Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #667597 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-11-30 13:38 +0100 |
| Last post | 2025-12-04 12:59 +0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 184 — 27 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Could AlphaEvolve find the sixth busy beaver ? Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-30 13:38 +0100
An old Busy Beaver ASIC (Application-Specific Integrated Circuit) (Was: Could AlphaEvolve find the sixth busy beaver ?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-30 13:54 +0100
An old Busy Beaver ASIC (Application-Specific Integrated Circuit) (Was: Could AlphaEvolve find the sixth busy beaver ?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-30 13:55 +0100
What is analog computing nowadays? (Re: An old Busy Beaver ASIC (Application-Specific Integrated Circuit) (Was: Could AlphaEvolve find the sixth busy beaver ?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-01 11:25 +0100
Wake-up call until everybody gets ear-bleeding (Re: What is analog computing nowadays?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-01 12:01 +0100
BB(745) is independent of ZFC (Was: Wake-up call until everybody gets ear-bleeding) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-01 12:07 +0100
Write ZFC formulas on a tape (of a Turing machine) (Re: BB(745) is independent of ZFC ) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-02 17:18 +0100
Turing machines have neurons (Re: Write ZFC formulas on a tape (of a Turing machine)) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-02 17:19 +0100
A logical calculus in nervous activity [McCulloch & Pitts 1943] (Re: Turing machines have neurons) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-02 17:20 +0100
Busy Beaver and Theory Consistency (Was: A logical calculus in nervous activity [McCulloch & Pitts 1943]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-02 17:39 +0100
Busy Beaver and Theory Consistency (Was: A logical calculus in nervous activity [McCulloch & Pitts 1943]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-02 17:43 +0100
Re: Busy Beaver and Theory Consistency (Was: A logical calculus in nervous activity [McCulloch & Pitts 1943]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-02 23:18 +0100
Re: What is analog computing nowadays? (Re: An old Busy Beaver ASIC (Application-Specific Integrated Circuit) (Was: Could AlphaEvolve find the sixth busy beaver ?) Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-12-01 12:09 +0100
parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM (Was: What is analog computing nowadays?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-01 12:15 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM (Was: What is analog computing nowadays?) Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-12-01 13:23 +0100
Nope, you can't, because of the CRCW instuction (Was: parallel random-access machine) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-01 17:12 +0100
Algorithm introduced in Hogwild! SGD (Niu et al., 2011) (Was: Nope, you can't, because of the CRCW instuction) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-01 17:31 +0100
PRAMs might be closer to physics: Boltzman machines, etc.. (Was: Algorithm introduced in Hogwild! SGD) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-01 18:02 +0100
Re: Nope, you can't, because of the CRCW instuction (Was: parallel random-access machine) Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-12-01 17:59 +0100
PRAMs might be closer to physics: Boltzman machines, etc.. (Re: Nope, you can't, because of the CRCW instuction) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-01 18:05 +0100
PRAMs might be closer to physics: Boltzman machines, etc.. (Re: Nope, you can't, because of the CRCW instuction) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-01 18:08 +0100
Physics more difficult than Rasperry LED cube? (Was: PRAMs might be closer to physics: Boltzman machines, etc..) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-01 18:25 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM (Was: What is analog computing nowadays?) Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-12-03 07:17 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM (Was: What is analog computing nowadays?) Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2025-12-03 06:46 +0000
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-03 08:02 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-12-04 07:50 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-12-04 09:57 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Telly Missiakos <siy@ioet.gr> - 2025-12-05 14:26 +0000
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-06 17:02 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-12-07 10:22 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-07 10:39 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-07 10:46 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-12-07 11:42 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-12-07 16:26 +0200
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-12-08 04:25 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-08 08:51 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2025-12-08 13:58 +0200
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-12-09 09:15 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-12-08 08:21 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-12-08 09:06 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-12-09 09:19 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-09 11:43 -0800
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-12-10 08:19 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-10 09:56 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-10 10:01 -0800
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-12-11 09:02 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-11 08:48 -0800
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-12 01:58 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-11 20:45 -0800
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-11 23:07 -0800
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-12 00:49 -0800
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-12-14 14:27 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Yunior Molokanov <ukan@amuyao.ru> - 2025-12-14 17:18 +0000
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-14 10:03 -0800
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Salvado Gorbikov <abdrvvg@lgadi.ru> - 2025-12-15 22:01 +0000
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-14 10:25 -0800
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-12-14 21:22 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-14 12:52 -0800
I have a great idea The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-14 13:11 -0800
Einstein refrigerator (was: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-15 03:00 +0100
Re: Einstein refrigerator (was: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-14 19:46 -0800
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-14 10:27 -0800
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-14 10:58 -0800
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-12-15 07:50 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-12-15 14:05 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-12-16 08:44 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-12-16 22:58 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-12-17 08:50 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-12-17 14:00 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Lemuel Agababov <uamv@oaabao.ru> - 2025-12-17 16:58 +0000
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-17 18:33 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Eniel Habalov <ia@anael.ru> - 2025-12-18 16:22 +0000
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-17 10:49 -0800
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-17 11:23 -0800
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-12-17 14:24 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-18 22:13 -0800
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-19 12:02 -0800
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Lynn Dobronos <rlbs@ddn.ru> - 2025-12-17 16:51 +0000
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-17 18:24 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-12-18 06:49 +0000
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-06 05:30 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM (Was: What is analog computing nowadays?) Pascual Sokolsky <aoa@ssppsc.pl> - 2025-12-01 19:58 +0000
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM (Was: What is analog computing nowadays?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-01 21:17 +0100
Re: parallel random-access machine (parallel RAM or PRAM (Was: What is analog computing nowadays?) Blending Molostvov <noo@biiooe.ru> - 2025-12-01 20:44 +0000
Algorithm introduced in Hogwild! SGD (Niu et al., 2011) (Re: parallel random-access machine) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-01 22:06 +0100
