Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > alt.checkmate > #230812

99% of scientists have yet to catch up to Einstein.

From Jeff-Relf.Me @.
Message-ID <Jeff-Relf.Me@Nov.28--7.39am.Seattle.2018> (permalink)
References (1 earlier) <ptj5hv$11h$2@gioia.aioe.org> <Jeff-Relf.Me@Nov.27--6.33am.Seattle.2018> <ptlsvj$nke$1@gioia.aioe.org> <Jeff-Relf.Me@Nov.28--6.37am.Seattle.2018> <ptm9sb$1hnu$2@gioia.aioe.org>
Newsgroups comp.os.linux.advocacy, sci.physics, alt.checkmate
Subject 99% of scientists have yet to catch up to Einstein.
Organization blocknews - www.blocknews.net
Date 2018-11-28 07:39 -0800

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show all headers | View raw


Kensi replied:
> > Why wouldn't entropy apply to a hot star in a cold vacuum ?
> > The cosmological constant is Einstein's greatest achievement,
> > not a blunder.
> 
> It has no explanatory value!  It's just a fudge factor! 
> A real achievement would be understanding the causing quantum field!

"Entropy and the cosmological constant" explains the uniform, 
isotropic, expotentially expanding Universe that we observe.

No need for your wild imaginations, like the graviton,
string theory, and the bullshit worlds you love to hide in.

99% of scientists have yet to catch up to Einstein.

