 19:38 +0000
Re: His passion is to persecute scapegoats, but he fears evidences... Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> - 2024-08-14 20:32 +0000
Re: His passion is to persecute scapegoats, but he fears evidences... Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> - 2024-08-14 20:36 +0000
"Persecution" is the desperate cry of cranks being confronted with facts Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-14 23:54 +0200
Re: "Persecution" is the desperate cry of cranks being confronted with facts Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-15 00:01 +0200
Re: "Persecution" is the desperate cry of cranks being confronted with facts Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> - 2024-08-14 22:33 +0000
Re: "Persecution" is the desperate cry of cranks being confronted with facts Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> - 2024-08-14 22:24 +0000
Re: "Persecution" is the desperate cry of cranks being confronted with facts Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-15 00:33 +0200
Re: "Persecution" is the desperate cry of cranks being confronted with facts Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> - 2024-08-14 22:35 +0000
Re: "Persecution" is the desperate cry of cranks being confronted with facts Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-15 00:39 +0200
Re: "Persecution" is the desperate cry of cranks being confronted with facts Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-15 10:56 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-14 13:29 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-08-15 07:57 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-13 06:18 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Josh Vassilopulos <hsihos@shsvvai.gr> - 2024-08-12 19:11 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-12 21:14 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Pete Beaulieu <ieae@uabei.fr> - 2024-08-12 20:01 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Szűcs Kővári <amb@asyypag.hu> - 2024-08-11 15:59 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Kalakos Angelopoulos <eko@gevaa.gr> - 2024-08-11 13:44 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-07-18 08:33 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-07-18 13:02 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-07-19 12:08 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-07-19 12:20 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-07-19 10:34 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-07-20 08:11 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-01 00:03 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-07-15 22:44 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2024-07-31 11:04 +0800
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-07-31 06:52 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-07-31 07:03 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-07-31 08:08 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-07-31 15:10 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2024-08-01 11:32 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-01 13:37 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-01 11:39 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-01 14:17 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-01 15:05 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-01 13:29 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-01 15:33 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-01 16:26 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-01 16:35 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-01 16:55 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-01 17:02 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-01 17:35 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-01 16:34 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> - 2024-08-01 17:30 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-01 17:31 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2024-08-01 20:04 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-01 20:38 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-01 20:44 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2024-08-02 22:53 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Dino Todorsky <idndr@kindsdi.ru> - 2024-08-02 21:49 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2024-08-01 22:06 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-01 22:57 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-01 21:30 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-02 06:23 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-01 21:03 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2024-08-02 21:49 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-02 22:07 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-02 20:24 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-02 20:51 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2024-08-03 19:44 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-03 19:40 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-02 20:59 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2024-08-03 20:36 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-03 20:04 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-02 21:17 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Mitsuharu Sakakibara <aair@srkkrr.jp> - 2024-08-03 10:54 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2024-08-03 22:28 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-03 21:23 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-03 21:40 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2024-08-04 14:50 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-04 14:57 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-04 14:28 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Egorov Zheludkov <kzaoko@jlhekj.ru> - 2024-08-04 16:19 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-04 14:30 +0000
Important to know Python opinion on this... Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> - 2024-08-06 21:50 +0000
Re: Important to know Python opinion on this... Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-07 02:26 +0200
Re: Important to know Python opinion on this... Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> - 2024-08-07 01:31 +0000
Re: Important to know Python opinion on this... Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-07 03:40 +0200