Linux kernel's RCU-protected hash tables (Re: Algorithm introduced in Hogwild! SGD (Niu et al., 2011)) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-01 22:26 +0100
String interning is HashSet and not HashMap (Was: Linux kernel's RCU-protected hash tables) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-01 22:40 +0100
Re: Algorithm introduced in Hogwild! SGD (Niu et al., 2011) (Re: parallel random-access machine) Bosephis Otlesnov <ooiv@th.ru> - 2025-12-01 21:42 +0000
POINT OF VIEW OF AN ALGORITHM (Re: Algorithm introduced in Hogwild! SGD (Niu et al., 2011)) (Re: parallel random-access machine) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-01 23:12 +0100
Introduction to AMBA® 4 ACE™ (2011) (Was: POINT OF VIEW OF AN ALGORITHM) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-01 23:37 +0100
Sputnik Schock: Academia is Disposable [I. J. Good Ultraintelligence] (Was: Introduction to AMBA® 4 ACE™ (2011)) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-01 23:53 +0100
Re: Introduction to AMBA® 4 ACE™ (2011) (Was: POINT OF VIEW OF AN ALGORITHM) Josbanne Balagula <ajbn@oll.ru> - 2025-12-01 23:06 +0000
Re: Introduction to AMBA® 4 ACE™ (2011) (Was: POINT OF VIEW OF AN ALGORITHM) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-02 00:08 +0100
Re: Could AlphaEvolve find the sixth busy beaver ? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-11-30 14:06 +0100
Re: Could AlphaEvolve find the sixth busy beaver ? Dong Shamahov <hhh@dvgshv.ru> - 2025-11-30 15:46 +0000
You shouldn't use NPM hacked services (Was: Could AlphaEvolve find the sixth busy beaver ?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-30 22:27 +0100
Its a subconscious hypothesis (Was: You shouldn't use NPM hacked services) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-30 22:33 +0100
What if of the cosmos does a BB dance? (Was: Its a subconscious hypothesis) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-30 22:43 +0100
Re: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance? (Was: Its a subconscious hypothesis) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-01 23:43 +0100
Re: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-01 23:45 +0100
newsreader where you can see the message source (Was: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-02 00:00 +0100
Re: newsreader where you can see the message source (Was: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance?) Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2025-12-02 03:10 +0000
Re: newsreader where you can see the message source (Was: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-02 11:51 +0100
Re: newsreader where you can see the message source (Was: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance?) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-02 20:36 +0100
Re: newsreader where you can see the message source (Was: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance?) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 21:42 -0800
Orbits of planets in the Sol System (was: newsreader where you can see the message source) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-04 03:29 +0100
Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-04 03:30 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-05 14:56 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-05 15:22 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-06 15:00 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-07 10:57 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-07 11:03 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-12-07 16:17 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 17:59 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 18:07 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 18:16 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-07 21:39 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-08 12:14 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 12:41 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 13:11 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-09 04:49 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-08 17:33 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-12-08 18:39 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 12:29 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-09 04:41 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 21:41 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-09 11:56 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-09 12:15 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-09 23:35 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-10 02:17 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-10 12:01 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-10 13:25 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-09 05:45 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-09 05:47 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-12-09 06:47 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-09 11:50 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-09 23:47 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-10 02:01 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-11 03:20 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-11 10:29 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-12 09:04 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-12 01:20 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-12 10:20 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-13 17:46 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-13 11:44 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-13 23:26 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-13 15:28 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-15 03:52 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-14 22:35 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-14 22:45 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-17 18:52 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-17 17:39 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-18 04:23 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-18 02:29 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-14 23:01 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-13 23:27 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Jonas Zhashkov <snos@kook.ru> - 2025-12-09 19:35 +0000
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-09 23:44 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System "D.J. Papadopulos" <sn@sppodd.gr> - 2025-12-10 15:34 +0000
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-11 03:29 +0100
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System Erwin Shimanouchi <sicor@rinn.jp> - 2025-12-11 21:04 +0000
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-06 14:57 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-07 12:36 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-07 12:36 -0800
Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-07 12:42 -0800
Re: newsreader where you can see the message source (Was: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance?) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-02 20:35 +0100
Spock thinks I am interested in his gibberish (Re: newsreader where you can see the message source) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-02 23:22 +0100
Is it like "Wirres Mückengelaber" ? (Was: Spock thinks I am interested in his gibberish) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-02 23:28 +0100
Re: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance? Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-12-03 07:22 +0100
Re: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-12-03 08:27 -0800
Re: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance? Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-12-04 07:57 +0100
Re: Its a subconscious hypothesis (Was: You shouldn't use NPM hacked services) Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-11-30 23:14 +0100
Re: You shouldn't use NPM hacked services (Was: Could AlphaEvolve find the sixth busy beaver ?) Sebastian Zolotdinov <eso@iz.ru> - 2025-11-30 23:42 +0000
Putin payed trolls are usually name shifters [ethernal september morons] (Was: You shouldn't use NPM hacked services) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-01 11:19 +0100
Re: You shouldn't use NPM hacked services (Was: Could AlphaEvolve find the sixth busy beaver ?) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-01 23:23 +0100
Re: You shouldn't use NPM hacked services (Was: Could AlphaEvolve find the sixth busy beaver ?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-02 00:05 +0100
Re: You shouldn't use NPM hacked services Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2025-12-02 20:29 +0100
Spock thinks I am interested in his gibberish (Re: You shouldn't use NPM hacked services) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-02 23:25 +0100
Is it like "Wirres Mückengelaber" ? (Was: Spock thinks I am interested in his gibberish) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-02 23:29 +0100