Back to alt.checkmate | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: By definition, geniuses are rare. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-27 05:16 -0500
  Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-11-27 06:33 -0800
    Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-28 06:08 -0500
      Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. Checkmate <oshay.shad@yahoo.corn> - 2018-11-28 09:51 -0800
      Why wouldn't entropy apply to a hot star in a cold vacuum ? Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-11-28 06:37 -0800
        Re: Why wouldn't entropy apply to a hot star in a cold vacuum ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-11-28 07:44 -0700
        Re: Why wouldn't entropy apply to a hot star in a cold vacuum ? kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-28 09:48 -0500
          99% of scientists have yet to catch up to Einstein. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-11-28 07:39 -0800
            Re: 99% of scientists have yet to catch up to Einstein. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-28 12:00 -0500
              Re: 99% of scientists have yet to catch up to Einstein. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-11-28 10:03 -0700
                Re: 99% of scientists have yet to catch up to Einstein. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-29 05:37 -0500
              Re: 99% of scientists have yet to catch up to Einstein. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-29 05:36 -0500
            Re: 99% of scientists have yet to catch up to Einstein. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-29 05:35 -0500
              The graviton, string theory, and bullshit worlds. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-11-29 06:19 -0800
                Re: The graviton, string theory, and bullshit worlds. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-29 10:21 -0500
                We don't know if Schrodinger's cat is dead or alive. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-11-29 08:31 -0800
                Re: We don't know if Schrodinger's cat is dead or alive. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-30 06:11 -0500
                Kensi's useless, unfalsifiable assumptions. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-11-30 05:09 -0800
                Re: Relf's useless, unfalsifiable assumptions. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-30 11:29 -0500
                Re: Relf's useless, unfalsifiable assumptions. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-11-30 21:00 +0000
                Re: Relf's useless, unfalsifiable assumptions. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-01 07:27 -0500
                Science FICTION sells better than the real thing $ $ $ Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-11-30 13:46 -0800
                Re: Science FICTION sells better than the real thing $ $ $ Sir Gaygory's Owner's Owner 🐶笛 <root@127.0.0.1> - 2018-11-30 16:41 -0600
                Re: Science FICTION sells better than the real thing $ $ $ kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-01 07:28 -0500
                Kensi is the KoOky one. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-12-01 06:28 -0800
                Re: Kensi is the KoOky one. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-01 09:33 -0500
                See ? ! Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-12-01 06:48 -0800
                Re: See ? ! kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-01 09:55 -0500
                I could be Taylor Swift, or the queen of England. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-12-01 07:04 -0800
                Re: I could be Taylor Swift, or the queen of England. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-01 11:27 -0500
                Re: I could be Taylor Swift, or the queen of England. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-12-01 12:13 -0500
                Re: I could be Taylor Swift, or the queen of England. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-12-02 02:09 +0000
                Re: I could be Taylor Swift, or the queen of England. Checkmate <oshay.shad@yahoo.corn> - 2018-12-01 22:18 -0800
                Re: I could be Taylor Swift, or the queen of England. "Sir Gregory Hall,  Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-12-02 09:31 -0500
                Re: I could be Taylor Swift, or the queen of England. % <%@%> - 2018-12-02 07:35 -0700
                Re: I could be Taylor Swift, or the queen of England. Checkmate <oshay.shad@yahoo.corn> - 2018-12-02 14:47 -0800
                Re: See ? ! Skeeter <chico@invalid.invalid> - 2018-12-01 08:51 -0700
                Re: See ? ! kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-01 11:27 -0500
                Re: See ? ! "Sir Gregory Hall,  Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-12-01 11:47 -0500
                Re: See ? ! % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-01 10:48 -0700
                Re: See ? ! Skeeter <chico@invalid.invalid> - 2018-12-01 12:43 -0700
                Re: See ? ! Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-12-02 02:10 +0000
                Re: See ? ! chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-12-03 07:17 -0600
                Re: See ? ! Skeeter <chico@invalid.invalid> - 2018-12-03 08:05 -0700
                Re: See ? ! % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-01 10:48 -0700
                Re: See ? ! Skeeter <chico@invalid.invalid> - 2018-12-01 12:44 -0700
                Re: See ? ! % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-01 12:49 -0700
                Re: See ? ! Skeeter <chico@invalid.invalid> - 2018-12-01 12:54 -0700
                Re: See ? ! % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-01 13:02 -0700
                Re: See ? ! Skeeter <chico@invalid.invalid> - 2018-12-01 15:10 -0700
                Re: See ? ! % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-12-01 15:22 -0700
                Re: See ? ! Skeeter <chico@invalid.invalid> - 2018-12-01 18:43 -0700
                Re: Kensi is the KoOky one. Bob Robertson <bobrobertsontsy66@gmail.com> - 2018-12-01 21:52 -0600
                Re: Kensi is the KoOky one. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-12-01 12:09 -0500
                Re: Science FICTION sells better than the real thing $ $ $ Skeeter <chico@invalid.invalid> - 2018-12-01 08:51 -0700
                Re: Science FICTION sells better than the real thing $ $ $ Sir Gaygory's Owner's Owner 🐶笛 <root@127.0.0.1> - 2018-12-01 11:48 -0600
                Re: Kensi's useless, unfalsifiable assumptions. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-30 12:28 -0500
          Re: Why wouldn't entropy apply to a hot star in a cold vacuum ? Checkmate <oshay.shad@yahoo.corn> - 2018-11-28 15:23 -0800
            Re: Why wouldn't entropy apply to a hot star in a cold vacuum ? Sir Gaygory's Owner's Owner 🐶笛 <root@127.0.0.1> - 2018-11-28 12:33 -0600
            Re: Why wouldn't entropy apply to a hot star in a cold vacuum ? "Sir Gregory Hall,  Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-11-28 15:54 -0500
              Re: Why wouldn't entropy apply to a hot star in a cold vacuum ? Checkmate <oshay.shad@yahoo.corn> - 2018-11-28 18:51 -0800
                Re: Why wouldn't entropy apply to a hot star in a cold vacuum ? Janithor <Janithor@comcast.net> - 2018-11-28 13:54 -0800
                Re: Why wouldn't entropy apply to a hot star in a cold vacuum ? % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-11-28 14:57 -0700
                Re: Why wouldn't entropy apply to a hot star in a cold vacuum ? Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-11-28 20:26 -0600
      Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-11-29 06:45 +0000
        Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. Checkmate <oshay.shad@yahoo.corn> - 2018-11-29 05:17 -0800
        Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. Libtard <libtard@sandernistas.edu> - 2018-11-29 09:43 +0000
          Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-29 05:49 -0500
            Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. Skeeter <chico@invalid.invalid> - 2018-11-29 09:08 -0700
              Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. Libtard <libtard@sandernistas.edu> - 2018-11-29 17:40 +0000
              Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-11-29 16:15 -0600
          Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. Skeeter <chico@invalid.invalid> - 2018-11-29 09:08 -0700
            Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-11-29 16:17 -0600
              Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. "Sir Gregory Hall,  Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2018-11-29 17:22 -0500
              Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-11-30 07:46 +0000
                Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. Skeeter <chico@invalid.invalid> - 2018-11-30 00:55 -0700
                Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. Libtard <libtard@sandernistas.edu> - 2018-11-30 09:49 +0000
                Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. Skeeter <chico@invalid.invalid> - 2018-11-30 08:50 -0700
                Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-11-30 09:59 -0600
        Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. kensi <kkensington01@gmail.nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-29 05:49 -0500
          Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. Nadegda <nad318b404@gmail.invalid> - 2018-11-29 20:08 +0000
            Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 13:19 -0700
          Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-11-29 12:09 -0800
            Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-11-29 12:48 -0800
            Re: Try again, you're off by 120 orders of magnitude. Skeeter <chico@invalid.invalid> - 2018-11-29 18:48 -0700

csiph-web