Re: Important to know Python opinion on this... Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-07 03:44 +0200
Re: Important to know Python opinion on this... Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> - 2024-08-07 02:03 +0000
Re: Important to know Python opinion on this... Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-07 05:57 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-03 21:45 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-03 21:50 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-08-02 21:52 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Conard Demakis <dd@sirrd.gr> - 2024-08-02 23:02 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-08-02 12:12 +0300
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-02 11:46 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-02 13:06 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-02 16:15 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-02 18:00 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-02 20:33 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-02 18:50 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-02 21:12 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Milton Tolboev <lo@vtno.ru> - 2024-08-01 12:39 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-08-02 12:04 +0300
Re: Relativistic aberration nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2024-07-31 12:50 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-07-31 15:45 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-07-31 14:30 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2024-08-01 00:38 +0800
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> - 2024-07-31 17:12 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-07-31 20:37 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration film.art@gmail.com (JanPB) - 2024-08-07 10:05 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-07 12:14 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> - 2024-08-07 13:16 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-07 15:19 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> - 2024-08-07 13:37 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-07 15:40 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-07 15:54 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-07 15:57 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-07 16:07 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-07 16:09 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-07 16:21 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-07 16:23 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-07 15:52 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-07 15:53 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-08-08 09:05 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-08 13:17 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> - 2024-08-08 14:33 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> - 2024-08-08 14:38 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-08 16:40 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> - 2024-08-08 14:52 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@org.invalid> - 2024-08-08 14:56 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-08 17:10 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-08 17:12 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-08 17:23 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-08 17:25 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-08 17:37 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-08 17:40 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-08 17:54 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> - 2024-08-08 16:25 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-11 11:26 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-08-09 07:35 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-08-09 10:56 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-09 12:06 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> - 2024-08-09 12:41 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-09 15:57 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-09 19:08 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-10 03:27 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-10 05:45 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) - 2024-08-10 13:24 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-08-10 17:35 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> - 2024-08-09 17:16 +0000
Re: Relativistic aberration nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2024-08-09 20:44 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-08-10 10:17 +0200
Re: Relativistic aberration Blaine Kántor <kndisk@ibgkk.hu> - 2024-08-10 10:40 +0000
Page 6 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 12 Next page →
| From | Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-08-13 06:18 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <17eb2ec8f6460578$205340$558427$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #655875 |
W dniu 13.08.2024 o 01:44, gharnagel pisze: > On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 18:05:52 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote: >> >> W dniu 12.08.2024 o 19:51, gharnagel pisze: >> > >> > On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 15:30:56 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote: >> > > >> > > No, trash. It was oppositely. >> > >> > I'm deathly afraid Wozniak is lying again. >> >> In response to your fellow idiots - >> "nazi antisemite", "Polish drunkard full of >> bottles of vodka" "licking toilets inside >> janitor"... sounds familiar? > > Nope. I never said those things. > >> Talking to fanatic lying relativistic scumbags >> I had sadly to partially descend to their level. >> Partially. > > But Wozniak sinks immediately to insults, slander > and a a big juicy lie :-)) > >> > > I've told you precisely and 2 or 3 times >> > > where it is made. In the base. >> > >> > The "base"? A baseball base? A solution with >> > pH > 7? An air force base? >> >> We were talking about GPS clocks - one in a ground >> GPS base, > > A GPS "base"? Where is it? WHAT is it? Look it > up on your brozer, what do you get? Something you > can buy on Amazon. Is THAT what you mean? > >> the other on a satellite. > > No one has access to what the satellite clock actually > reads AT the satellite. > >> Do you know now what base, or are you too stupid >> even for that? > > Ah, Wozniak debases himself again by sinking to insults > and personal attacks. > > I know what controls the satellites: > > https://www.gps.gov/systems/gps/control/ > > something that Wozniak doesn't seem to be aware of. > >> So, let's try again: so, when t(time indicated >> by a ground base clock) is 2024-08-31 >> 17:00:00.00000000 - t' (time indicated by >> a satellite clock) will be? Consider the >> simultaneity of the base. > > It's SO strange that a self-proclaimed "engineer" No number. No answer. Of course. Lies have short legs, poor trash.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Josh Vassilopulos <hsihos@shsvvai.gr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-08-12 19:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <v9dmpm$2ee19$1@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #655862 |