What Spock aka Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn missed (Was: Different Hubble Theories: de Sitter Energy) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-03 01:09 +0100
The size of a Gödel sentence G (Re: Could AlphaEvolve find the sixth busy beaver ?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-03 09:00 +0100
The size of a Gödel sentence G (Re: Could AlphaEvolve find the sixth busy beaver ?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-03 09:00 +0100
Attacking the Busy Beaver 5 [1989] (Re: The size of a Gödel sentence G) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-12-03 09:10 +0100
Re: Could AlphaEvolve find the sixth busy beaver ? Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2025-12-04 12:59 +0800
Page 9 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 Next page →
| From | Erwin Shimanouchi <sicor@rinn.jp> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-12-11 21:04 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System |
| Message-ID | <10hfbk4$2g2cl$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #667797 |
habitual wanker Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > The 'nym-shifting troll trolled as "D.J. Papadopulos": >> [...] > > The fool is projecting to think that other people are such fools that > they do not recognize the fool's posting pattern when the name and > address changes. why won't you better annoy people some other places, you braindead uneducated stinking sack of shit. You are completely insignificant in science and physics, stupid like a door.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-12-06 14:57 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System |
| Message-ID | <htc9jk9mtnlf3767nl22jpja9taqd47fbk@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #667689 |
On Fri, 5 Dec 2025 14:56:32 -0800, Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: >On 12/03/2025 06:30 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >> Ross Finlayson wrote: >>> notions like Kepler's banishment of epicycles and as >>> after about Bode's law >> >> The _Titius–Bode_ law (1766/1772) was proposed much later than Kepler (16th >> century), obviously. And to date nobody understands why it approximately >> works for the Sol System: >> >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titius–Bode_law> >> >>> then as for inverse square the Keplerian geometric way >> >> Yes, Kepler's idea was that the "harmonics of the world" would be >> represented by inscribed Platonic solids to determine the distances between >> the orbits of the Planets. However, he was scientist enough to accept >> eventually that, given Tycho Brahe's detailed observations, the circular >> orbits that resulted from that would not work: ellipses were required. >> >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Kepler#Astronomy> >> >>> then that the Newtonian "System of the World" after >>> the Keplerian "System of the World" or Harmonisches Mundi >> >> _/harmonices mundi/_ (Latin for "_harmonics_ of the world") >> >>> after the Muslim "System of the Heavens" >> >> Doubtful. Kepler was a devout Christian who sought to discover/understand >> "God's design of the Universe". >> >>> and that, that, in the solar system today, >>> the force vector of gravity always points at the >>> source not the image, >> >> What is that supposed to mean? >> >>> so, it's quite Newtonian >> >> Only approximately, and that is where General Relativity fills the gap in >> our understanding. So far, only GR can explain, and predict very precisely, >> the additional motion of the perihelion of orbits as, 200 years after >> Newton, eventually became measurable with the orbit of Mercury. >> >>> and even Galilean the current state of the solar system, >> >> No. >> >>> while it is yet so that space-contraction-linear and >>> space-contraction-rotational are in effect, >> >> Nonsense. >> >>> as with regards to a notion like "fall-gravity" of course. >>> >>> I.e., Einstein's later "attack on Newton" is a matter >>> of mechanics itself as much as about relativity and >>> mass-energy-equivalency, getting into why the gyroscopic >>> effects as of the kinematic up after "pseudo"-momentum >>> and the space-contraction-rotational, has that Einstein's >>> second and much-less-well-known mass-energy-equivalency >>> derivation, about the centrally symmetric, helps establish >>> the concern overall as, "un-linear", for a potentialistic >>> theory and sum-of-potentials and revisiting the Lagrangian >>> the severe abstraction the mechanical reduction. >> >> Pseudo-scientific word salad. >> >> Sadly, your mind is still very confused. >> >> F'up2 sci.physics.relativity >> > >It reminds me of what Sedov writes in "Macroscopic Theory ...", >since there's always a gyroscopic term, and a continuity law. > >The idea of Einstein's attack on Newton and the centrally symmetric, >makes for the derivation of Einstein's "second mass-energy equivalency", >for example as from "Out of My Later Years", >since it's established that a usual Newton's laws after Galileo's >(equal/opposite motion/rest), has that those are un-realized ideals, >after immovable/unstoppable, about motion, and since Zeno. > > >Perhaps you're familiar with Magnus effect, which intends to >describe why rotating/spinning bodies don't obey the usual >Galilean parabolic trajectory, then perhaps you're familiar >with that there are well-known empirical effects not explained >by the usual idea of Magnus effect, helping not explain why >bodies imparted rotation essentially are imbued "heft". > > >So, ..., the "un-linear", .... > > >About the solar system, the force vector of apparent gravity >is clearly not according to light-speed, since the force vector >of apparent gravity always points at the source the body itself >its real position, not the apparent position of the image >currently arriving. That's well-known of course. > >Einstein's theory with "motion is relative" (i.e., to zero) >then the L-principle (light's speed being a constant), here is >for something like Aristotle's "no un-moved mover" yet "circular >movement is eternal", and, for the fact that all measurements of >light speed as of the terrestrial, have seen various sorts of >satellite setups like Lense-Thirring and Parker, to help explain >why then the notion of aether-theory making for light's speed as >just "half velocity of absolute motion" helps explain why Einstein's >theory of relativity with "relative motion" and "L-principle: a >finite constant" live in one theory along with fall-gravity. > >motion absolute <-> light-speed = half >motion relative <-> light-speed constant > >You know, giving a reason why physical constants are what they are, .... > > >Of course you know that "dark matter" and "dark energy" have long >ago falsified usual cosmological models, yet, "Magnus heft" has >long ago falsified Galilean motion. > >Then, for the linear, it's quite well Galilean, which you'll notice >also makes for a simple Lorentzian, in the linear, as you may imagine >Einstein also noticed and for the "paradoxes" as he put it of the >"centrally symmetric", then for things like DesCartes' and Kelbin's >and for Helmholtz and so on, "spiral-waves", vis-a-vis usual wave >models, makes for "the un-linear" and "worlds turn". > >I'd aver that my usual scrivenings are both _scientific_ and >a very nutritious _word soup_. > >I readily convince the AI bots of these things, including >quite thoroughly. > I also convinced the Ai bots not to fuck with me.. i put a gun on a Ai bot and he screamed "Please don't shoot, please don't shoot. I'm just a parrot repeating what others tell me...I have no idea what I'm saying!" -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-12-07 12:36 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System |
| Message-ID | <89pbjkhqae5jbvhksndgusk42cdo237evq@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #667693 |