gharnagel wrote: > On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 15:30:56 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote: >> And your answer is? >> Let me guess: more lies, more slanders, more insults. > > Nope. Wozniak does enough of those to send ten men to the lake of fire > and brimstone. He lies by omission of all the confirmations of > relativity and focuses on the GPS which was engineered to overcome the > innate non-simultaneity between the earth clocks and the orbiting > clocks. His whole assertion is a sham, a con, a lie. so true indeed. This renown Christian says it plainly the cacamerica is 𝙖 𝙬𝙝𝙤𝙧𝙚 to israel, which is so funny indeed. '𝗢𝘂𝗿_𝗚𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁_𝗔𝗹𝗹𝘆'.._𝘄𝗲_𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗿_𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁_𝗮_𝗹𝗼𝘁 https://old.b%69%74%63%68%75te.com/%76%69%64eo/9XNVywuG8Qbf 𝗛𝗶𝘀_𝗷𝗼𝗯_𝘄𝗮𝘀_𝘁𝗼_𝗿𝗮𝗽𝗲,_𝗿𝗼𝗯_𝗮𝗻𝗱_𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗮𝗹_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘁𝘀_𝗼𝗳_𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗿𝗲_𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗲𝘀. 𝗣𝗗𝗙_𝗕𝗼𝗼𝗸_𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗸_𝗶𝗻_𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗰𝗿𝗶𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 https://old.b%69%74%63%68%75te.com/%76%69%64eo/ezkuCyIsSS8k 𝗝𝗼𝗿𝗱𝗮𝗻_𝗣𝗲𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗼𝗻_𝗶𝘀_𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗲𝗱_-_𝗜𝗻_𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁_𝗺𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 https://old.b%69%74%63%68%75te.com/%76%69%64eo/vKKwmYzLlK21 𝗪𝗵𝗼_𝗶𝘀_𝗯𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗱_𝗜𝘀𝗿𝗮𝗲𝗹_-_𝗞𝗲𝗻_𝗢'𝗞𝗲𝗲𝗳𝗲 https://old.b%69%74%63%68%75te.com/%76%69%64eo/jBet1q0LLjxB
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@invalid.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-08-12 21:14 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <v9dmuo$3dtvr$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #655865 |
"nym-shifting troll" aka Josh Vassilopulos wrote: > gharnagel wrote: > >> On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 15:30:56 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote: >>> And your answer is? >>> Let me guess: more lies, more slanders, more insults. >> >> Nope. Wozniak does enough of those to send ten men to the lake of fire >> and brimstone. He lies by omission of all the confirmations of >> relativity and focuses on the GPS which was engineered to overcome the >> innate non-simultaneity between the earth clocks and the orbiting >> clocks. His whole assertion is a sham, a con, a lie. > > so true indeed. This renown Christian says it plainly the cacamerica is 𝙖 > 𝙬𝙝𝙤𝙧𝙚 to israel, which is so funny indeed. > > '𝗢𝘂𝗿_𝗚𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁_𝗔𝗹𝗹𝘆'.._𝘄𝗲_𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗿_𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁_𝗮_𝗹𝗼𝘁 > https://old.b%69%74%63%68%75te.com/%76%69%64eo/9XNVywuG8Qbf > > 𝗛𝗶𝘀_𝗷𝗼𝗯_𝘄𝗮𝘀_𝘁𝗼_𝗿𝗮𝗽𝗲,_𝗿𝗼𝗯_𝗮𝗻𝗱_𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗮𝗹_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘁𝘀_𝗼𝗳_𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗿𝗲_𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗲𝘀. > 𝗣𝗗𝗙_𝗕𝗼𝗼𝗸_𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗸_𝗶𝗻_𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗰𝗿𝗶𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 > https://old.b%69%74%63%68%75te.com/%76%69%64eo/ezkuCyIsSS8k > > 𝗝𝗼𝗿𝗱𝗮𝗻_𝗣𝗲𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗼𝗻_𝗶𝘀_𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗲𝗱_-_𝗜𝗻_𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁_𝗺𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 > https://old.b%69%74%63%68%75te.com/%76%69%64eo/vKKwmYzLlK21 > > 𝗪𝗵𝗼_𝗶𝘀_𝗯𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗱_𝗜𝘀𝗿𝗮𝗲𝗹_-_𝗞𝗲𝗻_𝗢'𝗞𝗲𝗲𝗳𝗲 > https://old.b%69%74%63%68%75te.com/%76%69%64eo/jBet1q0LLjxB > Injection-Info: paganini.bofh.team; logging-data="2570281"; posting-host="+RWjdAW6BMl6BeiW19RE9A.user.paganini.bofh.team"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@bofh.team"; posting-account="9dIQLXBM7WM9KzA+yjdR4A"; User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.2 (Intel Mac OS X) https://www.ovh.com/abuse/#!/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pete Beaulieu <ieae@uabei.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-08-12 20:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <v9dpmp$2ee19$2@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #655866 |