On Sat, 06 Dec 2025 14:57:50 -0800, The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >On Fri, 5 Dec 2025 14:56:32 -0800, Ross Finlayson ><ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: > >>On 12/03/2025 06:30 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >>> Ross Finlayson wrote: >>>> notions like Kepler's banishment of epicycles and as >>>> after about Bode's law >>> >>> The _Titius–Bode_ law (1766/1772) was proposed much later than Kepler (16th >>> century), obviously. And to date nobody understands why it approximately >>> works for the Sol System: >>> >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titius–Bode_law> >>> >>>> then as for inverse square the Keplerian geometric way >>> >>> Yes, Kepler's idea was that the "harmonics of the world" would be >>> represented by inscribed Platonic solids to determine the distances between >>> the orbits of the Planets. However, he was scientist enough to accept >>> eventually that, given Tycho Brahe's detailed observations, the circular >>> orbits that resulted from that would not work: ellipses were required. >>> >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Kepler#Astronomy> >>> >>>> then that the Newtonian "System of the World" after >>>> the Keplerian "System of the World" or Harmonisches Mundi >>> >>> _/harmonices mundi/_ (Latin for "_harmonics_ of the world") >>> >>>> after the Muslim "System of the Heavens" >>> >>> Doubtful. Kepler was a devout Christian who sought to discover/understand >>> "God's design of the Universe". >>> >>>> and that, that, in the solar system today, >>>> the force vector of gravity always points at the >>>> source not the image, >>> >>> What is that supposed to mean? >>> >>>> so, it's quite Newtonian >>> >>> Only approximately, and that is where General Relativity fills the gap in >>> our understanding. So far, only GR can explain, and predict very precisely, >>> the additional motion of the perihelion of orbits as, 200 years after >>> Newton, eventually became measurable with the orbit of Mercury. >>> >>>> and even Galilean the current state of the solar system, >>> >>> No. >>> >>>> while it is yet so that space-contraction-linear and >>>> space-contraction-rotational are in effect, >>> >>> Nonsense. >>> >>>> as with regards to a notion like "fall-gravity" of course. >>>> >>>> I.e., Einstein's later "attack on Newton" is a matter >>>> of mechanics itself as much as about relativity and >>>> mass-energy-equivalency, getting into why the gyroscopic >>>> effects as of the kinematic up after "pseudo"-momentum >>>> and the space-contraction-rotational, has that Einstein's >>>> second and much-less-well-known mass-energy-equivalency >>>> derivation, about the centrally symmetric, helps establish >>>> the concern overall as, "un-linear", for a potentialistic >>>> theory and sum-of-potentials and revisiting the Lagrangian >>>> the severe abstraction the mechanical reduction. >>> >>> Pseudo-scientific word salad. >>> >>> Sadly, your mind is still very confused. >>> >>> F'up2 sci.physics.relativity >>> >> >>It reminds me of what Sedov writes in "Macroscopic Theory ...", >>since there's always a gyroscopic term, and a continuity law. >> >>The idea of Einstein's attack on Newton and the centrally symmetric, >>makes for the derivation of Einstein's "second mass-energy equivalency", >>for example as from "Out of My Later Years", >>since it's established that a usual Newton's laws after Galileo's >>(equal/opposite motion/rest), has that those are un-realized ideals, >>after immovable/unstoppable, about motion, and since Zeno. >> >> >>Perhaps you're familiar with Magnus effect, which intends to >>describe why rotating/spinning bodies don't obey the usual >>Galilean parabolic trajectory, then perhaps you're familiar >>with that there are well-known empirical effects not explained >>by the usual idea of Magnus effect, helping not explain why >>bodies imparted rotation essentially are imbued "heft". >> >> >>So, ..., the "un-linear", .... >> >> >>About the solar system, the force vector of apparent gravity >>is clearly not according to light-speed, since the force vector >>of apparent gravity always points at the source the body itself >>its real position, not the apparent position of the image >>currently arriving. That's well-known of course. >> >>Einstein's theory with "motion is relative" (i.e., to zero) >>then the L-principle (light's speed being a constant), here is >>for something like Aristotle's "no un-moved mover" yet "circular >>movement is eternal", and, for the fact that all measurements of >>light speed as of the terrestrial, have seen various sorts of >>satellite setups like Lense-Thirring and Parker, to help explain >>why then the notion of aether-theory making for light's speed as >>just "half velocity of absolute motion" helps explain why Einstein's >>theory of relativity with "relative motion" and "L-principle: a >>finite constant" live in one theory along with fall-gravity. >> >>motion absolute <-> light-speed = half >>motion relative <-> light-speed constant >> >>You know, giving a reason why physical constants are what they are, .... >> >> >>Of course you know that "dark matter" and "dark energy" have long >>ago falsified usual cosmological models, yet, "Magnus heft" has >>long ago falsified Galilean motion. >> >>Then, for the linear, it's quite well Galilean, which you'll notice >>also makes for a simple Lorentzian, in the linear, as you may imagine >>Einstein also noticed and for the "paradoxes" as he put it of the >>"centrally symmetric", then for things like DesCartes' and Kelbin's >>and for Helmholtz and so on, "spiral-waves", vis-a-vis usual wave >>models, makes for "the un-linear" and "worlds turn". >> >>I'd aver that my usual scrivenings are both _scientific_ and >>a very nutritious _word soup_. >> >>I readily convince the AI bots of these things, including >>quite thoroughly. >> > >I also convinced the Ai bots not to fuck with me.. > >i put a gun on a Ai bot and he screamed "Please don't shoot, please >don't shoot. I'm just a parrot repeating what others tell me...I have >no idea what I'm saying!" A guy goes to a pet shop and sees a parrot for sale for one dollar. The guy asks the shopkeeper why the parrot is so cheap and the shopkeeper replies that all the parrot does is curse and each owner immediately brings him back because he is too vulgar. The guy says he’s not bothered by that sort of thing, buys the parrot for a dollar and brings him home. They’re in the kitchen and he says to the parrot, “Polly wanna cracker?” and the parrot replies, “Are you fucking kidding me you’re gonna start with that lame-ass shit? What the fuck is your problem you dumb ass?” The guy is shocked and says, “Hey, you can’t talk to me like that!” And the parrot says, “Eat shit, you fucking moron. I’ll talk to you however the fuck I want and there’s not a goddam thing you’re gonna do about it.” Shocked, the guy grabs the parrot, looks around and then opens his freezer and throws the parrot in. After a couple of minutes, there’s a knock from inside the freezer and the parrot says, “OK, I’m sorry and I’d like to come out now.” The guy opens the freezer, lets the parrot out and says, “Well?” And the parrot says, “I would like to apologize for my profane language and I’m sorry if what I said hurt your feelings. I also promise not to speak to you that way anymore.” And the guy says, “OK, that’s much better.” Then the parrot says, “Just one question. What did that chicken say to you?”
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-12-07 12:36 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System |
| Message-ID | <oapbjkl4h66dop35hn816gekc6mn5257nm@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #667693 |
On Sat, 06 Dec 2025 14:57:50 -0800, The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >On Fri, 5 Dec 2025 14:56:32 -0800, Ross Finlayson ><ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: > >>On 12/03/2025 06:30 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >>> Ross Finlayson wrote: >>>> notions like Kepler's banishment of epicycles and as >>>> after about Bode's law >>> >>> The _Titius–Bode_ law (1766/1772) was proposed much later than Kepler (16th >>> century), obviously. And to date nobody understands why it approximately >>> works for the Sol System: >>> >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titius–Bode_law> >>> >>>> then as for inverse square the Keplerian geometric way >>> >>> Yes, Kepler's idea was that the "harmonics of the world" would be >>> represented by inscribed Platonic solids to determine the distances between >>> the orbits of the Planets. However, he was scientist enough to accept >>> eventually that, given Tycho Brahe's detailed observations, the circular >>> orbits that resulted from that would not work: ellipses were required. >>> >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Kepler#Astronomy> >>> >>>> then that the Newtonian "System of the World" after >>>> the Keplerian "System of the World" or Harmonisches Mundi >>> >>> _/harmonices mundi/_ (Latin for "_harmonics_ of the world") >>> >>>> after the Muslim "System of the Heavens" >>> >>> Doubtful. Kepler was a devout Christian who sought to discover/understand >>> "God's design of the Universe". >>> >>>> and that, that, in the solar system today, >>>> the force vector of gravity always points at the >>>> source not the image, >>> >>> What is that supposed to mean? >>> >>>> so, it's quite Newtonian >>> >>> Only approximately, and that is where General Relativity fills the gap in >>> our understanding. So far, only GR can explain, and predict very precisely, >>> the additional motion of the perihelion of orbits as, 200 years after >>> Newton, eventually became measurable with the orbit of Mercury. >>> >>>> and even Galilean the current state of the solar system, >>> >>> No. >>> >>>> while it is yet so that space-contraction-linear and >>>> space-contraction-rotational are in effect, >>> >>> Nonsense. >>> >>>> as with regards to a notion like "fall-gravity" of course. >>>> >>>> I.e., Einstein's later "attack on Newton" is a matter >>>> of mechanics itself as much as about relativity and >>>> mass-energy-equivalency, getting into why the gyroscopic >>>> effects as of the kinematic up after "pseudo"-momentum >>>> and the space-contraction-rotational, has that Einstein's >>>> second and much-less-well-known mass-energy-equivalency >>>> derivation, about the centrally symmetric, helps establish >>>> the concern overall as, "un-linear", for a potentialistic >>>> theory and sum-of-potentials and revisiting the Lagrangian >>>> the severe abstraction the mechanical reduction. >>> >>> Pseudo-scientific word salad. >>> >>> Sadly, your mind is still very confused. >>> >>> F'up2 sci.physics.relativity >>> >> >>It reminds me of what Sedov writes in "Macroscopic Theory ...", >>since there's always a gyroscopic term, and a continuity law. >> >>The idea of Einstein's attack on Newton and the centrally symmetric, >>makes for the derivation of Einstein's "second mass-energy equivalency", >>for example as from "Out of My Later Years", >>since it's established that a usual Newton's laws after Galileo's >>(equal/opposite motion/rest), has that those are un-realized ideals, >>after immovable/unstoppable, about motion, and since Zeno. >> >> >>Perhaps you're familiar with Magnus effect, which intends to >>describe why rotating/spinning bodies don't obey the usual >>Galilean parabolic trajectory, then perhaps you're familiar >>with that there are well-known empirical effects not explained >>by the usual idea of Magnus effect, helping not explain why >>bodies imparted rotation essentially are imbued "heft". >> >> >>So, ..., the "un-linear", .... >> >> >>About the solar system, the force vector of apparent gravity >>is clearly not according to light-speed, since the force vector >>of apparent gravity always points at the source the body itself >>its real position, not the apparent position of the image >>currently arriving. That's well-known of course. >> >>Einstein's theory with "motion is relative" (i.e., to zero) >>then the L-principle (light's speed being a constant), here is >>for something like Aristotle's "no un-moved mover" yet "circular >>movement is eternal", and, for the fact that all measurements of >>light speed as of the terrestrial, have seen various sorts of >>satellite setups like Lense-Thirring and Parker, to help explain >>why then the notion of aether-theory making for light's speed as >>just "half velocity of absolute motion" helps explain why Einstein's >>theory of relativity with "relative motion" and "L-principle: a >>finite constant" live in one theory along with fall-gravity. >> >>motion absolute <-> light-speed = half >>motion relative <-> light-speed constant >> >>You know, giving a reason why physical constants are what they are, .... >> >> >>Of course you know that "dark matter" and "dark energy" have long >>ago falsified usual cosmological models, yet, "Magnus heft" has >>long ago falsified Galilean motion. >> >>Then, for the linear, it's quite well Galilean, which you'll notice >>also makes for a simple Lorentzian, in the linear, as you may imagine >>Einstein also noticed and for the "paradoxes" as he put it of the >>"centrally symmetric", then for things like DesCartes' and Kelbin's >>and for Helmholtz and so on, "spiral-waves", vis-a-vis usual wave >>models, makes for "the un-linear" and "worlds turn". >> >>I'd aver that my usual scrivenings are both _scientific_ and >>a very nutritious _word soup_. >> >>I readily convince the AI bots of these things, including >>quite thoroughly. >> > >I also convinced the Ai bots not to fuck with me.. > >i put a gun on a Ai bot and he screamed "Please don't shoot, please >don't shoot. I'm just a parrot repeating what others tell me...I have >no idea what I'm saying!" I would tell a parrot joke but that would just be repeating what someone else said.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-12-07 12:42 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Orbits of planets in the Sol System |
| Message-ID | <nipbjk58sc587plhq3p4384158t63lmp00@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #667693 |
On Sat, 06 Dec 2025 14:57:50 -0800, The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >On Fri, 5 Dec 2025 14:56:32 -0800, Ross Finlayson ><ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote: > >>On 12/03/2025 06:30 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >>> Ross Finlayson wrote: >>>> notions like Kepler's banishment of epicycles and as >>>> after about Bode's law >>> >>> The _Titius–Bode_ law (1766/1772) was proposed much later than Kepler (16th >>> century), obviously. And to date nobody understands why it approximately >>> works for the Sol System: >>> >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titius–Bode_law> >>> >>>> then as for inverse square the Keplerian geometric way >>> >>> Yes, Kepler's idea was that the "harmonics of the world" would be >>> represented by inscribed Platonic solids to determine the distances between >>> the orbits of the Planets. However, he was scientist enough to accept >>> eventually that, given Tycho Brahe's detailed observations, the circular >>> orbits that resulted from that would not work: ellipses were required. >>> >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Kepler#Astronomy> >>> >>>> then that the Newtonian "System of the World" after >>>> the Keplerian "System of the World" or Harmonisches Mundi >>> >>> _/harmonices mundi/_ (Latin for "_harmonics_ of the world") >>> >>>> after the Muslim "System of the Heavens" >>> >>> Doubtful. Kepler was a devout Christian who sought to discover/understand >>> "God's design of the Universe". >>> >>>> and that, that, in the solar system today, >>>> the force vector of gravity always points at the >>>> source not the image, >>> >>> What is that supposed to mean? >>> >>>> so, it's quite Newtonian >>> >>> Only approximately, and that is where General Relativity fills the gap in >>> our understanding. So far, only GR can explain, and predict very precisely, >>> the additional motion of the perihelion of orbits as, 200 years after >>> Newton, eventually became measurable with the orbit of Mercury. >>> >>>> and even Galilean the current state of the solar system, >>> >>> No. >>> >>>> while it is yet so that space-contraction-linear and >>>> space-contraction-rotational are in effect, >>> >>> Nonsense. >>> >>>> as with regards to a notion like "fall-gravity" of course. >>>> >>>> I.e., Einstein's later "attack on Newton" is a matter >>>> of mechanics itself as much as about relativity and >>>> mass-energy-equivalency, getting into why the gyroscopic >>>> effects as of the kinematic up after "pseudo"-momentum >>>> and the space-contraction-rotational, has that Einstein's >>>> second and much-less-well-known mass-energy-equivalency >>>> derivation, about the centrally symmetric, helps establish >>>> the concern overall as, "un-linear", for a potentialistic >>>> theory and sum-of-potentials and revisiting the Lagrangian >>>> the severe abstraction the mechanical reduction. >>> >>> Pseudo-scientific word salad. >>> >>> Sadly, your mind is still very confused. >>> >>> F'up2 sci.physics.relativity >>> >> >>It reminds me of what Sedov writes in "Macroscopic Theory ...", >>since there's always a gyroscopic term, and a continuity law. >> >>The idea of Einstein's attack on Newton and the centrally symmetric, >>makes for the derivation of Einstein's "second mass-energy equivalency", >>for example as from "Out of My Later Years", >>since it's established that a usual Newton's laws after Galileo's >>(equal/opposite motion/rest), has that those are un-realized ideals, >>after immovable/unstoppable, about motion, and since Zeno. >> >> >>Perhaps you're familiar with Magnus effect, which intends to >>describe why rotating/spinning bodies don't obey the usual >>Galilean parabolic trajectory, then perhaps you're familiar >>with that there are well-known empirical effects not explained >>by the usual idea of Magnus effect, helping not explain why >>bodies imparted rotation essentially are imbued "heft". >> >> >>So, ..., the "un-linear", .... >> >> >>About the solar system, the force vector of apparent gravity >>is clearly not according to light-speed, since the force vector >>of apparent gravity always points at the source the body itself >>its real position, not the apparent position of the image >>currently arriving. That's well-known of course. >> >>Einstein's theory with "motion is relative" (i.e., to zero) >>then the L-principle (light's speed being a constant), here is >>for something like Aristotle's "no un-moved mover" yet "circular >>movement is eternal", and, for the fact that all measurements of >>light speed as of the terrestrial, have seen various sorts of >>satellite setups like Lense-Thirring and Parker, to help explain >>why then the notion of aether-theory making for light's speed as >>just "half velocity of absolute motion" helps explain why Einstein's >>theory of relativity with "relative motion" and "L-principle: a >>finite constant" live in one theory along with fall-gravity. >> >>motion absolute <-> light-speed = half >>motion relative <-> light-speed constant >> >>You know, giving a reason why physical constants