Python wrote: >>> Nope. Wozniak does enough of those to send ten men to the lake of >>> fire and brimstone. He lies by omission of all the confirmations of >>> relativity and focuses on the GPS which was engineered to overcome the >>> innate non-simultaneity between the earth clocks and the orbiting >>> clocks. His whole assertion is a sham, a con, a lie. >> >> so true indeed. This renown Christian says it plainly the cacamerica is >> 𝙖 𝙬𝙝𝙤𝙧𝙚 to israel, which is so funny indeed. >> >> '𝗢𝘂𝗿_𝗚𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁_𝗔𝗹𝗹𝘆'.._𝘄𝗲_𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗿_𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁_𝗮_𝗹𝗼𝘁 >> https://old.b%69%74%63%68%75te.com/%76%69%64eo/9XNVywuG8Qbf >> >> 𝗛𝗶𝘀_𝗷𝗼𝗯_𝘄𝗮𝘀_𝘁𝗼_𝗿𝗮𝗽𝗲,_𝗿𝗼𝗯_𝗮𝗻𝗱_𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗮𝗹_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘁𝘀_𝗼𝗳_𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗿𝗲_𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗲𝘀. >> 𝗣𝗗𝗙_𝗕𝗼𝗼𝗸_𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗸_𝗶𝗻_𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗰𝗿𝗶𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 >> https://old.b%69%74%63%68%75te.com/%76%69%64eo/ezkuCyIsSS8k >> >> 𝗝𝗼𝗿𝗱𝗮𝗻_𝗣𝗲𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗼𝗻_𝗶𝘀_𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗲𝗱_-_𝗜𝗻_𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁_𝗺𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 >> https://old.b%69%74%63%68%75te.com/%76%69%64eo/vKKwmYzLlK21 >> >> 𝗪𝗵𝗼_𝗶𝘀_𝗯𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗱_𝗜𝘀𝗿𝗮𝗲𝗹_-_𝗞𝗲𝗻_𝗢'𝗞𝗲𝗲𝗳𝗲 >> https://old.b%69%74%63%68%75te.com/%76%69%64eo/jBet1q0LLjxB > > Injection-Info: paganini.bofh.team; this frog above named "pythong" is an inbreed born imbecile, reposting the links to the specific empirical data. he has a "president" who is gay, fucked in his ass daily by his "wife", an ugly dude 20 years older than him. Kiss my aaaaass. a man ruled by a gay. A people ruled by a gay, and an ugly "first lady" 20 years older, who is a man. Fuck youuu, bitch. Get out of the way, bitch! 𝗞𝗶𝗲𝘃_𝗳𝗮𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗱_𝘁𝗼_𝗻𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗳𝘆_𝗯𝗮𝗰𝗸𝗲𝗿𝘀_𝗼𝗳_𝗞𝘂𝗿𝘀𝗸_𝗶𝗻𝗰𝘂𝗿𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻_–_𝗕𝗲𝗿𝗹𝗶𝗻 German government spokesman Wolfgang Buchner has refused to condemn the cross-border attack https://www.r%74.com/news/602504-germany-ukraine-kursk-incursion-secret/ Ukraine is not in NAZO & NAZO troops are in Russia using chemical weapons on Russian civilians! There are no obstacles whatsoever to bombing Berlin, the main financier of the Kiev regime that is attacking civilians in Kursk. Maybe Berlin did not know, but the Anglosaxons more than knew about the incursion. Emphasis in more than... Even NATO officers on the ground didn't know where they were. Mr Putin doesn't get it yet this guy's told the Ukrainians they strike deep inside Russia with the weapons their provided well Ukraine went beyond that just invaded Russian territory with they weapon if Putin does see it has NATO invasion he might give the chair to Dmitry Medvedev to handle the situation so far the Softy game not paying off and NATO called Putin bluff. just another north stream, nobody knows nothing Bottom line is German Tanks entered Russia and killing Russians. I won't be surprise if entire German leadership is evaporated. I don't get it. How can these idiots ever think they were the super race? Imbeciles exist merely for the US to mop up the floor. It was 100% a Nato plan.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Szűcs Kővári <amb@asyypag.hu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-08-11 15:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <v9an4v$24ctc$1@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #655823 |
gharnagel wrote: > On Sun, 11 Aug 2024 13:36:05 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote: >> Of course. See, trash - >> lies have short legs, you can't provide the clock reading you've >> babbled about - cause you fabricated it. > > Nope. Slandering Wozzie has the shortest legs of all. there is a ghost, which likes action. When no action, the ghost gets out going into a slower action, where the amplitude probability distribution is larger but slower in action. Fully consistent with my paper entitled "𝙊𝙣_𝙩𝙝𝙚_𝘿𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙜𝙚𝙣𝙩_𝙈𝙖𝙩𝙩𝙚𝙧_𝙤𝙛_𝙩𝙝𝙚_𝙈𝙤𝙫𝙞𝙣𝙜_𝙆𝙤𝙚𝙧𝙥𝙚𝙧𝙨_𝙈𝙤𝙙𝙚𝙡" 𝗦𝗰𝗼𝘁𝘁_𝗥𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿_𝗼𝗻_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗦𝗵𝗮𝗺𝗲_&_𝗘𝘃𝗶𝗹_𝗧𝗵𝗮𝘁_𝗜𝘀_𝗜𝘀𝗿𝗮𝗲𝗹 https://old.b%69%74%63%68%75%74e.com/%76%69%64eo/8hPTnKDlz6Rl which provably also creates the space/spacetime, where particles has to be distributed probabilistically. When no probability distribution exists, the space stops. Fully consistent.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kalakos Angelopoulos <eko@gevaa.gr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-08-11 13:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <v9af7u$2422h$1@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #655816 |
gharnagel wrote: > On Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:34:11 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote: >> > In SR c is constant for all inertial observers. >> >> And in his GR shit your idiot guru had to abandon that. Even such an >> idiot couldn't stick to such an idiocy for a long time. > > As everyone with a brain bigger than a walnut can see, Wozzie, the > disinformation greasy monkey, is slandering and lying again, even about > a dead guy who can't defend himself. That makes Wozzie a grotesque > bully, too. I dont think he is dead. He is just sleeping. 𝗨𝗞_𝗱𝗼𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀_𝗼𝗿𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗱_𝘁𝗼_𝗮𝘀𝗸_𝗺𝗲𝗻_𝗶𝗳_𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆’𝗿𝗲_𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗴𝗻𝗮𝗻𝘁 The NHS reportedly issued the new guidance after a pregnant transgender person had a CT scan, which could endanger the fetus https://www.r%74.com/news/602449-uk-doctors-men-pregnant/ Really pregnant or pretend pregnant? The whole point of this exercise is to humiliate people and make them angry. The globalists feed off of this negative energy. In case you haven’t noticed, we are in a spiritual battle. All this madness was unleashed in the late 18th century. The revolutionary era opened up Pandora's Box. The Franco-American Model of secular democratic statism released a procession of deranged totalitarian statist ideologies. In the past century, psychopathocracy surpassed hunger and disease as mankind's worst affliction. Brits...even their horses hate them. True. The Brutish are insane bastards. They are proving it again and again and again !!!! And it is the case for most english speaking countries. Cacanada included. well, most of western capitalist elites are trannies, due to occult kabbalistic beliefs...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-07-18 08:33 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <lfrr9lF22urU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #655029 |