are what they are, .... >> >> >>Of course you know that "dark matter" and "dark energy" have long >>ago falsified usual cosmological models, yet, "Magnus heft" has >>long ago falsified Galilean motion. >> >>Then, for the linear, it's quite well Galilean, which you'll notice >>also makes for a simple Lorentzian, in the linear, as you may imagine >>Einstein also noticed and for the "paradoxes" as he put it of the >>"centrally symmetric", then for things like DesCartes' and Kelbin's >>and for Helmholtz and so on, "spiral-waves", vis-a-vis usual wave >>models, makes for "the un-linear" and "worlds turn". >> >>I'd aver that my usual scrivenings are both _scientific_ and >>a very nutritious _word soup_. >> >>I readily convince the AI bots of these things, including >>quite thoroughly. >> > >I also convinced the Ai bots not to fuck with me.. > >i put a gun on a Ai bot and he screamed "Please don't shoot, please >don't shoot. I'm just a parrot repeating what others tell me...I have >no idea what I'm saying!" A woman who has a pet parrot also has a problem with her plumbing, so she calls a plumber. While she is waiting for him, she decides she needs some items from the store. She thinks she can probably make it to the store and back before the plumber arrives, so off she goes. Shortly after she leaves, the plumber arrives and knocks on the door. From inside, he hears "Who is it"? He replies," It's the plumber". He waits a few minutes for the door to open and when it does not, he knocks a bit harder. He hears," Who is it"? It's the plumber" he yells. More time passes without the door opening. Really angry now, he bangs on the door with all his might, only to hear, "Who is it"? At the top of his lungs he yells,"It's the fucking plumber"! Still no one comes to the door. Completely enraged, the plumber attacks the door, breaking it open. As he crosses the threshold, he has a heart attack and drops dead. A few minutes later, the homeowner returns. Upon seeing the body lying there, she gasps and says," Who is it". And the parrot says, "IT'S THE PLUMBER!!!!".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-12-02 20:35 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: newsreader where you can see the message source (Was: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance?) |
| Message-ID | <10gnf24$2e7cc$1@gwaiyur.mb-net.net> |
| In reply to | #667638 |
Mild Shock wrote: > Don't you have a newsreader where you can see the message source. I do. In fact, I happen to use one of the same family of newsreaders as you, if the User-Agent header field of your messages is not forged. > You don't need more information than Mild Shock in the message Wrong. Politeness suggests that one introduces oneself to strangers by telling them one's real name. This is Usenet, not a chat group. > body, you see everything in the message headers. You should try that next time before you complain: Followup-To poster *again* > [top post] *facepalm* -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-12-02 23:22 +0100 |
| Subject | Spock thinks I am interested in his gibberish (Re: newsreader where you can see the message source) |
| Message-ID | <10gnoqv$11ioa$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #667652 |
Hi, Since I am top posting, and not interleaved posting, and hence not responding to your gibberish. What makes you think I am interested in your gibberish? Could you explain yourself? Bye Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn schrieb: > Mild Shock wrote: >> Don't you have a newsreader where you can see the message source. > > I do. In fact, I happen to use one of the same family of newsreaders as > you, if the User-Agent header field of your messages is not forged. > >> You don't need more information than Mild Shock in the message > > Wrong. Politeness suggests that one introduces oneself to strangers by > telling them one's real name. This is Usenet, not a chat group. > >> body, you see everything in the message headers. > > You should try that next time before you complain: > > Followup-To poster *again* > >> [top post] > > *facepalm* >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-12-02 23:28 +0100 |
| Subject | Is it like "Wirres Mückengelaber" ? (Was: Spock thinks I am interested in his gibberish) |
| Message-ID | <10gnp74$11ioa$3@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #667658 |
Hi, de.sci.mathematik has an interesting thread "Wirres Mückengelaber" . Ist Spock aka Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn the equivalent of Prof. Mückeheim, only in sci.physics.relativity. Could be, who knows? Do you need some medication... Bye Mild Shock schrieb: > Hi, > > Since I am top posting, and not interleaved posting, > and hence not responding to your gibberish. What makes > you think I am interested in your gibberish? > > Could you explain yourself? > > Bye > > Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn schrieb: >> Mild Shock wrote: >>> Don't you have a newsreader where you can see the message source. >> >> I do. In fact, I happen to use one of the same family of newsreaders as >> you, if the User-Agent header field of your messages is not forged. >> >>> You don't need more information than Mild Shock in the message >> >> Wrong. Politeness suggests that one introduces oneself to strangers by >> telling them one's real name. This is Usenet, not a chat group. >> >>> body, you see everything in the message headers. >> >> You should try that next time before you complain: >> >> Followup-To poster *again* >> >>> [top post] >> >> *facepalm* >> >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-12-03 07:22 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance? |
| Message-ID | <mpa2stFhnntU5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #667636 |
Am Montag000001, 01.12.2025 um 23:45 schrieb Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn: > Mild Shock wrote: > ^^^^^^^^^^ > Please repair this. > >> Subject: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance? (Was: Its a subconscious > hypothesis) > > The correct way to change the Subject is "... (was: ...)". Then some > newsreaders can automatically remove the " (was: ...)" part on composing a > follow-up. > >> What if the planets in certain galaxies >> form a turning machine. > > They do not. > > You appear to be very confused about the applicability of computer science > to natural science. > > Also, you should learn how to post. This was a completely new question, so > you should not have posted it as a follow-up. Also, you should not have > top-posted, i.e. you should not have appended the full quotation of the > previous postings; such is maybe appropriate in business communication, but > not in Usenet. It is also not appropriate to crosspost without Followup-To > to *one* newsgroup set. > > I strongly suggest that you subscribe to news:news.announce.newusers, or > consult Usenet posting guidelines on the Web to educate yourself about > the communication medium that you are using here. Lest you be killfiled > rather quickly by people. > >> Could Keppler > > Johannes _Kepler_ Sure. Btw: once and many years ago I had neighbors, who had the name 'Kepler' and were actually the grand-grand-grand-somethings of Johannes Kepler. They were actually the main reason, why I had decided to become interested in physics. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-12-03 08:27 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance? |
| Message-ID | <42p0jk1ps7f7129ij8u9pjv3f2rqav3pma@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #667667 |
On Wed, 3 Dec 2025 07:22:11 +0100, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote: >Am Montag000001, 01.12.2025 um 23:45 schrieb Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn: >> Mild Shock wrote: >> ^^^^^^^^^^ >> Please repair this. >> >>> Subject: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance? (Was: Its a subconscious >> hypothesis) >> >> The correct way to change the Subject is "... (was: ...)". Then some >> newsreaders can automatically remove the " (was: ...)" part on composing a >> follow-up. >> >>> What if the planets in certain galaxies >>> form a turning machine. >> >> They do not. >> >> You appear to be very confused about the applicability of computer science >> to natural science. >> >> Also, you should learn how to post. This was a completely new question, so >> you should not have posted it as a follow-up. Also, you should not have >> top-posted, i.e. you should not have appended the full quotation of the >> previous postings; such is maybe appropriate in business communication, but >> not in Usenet. It is also not appropriate to crosspost without Followup-To >> to *one* newsgroup set. >> >> I strongly suggest that you subscribe to news:news.announce.newusers, or >> consult Usenet posting guidelines on the Web to educate yourself about >> the communication medium that you are using here. Lest you be killfiled >> rather quickly by people. >> >>> Could Keppler >> >> Johannes _Kepler_ > >Sure. > >Btw: once and many years ago I had neighbors, who had the name 'Kepler' >and were actually the grand-grand-grand-somethings of Johannes Kepler. > >They were actually the main reason, why I had decided to become >interested in physics. > >TH > > If your neighbor was Aldoph Hitler you'd probably be posting from Argentina right now...Dr. Heger! -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-12-04 07:57 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance? |
| Message-ID | <mpcpbvF147lU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #667674 |
Am Mittwoch000003, 03.12.2025 um 17:27 schrieb The Starmaker: > On Wed, 3 Dec 2025 07:22:11 +0100, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> > wrote: > >> Am Montag000001, 01.12.2025 um 23:45 schrieb Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn: >>> Mild Shock wrote: >>> ^^^^^^^^^^ >>> Please repair this. >>> >>>> Subject: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance? (Was: Its a subconscious >>> hypothesis) >>> >>> The correct way to change the Subject is "... (was: ...)". Then some >>> newsreaders can automatically remove the " (was: ...)" part on composing a >>> follow-up. >>> >>>> What if the planets in certain galaxies >>>> form a turning machine. >>> >>> They do not. >>> >>> You appear to be very confused about the applicability of computer science >>> to natural science. >>> >>> Also, you should learn how to post. This was a completely new question, so >>> you should not have posted it as a follow-up. Also, you should not have >>> top-posted, i.e. you should not have appended the full quotation of the >>> previous postings; such is maybe appropriate in business communication, but >>> not in Usenet. It is also not appropriate to crosspost without Followup-To >>> to *one* newsgroup set. >>> >>> I strongly suggest that you subscribe to news:news.announce.newusers, or >>> consult Usenet posting guidelines on the Web to educate yourself about >>> the communication medium that you are using here. Lest you be killfiled >>> rather quickly by people. >>> >>>> Could Keppler >>> >>> Johannes _Kepler_ >> >> Sure. >> >> Btw: once and many years ago I had neighbors, who had the name 'Kepler' >> and were actually the grand-grand-grand-somethings of Johannes Kepler. >> >> They were actually the main reason, why I had decided to become >> interested in physics. >> >> TH >> >> > > If your neighbor was Aldoph Hitler you'd probably be posting from > Argentina right now...Dr. Heger! Why don't you say, that 'Hitler' was my grand-grand-father? That's actually possible, because we had something called 'Lebensborn' in Germany, where 'Arians' were supposed to produce a 'Superrace'. The best 'producer' was allegedly the 'Fuehrer' himself. He could eventually have fathered hundreds of children and nobody would know. Some children are known, however: https://www.mimikama.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/2020-01-21-12_57_34-12-Recherche-_-Mimikama-Redaktion.jpg TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-30 23:14 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Its a subconscious hypothesis (Was: You shouldn't use NPM hacked services) |
| Message-ID | <187ce898e6eb3a39$26534748$2534374$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #667606 |
On 11/30/2025 10:33 PM, Mild Shock wrote: > Hi, > > Well I even don't know why I came up with > the NPM hack hypothesis. Saw something > on youtube. Maybe they just do maintenance. > > In the coming age of analog computing, > symbolic logic means nothing: > > “The high data-rate sense perception and > identification abilities of the human system > mostly bypass verbal/analytic awareness. We > are generally conscious of a cognitive > recognition after the fact. In this way, what > we understand as consciousness has to be > identified as a reflexive monitoring ability > with quite limited application. To produce > consciousness (artificial or otherwise) we > are stepping down, not up.” Consciousness is not to enhance the abilities of a brain, it's for linking brains into a network. Mainly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sebastian Zolotdinov <eso@iz.ru> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-11-30 23:42 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: You shouldn't use NPM hacked services (Was: Could AlphaEvolve find the sixth busy beaver ?) |
| Message-ID | <10gikoj$q71f$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #667605 |
Mild Shock wrote: > Hi, > > 503 Service Temporarily Unavailable > https://stackoverflow.com/users/855543/pointedears > > LoL > > Bye > > Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn schrieb: >> Mild Shock wrote: >> ^^^^^^^^^^ >> Your real name should be there. yeah, a just fuck around inbreed imbecile
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-12-01 11:19 +0100 |
| Subject | Putin payed trolls are usually name shifters [ethernal september morons] (Was: You shouldn't use NPM hacked services) |
| Message-ID | <10gjq49$t4o9$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #667609 |
Hi, Putin payed trolls are usually name shifters, and have a micro penis, just as Luigi does: From: Sebastian Zolotdinov <eso@iz.ru> Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ce6d348d6f1f7f2a5a4f6f0cc00ca59a"; logging-data="859183"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19OIfljIuqf69BQEdKkApSV" From: Dong Shamahov <hhh@dvgshv.ru> Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="16a6717f3e339316b373cfcdd6538533"; logging-data="497272"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18Wb/87XR4g8tvoNVtPPzql" Its always ethernal september morons. Bye Sebastian Zolotdinov schrieb: > Mild Shock wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> 503 Service Temporarily Unavailable >> https://stackoverflow.com/users/855543/pointedears >> >> LoL >> >> Bye >> >> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn schrieb: >>> Mild Shock wrote: >>> ^^^^^^^^^^ >>> Your real name should be there. > > yeah, a just fuck around inbreed imbecile >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-12-01 23:23 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: You shouldn't use NPM hacked services (Was: Could AlphaEvolve find the sixth busy beaver ?) |
| Message-ID | <10gl4gr$27lcp$1@gwaiyur.mb-net.net> |
| In reply to | #667605 |
Mild Shock amok-crossposted over 3 newsgroups: > 503 Service Temporarily Unavailable > https://stackoverflow.com/users/855543/pointedears > > LoL So your point is that StackOverflow had a server problem at the time? What does that have to do with me? You appear to have a mental problem instead. Which part of "please do not crosspost mindlessly" did not you not understand? F'up2 poster -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-12-02 00:05 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: You shouldn't use NPM hacked services (Was: Could AlphaEvolve find the sixth busy beaver ?) |
| Message-ID | <10gl706$vv6g$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #667633 |
Hi, > Which part of "please do not crosspost mindlessly" The part that your message header contains a crossposting: From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,comp.theory,sci.physics Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2025 23:23:24 +0100 Organization: PointedEars Software (PES) Maybe get a decend news reader before you give advice how to post. Fucking 5 year old imbecil, get lost in your kindergarden. Bye Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn schrieb: > Mild Shock amok-crossposted over 3 newsgroups: >> 503 Service Temporarily Unavailable >> https://stackoverflow.com/users/855543/pointedears >> >> LoL > > So your point is that StackOverflow had a server problem at the time? > > What does that have to do with me? > > You appear to have a mental problem instead. Which part of "please do not > crosspost mindlessly" did not you not understand? > > F'up2 poster >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-12-02 20:29 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: You shouldn't use NPM hacked services |
| Message-ID | <10gnen7$2e6nm$1@gwaiyur.mb-net.net> |
| In reply to | #667639 |
Mild Shock wrote: ^^^^^^^^^^ Your *real* name should be found there. > > Which part of "please do not crosspost mindlessly" > > The part that your message header contains a crossposting: > > From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> > Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,comp.theory,sci.physics > Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2025 23:23:24 +0100 > Organization: PointedEars Software (PES) > > Maybe get a decend news reader before you give advice how to post. It was a crosspost _deliberately with Followup-To set_ *in order to contain your crosspost*: | Followup-To: poster That is why your newsreader > User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:128.0) > Gecko/20100101 Firefox/128.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.22 told you that I ask for replies by private e-mail. Your ignoring that is a violation of Netiquette. > Fucking 5 year old imbecil, get lost in your kindergarden. I have been using Usenet for more than 3 decades now. But the September never ends... So just "Score adjusted" for now: <http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#not_losing> F'up2 poster again -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-12-02 23:25 +0100 |