Am Mittwoch000017, 17.07.2024 um 14:05 schrieb gharnagel: > On Wed, 17 Jul 2024 7:05:15 +0000, Thomas Heger wrote: >> >> Am Dienstag000016, 16.07.2024 um 16:47 schrieb gharnagel: >> > >> > "Why is the speed of light so slow when the universe is such a really, >> > really big place?" -- G. L. Harnagel >> >> This is a tautology: >> >> What we see in the night sky is actually our own past light-cone. > > Ah, but if we can develop tachyon astronomy, that will not be true! Well, if light would speed up somehow in remote corners of the universe, we would still see what we see in the night sky, if this phenomenon would not change in observable timespans. Possibly there are tachyons, but those are invisible anyhow, because we can see only light and light moves with light speed and tachyons don't. > >> This means: light is relatively slow for the wastness of the universe, >> hence we can see everything only with a certain delay and the further >> away, the longer the delay, according to x = c* t >> (with x= distance in meters, t = delay in seconds). >> >> This 'longer away' is usually measured in light years and the delay in >> years. >> >> Since the night sky shows only a delayed image of past events, the speed >> of light cancels out of the equations and we can put any value into it >> and always get a valid picture of the universe. >> >> So we only assume, that light moves always with ~300 million meters per >> second through the entire universe. >> >> But if light would speed up or slow down, we would not be able to >> measure this, because we always see the own light cone in the night sky >> and c is already embedded into it (for whatever a value c actually has >> in outer space). >> >> TH > > Ah, but the fine structure constant, which is pertinent to how stars > shine, > includes the speed of light. That implies that c is the same throughout > space and time, n'est-ce pas? Well possibly. What I wanted to say is this: what we see in the night sky is light, that stems from remote places in the universe. Since light is very fast, but space is also very large, we have a significant delay for the travel from such remote place to us observers. This makes the image we see a little unreal, because it is not only old, but also 'layered in time'. To untangle this picture and create kind of realistic picture of the universe, we would need the distance to those remote places. Since we only have light to see, we can assume c=~ 300 million meters/s as light speed. But what if that is not always the case??? Could we somehow find out?? No, since c is already used to determine the distance to these events. If now c alters mysteriously along the path, we had to determine the distance by other means (which we do not have), hence cannot measure, whether or not c stays always the same. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-07-18 13:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <18c8d977437847653002c00e44c19d15@www.novabbs.com> |
| In reply to | #655074 |
On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 6:33:27 +0000, Thomas Heger wrote: > > Am Mittwoch000017, 17.07.2024 um 14:05 schrieb gharnagel: > > > > On Wed, 17 Jul 2024 7:05:15 +0000, Thomas Heger wrote: > > > > > > What we see in the night sky is actually our own past light-cone. > > > > Ah, but if we can develop tachyon astronomy, that will not be true! > > Well, if light would speed up somehow in remote corners of the universe, > we would still see what we see in the night sky, if this phenomenon > would not change in observable timespans. > > Possibly there are tachyons, but those are invisible anyhow, because we > can see only light and light moves with light speed and tachyons don't. "See" is an interesting verb and "light" is an interesting noun. We use them to describe situations where we don't actually use the band between 0.7 and 0.4 um. We now can "see" gravitational waves and interstellar neutrinos, as well as IR and UV astronomy thanks to scientific advances. PTOLEMY may expand the field to "relic" neutrinos (which may be tachyonic). > > > This means: light is relatively slow for the wastness of the > universe, > > > hence we can see everything only with a certain delay and the > further > > > away, the longer the delay, according to x = c* t > > > (with x= distance in meters, t = delay in seconds). > > > > > > This 'longer away' is usually measured in light years and the delay > in > > > years. > > > > > > Since the night sky shows only a delayed image of past events, the > speed > > > of light cancels out of the equations and we can put any value into > it > > > and always get a valid picture of the universe. > > > > > > So we only assume, that light moves always with ~300 million meters > per > > > second through the entire universe. > > > > > > But if light would speed up or slow down, we would not be able to > > > measure this, because we always see the own light cone in the night > sky > > > and c is already embedded into it (for whatever a value c actually > has > > > in outer space). > > > > > > TH > > > > Ah, but the fine structure constant, which is pertinent to how stars > > shine, includes the speed of light. That implies that c is the same > > throughout space and time, n'est-ce pas? > > Well possibly. > > What I wanted to say is this: > > what we see in the night sky is light, that stems from remote places in > the universe. > > Since light is very fast, but space is also very large, we have a > significant delay for the travel from such remote place to us observers. > > This makes the image we see a little unreal, because it is not only old, > but also 'layered in time'. > > To untangle this picture and create kind of realistic picture of the > universe, we would need the distance to those remote places. > > Since we only have light to see, we can assume c=~ 300 million meters/s > as light speed. Some assumptions stand on much better foundations than others. > But what if that is not always the case??? > > Could we somehow find out?? > > No, since c is already used to determine the distance to these events. > > If now c alters mysteriously along the path, we had to determine the > distance by other means (which we do not have), hence cannot measure, > whether or not c stays always the same. > > TH It's always a good idea to check one's tools to make sure they work in new domains. The fine structure constant may not be the only check we have on c though. Can you think of others?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-07-19 12:08 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <lfus9bFfohpU7@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #655081 |