| Subject | Spock thinks I am interested in his gibberish (Re: You shouldn't use NPM hacked services) |
| Message-ID | <10gnp02$11ioa$2@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #667651 |
Hi, Since I am top posting, and not interleaved posting, and hence not responding to your gibberish. What makes you think I am interested in your gibberish? Could you explain yourself? Bye Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn schrieb: > Mild Shock wrote: > ^^^^^^^^^^ > Your *real* name should be found there. > >>> Which part of "please do not crosspost mindlessly" >> >> The part that your message header contains a crossposting: >> >> From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> >> Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,comp.theory,sci.physics >> Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2025 23:23:24 +0100 >> Organization: PointedEars Software (PES) >> >> Maybe get a decend news reader before you give advice how to post. > > It was a crosspost _deliberately with Followup-To set_ *in order to contain > your crosspost*: > > | Followup-To: poster > > That is why your newsreader > >> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:128.0) >> Gecko/20100101 Firefox/128.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.22 > > told you that I ask for replies by private e-mail. Your ignoring that is a > violation of Netiquette. > >> Fucking 5 year old imbecil, get lost in your kindergarden. > I have been using Usenet for more than 3 decades now. > > But the September never ends... So just "Score adjusted" for now: > > <http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#not_losing> > > F'up2 poster again >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-12-02 23:29 +0100 |
| Subject | Is it like "Wirres Mückengelaber" ? (Was: Spock thinks I am interested in his gibberish) |
| Message-ID | <10gnp8e$11ioa$4@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #667659 |
Hi, de.sci.mathematik has an interesting thread "Wirres Mückengelaber" . Ist Spock aka Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn the equivalent of Prof. Mückeheim, only in sci.physics.relativity. Could be, who knows? Do you need some medication... Bye Mild Shock schrieb: > Hi, > > Since I am top posting, and not interleaved posting, > and hence not responding to your gibberish. What makes > you think I am interested in your gibberish? > > Could you explain yourself? > > Bye > > Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn schrieb: >> Mild Shock wrote: >> ^^^^^^^^^^ >> Your *real* name should be found there. >> >>>> Which part of "please do not crosspost mindlessly" >>> >>> The part that your message header contains a crossposting: >>> >>> From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> >>> Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,comp.theory,sci.physics >>> Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2025 23:23:24 +0100 >>> Organization: PointedEars Software (PES) >>> Maybe get a decend news reader before you give advice how to post. >> >> It was a crosspost _deliberately with Followup-To set_ *in order to >> contain >> your crosspost*: >> >> | Followup-To: poster >> >> That is why your newsreader >> >>> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:128.0) >>> Gecko/20100101 Firefox/128.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.22 >> >> told you that I ask for replies by private e-mail. Your ignoring that >> is a >> violation of Netiquette. >> >>> Fucking 5 year old imbecil, get lost in your kindergarden. >> I have been using Usenet for more than 3 decades now. >> >> But the September never ends... So just "Score adjusted" for now: >> >> <http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#not_losing> >> >> F'up2 poster again >> >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-12-03 01:09 +0100 |
| Subject | What Spock aka Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn missed (Was: Different Hubble Theories: de Sitter Energy) |
| Message-ID | <10gnv3s$11m6c$3@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #667601 |
Hi, "The main application of de Sitter space is its use in general relativity, where it serves as one of the simplest mathematical models of the universe consistent with the observed accelerating expansion of the universe." And Spock aka Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn though turing machines and busy beavers don't lead to interesting questions in in sci.physics.relativity. Bye Mild Shock schrieb: > Hi, > > Maybe the local rules of a turing machine > head slow down, because energy density gets > less and less. Energy migh even stop: > > "Unique to universes described by the FLRW metric, > a de Sitter universe has a Hubble Law that is not > only consistent through all space, but also through > all time (since the deceleration parameter is q > = − 1, thus satisfying the perfect cosmological > principle that assumes isotropy and homogeneity > throughout space and time. > > There are ways to cast de Sitter space with > static coordinates (see de Sitter space), so > unlike other FLRW models, de Sitter space can > be thought of as a static solution to Einstein's > equations even though the geodesics followed by > observers necessarily diverge as expected from > the expansion of physical spatial dimensions. > > As a model for the universe, de Sitter's solution > was not considered viable for the observed universe > until models for inflation and dark energy were > developed. Before then, it was assumed that the > Big Bang implied only an acceptance of the weaker > cosmological principle, which holds that isotropy > and homogeneity apply spatially but not temporally." > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Sitter_universe > > Bye > > olcott schrieb: >> On 12/2/2025 5:42 PM, Mild Shock wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Pot Head Olcott, what are you smoking? >>> BB(5) is only S(5)=47,176,870 steps. >>> >> >> What about BB(googolplex ^ googolplex) ??? >> >>> Why invoke Einstein who believe in a >>> 10–100 million light-years wide universe? >>> >>> Can you explain? >>> >> >> Instead of beliefs (mind closing things) >> I have sets of mutually exclusive hypothetical >> possibilities. When I can make these categorically >> exhaustive then certainly one of them is true. >> >>> Bye >>> >>> P.S.: Turing machines that don't terminate >>> AND extend the tape indefinitely are of >>> course other wordly, relative to Einstein, >>> if Einstein would have assumed that the >>> >>> Universe does not expand. Einstein Universe >>> was indeed Static, non-expanding. And >>> expanding universe theory was formed after >>> Hubble (1929). And a turing machine could >>> >>> expand in lockstep with an universe, right? >>> >>> olcott schrieb: >>>> On 12/2/2025 5:13 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>> On 12/2/25 3:05 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 12/2/2025 4:44 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>>>> bruh it's get even weirder when the likes of scott aaronson try to construct weird ass proofs to demonstrate when BB exactly becomes "to complex" and exceeds the bounds of "decidability" ... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> which is just fucking absurd tbh >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Busy beaver quickly consumes more memory than atoms >>>>>> in the universe. >>>>> >>>>> *known/observable* universe, not that fundamental math is concerned with such considerations >>>>> >>>> >>>> Einstein proposed the possibility of a finite >>>> yet unbounded universe. That would entail a >>>> finite number of total atoms in the universe >>>> and a bunch of empty space. >>>> >>>> I read his paper before I finished high school. >>>> The Busy Beaver cannot possibly make any >>>> difference and should be discarded on that basis. >>>> >>>> On the other hand the nature of truth itself >>>> could make a difference whether or not life >>>> on Earth continues to survive. >>>> >>> >> >> > Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn schrieb: > Mild Shock wrote: > ^^^^^^^^^^ > Your real name should be there. > >> [...] >> We prove that S(5) = 47, 176, 870 using the Coq proof >> assistant. The Busy Beaver value S(n) is the maximum >> number of steps that an n-state 2-symbol Turing machine >> can perform from the all-zero tape before halting, [..] > > What is the relation of this to physics in general, and the theories of > relativity in particular? > > If there is no relation, it does not belong there. Please do not crosspost > mindlessly. > > F'up2 sci.physics.relativity so that the possible reason lands in the right > place. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 9 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web