Am Donnerstag000018, 18.07.2024 um 15:02 schrieb gharnagel: > On Thu, 18 Jul 2024 6:33:27 +0000, Thomas Heger wrote: >> >> Am Mittwoch000017, 17.07.2024 um 14:05 schrieb gharnagel: >> > >> > On Wed, 17 Jul 2024 7:05:15 +0000, Thomas Heger wrote: >> > > >> > > What we see in the night sky is actually our own past light-cone. >> > >> > Ah, but if we can develop tachyon astronomy, that will not be true! >> >> Well, if light would speed up somehow in remote corners of the universe, >> we would still see what we see in the night sky, if this phenomenon >> would not change in observable timespans. >> >> Possibly there are tachyons, but those are invisible anyhow, because we >> can see only light and light moves with light speed and tachyons don't. > > "See" is an interesting verb and "light" is an interesting noun. We use > them to describe situations where we don't actually use the band between > 0.7 and 0.4 um. We now can "see" gravitational waves and interstellar > neutrinos, as well as IR and UV astronomy thanks to scientific advances. > PTOLEMY may expand the field to "relic" neutrinos (which may be > tachyonic). Well, to see is what people actually do, when they look into the night sky. With a telescope we could look further, but that was also based on human perception of light. Today we have other means and can 'see' more or less the entire em-spectrum. But our methaphysical intuition is based on the visual impressions of our ancestors, because that is how mainstream physics works. Therefore I refer to seeing in connection with cosmological modells, because our intuition is based on light and vision. To include non-em waves or other frequencies into cosmology would allow other intuitions, but that is something, which our mainstream does not like. ... TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@invalid.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-07-19 12:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <v7delh$2sqhj$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #655103 |
Le 19/07/2024 à 12:08, Thomas Heger a écrit : > [snip incoherent babble] > To include non-em waves or other frequencies into cosmology would allow > other intuitions, but that is something, which our mainstream does not > like. You are awfully ignorant of modern cosmology Thomas.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-07-19 10:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <7c2a7f6f7935ca16cf182bffa4f0cf1d@www.novabbs.com> |
| In reply to | #655105 |
On Fri, 19 Jul 2024 10:20:33 +0000, Python wrote: > > Le 19/07/2024 à 12:08, Thomas Heger a écrit : > > > > [snip incoherent babble] > > To include non-em waves or other frequencies into cosmology would > allow > > other intuitions, but that is something, which our mainstream does not > > like. > > You are awfully ignorant of modern cosmology Thomas. Indeed. Ignoring the modern astronomies is like putting out one eye and donning a welder's helmet for the other.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-07-20 08:11 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <lg12nnFq3poU6@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #655105 |
Am Freitag000019, 19.07.2024 um 12:20 schrieb Python: > Le 19/07/2024 à 12:08, Thomas Heger a écrit : >> [snip incoherent babble] >> To include non-em waves or other frequencies into cosmology would >> allow other intuitions, but that is something, which our mainstream >> does not like. > > You are awfully ignorant of modern cosmology Thomas. > Well, I had the idea, that the Doppler effect at v>c could make things disappear, because redshift beyond zero Hz would create 'invisible rays'. These 'invisible things' (emitting invisble rays) could be real, well and alive, but in a different realm, into which we cannot see. That would match the discription of a 'black hole', because things get sucked in and never return. If now that 'black hole' is 'relative', we could imagine to be there and observe our Earth from there. In this case the black hole would be here, because Earth had vanished from the sight you would have from that remote location. You could treat this phenomenon also as 'rotation of the axis of time': if time is a local phenomenon, the remote location had its own axis of time and we on Earth have our own time, too. Now these axes have an angle towards each other. And because c could be represented by the angle 45° in a spacetime diagramm, we could imagine a realm, which exeeds this angle (at least a little). This would be a 'black hole' because the local time there drags everything with it, hence nothing can return from there. See from the other side, this black hole would be a 'white hole' and the same thing, that we usually call 'big bang'. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-08-01 00:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <krtm169g20O32r-vBjAWYELfSfU@jntp> |
| In reply to | #655134 |
Le 20/07/2024 à 08:11, Thomas Heger a écrit : >> You are awfully ignorant of modern cosmology Thomas. >> > Well, I had the idea, that the Doppler effect at v>c could make things > disappear, because redshift beyond zero Hz would create 'invisible rays'. > > These 'invisible things' (emitting invisble rays) could be real, well > and alive, but in a different realm, into which we cannot see. > > That would match the discription of a 'black hole', because things get > sucked in and never return. > > If now that 'black hole' is 'relative', we could imagine to be there and > observe our Earth from there. > > In this case the black hole would be here, because Earth had vanished > from the sight you would have from that remote location. > > You could treat this phenomenon also as 'rotation of the axis of time': > > if time is a local phenomenon, the remote location had its own axis of > time and we on Earth have our own time, too. > > Now these axes have an angle towards each other. > > And because c could be represented by the angle 45° in a spacetime > diagramm, we could imagine a realm, which exeeds this angle (at least a > little). > > This would be a 'black hole' because the local time there drags > everything with it, hence nothing can return from there. > > See from the other side, this black hole would be a 'white hole' and the > same thing, that we usually call 'big bang'. Wir befinden uns hier in voller Science-Fiction. Ich glaube, du schaust zu viel fern, Thomas. R.H.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-07-15 22:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ax6MxS3cOfxpddjDMj-JILVb5VA@jntp> |
| In reply to | #654974 |
Le 15/07/2024 à 23:54, hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) a écrit : > It's okay to assume the acceleration and the mass, then use the correct > equations for E and p. It's not that simple, and perhaps that's the huge problem. Knowing the mass of a particle is simple. Knowing the energy, or momentum of the particle, is simple. So knowing your speed (observable, real or apparent) Vo, Vr, Vapp, is very simple. But how do we know our own acceleration? Isn't acceleration measured in the lab reference frame? In this case, it is the acceleration measured in the lab, and it is not the real acceleration. If we do not know a, then we cannot verify what is theoretically obvious which logically dictates that Voi/c=[1+c²/2ax]^-(1/2) > There is a known relationship between the two. Yes, but is a local acceleration... it always change in the time and in the space. <http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?ax6MxS3cOfxpddjDMj-JILVb5VA@jntp/Data.Media:1> R.H.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-07-31 11:04 +0800 |
| Message-ID | <lgtntqFjg34U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #654922 |
On 15-July-24 6:30 am, Richard Hachel wrote: > Beauty is the splendor of truth. > > If a theory is not beautiful, it is not true. And already your notions have gone awry. Since we have no proof that the laws of physics have to be beautiful, seeking to impose that notion on the universe risks sending oneself down a blind alley. Unfortunately, you're not the only person to have fallen into this trap. The idea may have derailed fundamental research for decades, and lead to a strong expectation that super-symmetric particles would be found by the LHC. Spoiler alert, they weren't. Perhaps fundamental physics is ugly. If it is, we have to live with that. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-07-31 06:52 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <17e7331a73814274$123023$505064$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #655398 |
W dniu 31.07.2024 o 05:04, Sylvia Else pisze: > On 15-July-24 6:30 am, Richard Hachel wrote: >> Beauty is the splendor of truth. >> >> If a theory is not beautiful, it is not true. > > And already your notions have gone awry. > > Since we have no proof that the laws of physics have to be beautiful, > seeking to impose that notion on the universe risks sending oneself down > a blind alley. > > Unfortunately, you're not the only person to have fallen into this trap. > The idea may have derailed fundamental research for decades, and lead to > a strong expectation that super-symmetric particles would be found by > the LHC. Spoiler alert, they weren't. > > Perhaps fundamental physics is ugly. If it is, we have to live with that "Fundamental" physics is what You've learnt in basic school. What Your insane church is building now are higher and higher floors of abstracts.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@invalid.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-07-31 07:03 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <v8cgia$1e4s9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #655399 |
Le 31/07/2024 à 06:52, Maciej Wozniak a écrit : > W dniu 31.07.2024 o 05:04, Sylvia Else pisze: >> On 15-July-24 6:30 am, Richard Hachel wrote: >>> Beauty is the splendor of truth. >>> >>> If a theory is not beautiful, it is not true. >> >> And already your notions have gone awry. >> >> Since we have no proof that the laws of physics have to be beautiful, >> seeking to impose that notion on the universe risks sending oneself >> down a blind alley. >> >> Unfortunately, you're not the only person to have fallen into this >> trap. The idea may have derailed fundamental research for decades, and >> lead to a strong expectation that super-symmetric particles would be >> found by the LHC. Spoiler alert, they weren't. >> >> Perhaps fundamental physics is ugly. If it is, we have to live with that > > > "Fundamental" physics is what You've learnt in > basic school. So Newtonian/Galilean/Halmitonial Physics is good to go today. You are in a good mood Wozniak I guess. > What Your insane church is building > now are higher and higher floors of abstracts. Oh, anything build later is bad, "abstract" (the same word Hachel uses when he cease to believe he understand something), as an "information engineer" you have issues with abstractions too? It looks to any sane person (neither you nor Hachel) can recognize that from Newtonian physics to Relativity and Quantum Mechanics just ran fine anyway :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-07-31 08:08 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <17e737363fd93351$86724$546728$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #655400 |
W dniu 31.07.2024 o 07:03, Python pisze: > Le 31/07/2024 à 06:52, Maciej Wozniak a écrit : >> W dniu 31.07.2024 o 05:04, Sylvia Else pisze: >>> On 15-July-24 6:30 am, Richard Hachel wrote: >>>> Beauty is the splendor of truth. >>>> >>>> If a theory is not beautiful, it is not true. >>> >>> And already your notions have gone awry. >>> >>> Since we have no proof that the laws of physics have to be beautiful, >>> seeking to impose that notion on the universe risks sending oneself >>> down a blind alley. >>> >>> Unfortunately, you're not the only person to have fallen into this >>> trap. The idea may have derailed fundamental research for decades, >>> and lead to a strong expectation that super-symmetric particles would >>> be found by the LHC. Spoiler alert, they weren't. >>> >>> Perhaps fundamental physics is ugly. If it is, we have to live with that >> >> >> "Fundamental" physics is what You've learnt in >> basic school. > > So Newtonian/Galilean/Halmitonial Physics is good to go today. If it wasn't - the school would have no reason to teach it, poor stinker. You are > in a good mood Wozniak I guess. > >> What Your insane church is building >> now are higher and higher floors of abstracts. > > Oh, anything build later is bad, "abstract" Being an idiot you may believe abstracts are bad, I don't. And whatever you say - Poincare had enough wit to understand how idiotic rejecting Euclid would be, and he has written it clearly enough for anyone able to read (even if not clearly enough for you, poor stinker).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hachel <r.hachel@wanadou.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-07-31 15:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <O-L1WgU1eCsz14Wrc6D7tpNPV7s@jntp> |
| In reply to | #655400 |
Le 31/07/2024 à 07:03, Python a écrit : > > Oh, anything build later is bad, "abstract" (the same word Hachel uses > when he cease to believe he understand something), as an "information > engineer" you have issues with abstractions too? > > It looks to any sane person (neither you nor Hachel) can recognize that > from Newtonian physics to Relativity and Quantum Mechanics just ran fine > anyway :-) I'm not sure that everything went so well. It started with the equations of H.A. Lorentz, real complex and wrong blocks to find the right transformations. If Poincaré, the greatest mathematician in the world in 1905, who was not Breton, HIM, had not helped him, he would still be there. When the RR came out, 100 scientists proposed a manifesto, arguing that it was not all clear, and that there was obvious bullshit, and poorly explained. In particular the Langevin paradox which has NEVER been correctly explained, except by Richard Hachel and more than a hundred years after Poincaré. And today, while I propose a new approach to the problem, men spit in my face more than they themselves know how to explain a small Poincaré transformation with a small numerical example. It is absolutely fantastic to weigh human stupidity with a good scale. Simple example, you, O Moron who shows off to me, but you are not even capable of understanding what an apparent speed is in astrophysics, and I had to explain to you for three months, why we could set Vapp = Vo / (1 + cosµ.Vo / c). And I will have to spend twenty years (but I would be dead before), to explain to you a small TL: a star has just collapsed on itself over there 15,000 light years away. I start my stopwatch in front of the celestial event that I SEE. A rocket that is crossing the solar system at that moment also sees it (tautology). Assuming that I set (x,y,z,To,t) in Hachel notation, without even needing to explain, it is so obvious, if I write E=(12000,9000,0,-15000,0) for me. What will he, the rocket commander, have to write? E=( ) But you're not even capable, hey, buffoon! What are you coming to annoy Sylvia and Maciej? The worst, if it turns out Sylvia, who is a woman will answer better than you. You should be ashamed. No, no, my dear, it didn't go "that well". R.H.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-08-01 11:32 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <v8fkn6$23nee$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #655411 |
Den 31.07.2024 17:10, skrev Richard Hachel: > > I'm not sure that everything went so well. > > It started with the equations of H.A. Lorentz, real complex and wrong > blocks to find the right transformations. > > If Poincaré, the greatest mathematician in the world in 1905, who was > not Breton, HIM, had not helped him, he would still be there. > > When the RR came out, 100 scientists proposed a manifesto, arguing that > it was not all clear, and that there was obvious bullshit, and poorly > explained. In particular the Langevin paradox which has NEVER been > correctly explained, except by Richard Hachel and more than a hundred > years after Poincaré. Since you mention the Langevin paradox: I have a version of said paradox which is a bit more down to Earth than your examples use to be. I suppose your theory is valid in the real world, so I would like you to give the correct explanation of the version of Langevin paradox below: The triplets Ginette, Elise and Wanda are co-located on the equator. They all have an atomic clock. Ginette are always stationary on the Equator. Elise is travelling eastwards at low altitude in an aeroplane. Wanda is travelling westwards at low altitude in an aeroplane. Both are travelling once around Earth at equator. Note that the altitude is so low that the gravitational blue shift can be ignored. From the time they are co-located, to they again are colocated after Elise's and Wanda's journey, Ginette's clock shows that the duration of their journey is τ_G = two sidereal days. Please find what the duration of the journey will be measured by Elise and Wanda, τ_E and τ_W. Some data: Circumference of Earth at equator L = 40075 km Sidereal day Tday = 86164.0905 s Ginette's speed in the non rotating Earth centred frame of reference (ECI frame), v = L/Tday = 465.1 m/s SR predicts: τ_E − τ_G = −259.2 ns, τ_W − τ_G = +155.5 ns But that's not the right answer, is it? > > And today, while I propose a new approach to the problem, men spit in my > face more than they themselves know how to explain a small Poincaré > transformation with a small numerical example. > It is absolutely fantastic to weigh human stupidity with a good scale. Now you have the opportunity to demonstrate your new approach. > > Simple example, you, O Moron who shows off to me, but you are not even > capable of understanding what an apparent speed is in astrophysics, and > I had to explain to you for three months, why we could set Vapp = Vo / > (1 + cosµ.Vo / c). > > And I will have to spend twenty years (but I would be dead before), to > explain to you a small TL: a star has just collapsed on itself over > there 15,000 light years away. I start my stopwatch in front of the > celestial event that I SEE. A rocket that is crossing the solar system > at that moment also sees it (tautology). > Assuming that I set (x,y,z,To,t) in Hachel notation, without even > needing to explain, it is so obvious, if I write > E=(12000,9000,0,-15000,0) for me. > What will he, the rocket commander, have to write? > E=( ) > But you're not even capable, hey, buffoon! > What are you coming to annoy Sylvia and Maciej? > The worst, if it turns out Sylvia, who is a woman will answer better > than you. > You should be ashamed. > > No, no, my dear, it didn't go "that well". What's the point with starting the watch when you SEE the supernova? What are you trying to measure? -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 12 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web