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

Groups > comp.lang.prolog > #15088 > unrolled thread

newsreader where you can see the message source (Was: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance?)

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.prolog

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  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: 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

#15088 — newsreader where you can see the message source (Was: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance?)

Hi,

Don't you have a newsreader where you can
see the message source. You don't need more
information than Mild Shock in the message

body, you see everything in the message
headers. For example I see in your message:

From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de>
Injection-Info: gwaiyur.mb-net.net; logging-data="2349822"; 
mail-complaints-to="abuse@open-news-network.org"

So you posted from INWX GmbH? Still you
give advice how to format a USENET post, even
you are not able to see the message source,

of my posts? You can easily read off who I am.
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 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_
> 
>> have modelled a 3 planet system.
> 
> Yes, he did, but not exactly.
> 
>> Can we model a 3 planet system now ?
> 
> Obviously; there are simulations of the Sol System e.g. in Universe Sandbox.
>   But the 3-body-problem is not about 3 planets, but more general.
> 
> There is no *general* *exact* solution to this problem; just a solution for
> the *restricted* 3-body-problem in which one of the objects has a very large
> mass; the second object, e.g. a gas giant like Jupiter, has a smaller mass
> and is very far away from the first object; and the third object. e.g. an
> asteroid, has a small that is small enough to be negligible, and is
> comparably far away from the first and second object, respectively.
> 
> And this is neglecting general-relativistic corrections that lead to an
> additional contribution in the precession of the perihelia (orbits are not
> actually ellipses, closed curves).
> 
> F'up2 sci.physics
> 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#15092 — Re: newsreader where you can see the message source (Was: What if of the cosmos does a BB dance?)

Le 02/12/2025 à 00:00, Mild Shock a écrit :
> Hi,
> 
> Don't you have a newsreader where you can
> see the message source. You don't need more
> information than Mild Shock in the message
> 
> body, you see everything in the message
> headers. For example I see in your message:
> 
> From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de>
> Injection-Info: gwaiyur.mb-net.net; logging-data="2349822"; 
> mail-complaints-to="abuse@open-news-network.org"
> 
> So you posted from INWX GmbH? Still you
> give advice how to format a USENET post, even
> you are not able to see the message source,
> 
> of my posts? You can easily read off who I am.
> 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 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_
>> 
>>> have modelled a 3 planet system.
>> 
>> Yes, he did, but not exactly.
>> 
>>> Can we model a 3 planet system now ?
>> 
>> Obviously; there are simulations of the Sol System e.g. in Universe Sandbox.
>>   But the 3-body-problem is not about 3 planets, but more general.
>> 
>> There is no *general* *exact* solution to this problem; just a solution for
>> the *restricted* 3-body-problem in which one of the objects has a very large
>> mass; the second object, e.g. a gas giant like Jupiter, has a smaller mass
>> and is very far away from the first object; and the third object. e.g. an
>> asteroid, has a small that is small enough to be negligible, and is
>> comparably far away from the first and second object, respectively.
>> 
>> And this is neglecting general-relativistic corrections that lead to an
>> additional contribution in the precession of the perihelia (orbits are not
>> actually ellipses, closed curves).
>> 
>> F'up2 sci.physics
>> 

you're not going well, right?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15094

And here comes the next oneliner imbecil.
I wish the USENET was like 10 years ago,
where there were veritable cranks and trolls,

that wrote 2-3 page essays, that were interesting
and challenge to respond. Now its all autism,
and inquisitory questions. Everybody has his

brain amputated and fears making expositions.

So get lost, fuck yourself annonying moron.

Python schrieb:
> you're not going well, right?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15101

Mild Shock wrote:
> And here comes the next oneliner imbecil.
> I wish the USENET was like 10 years ago,
> where there were veritable cranks and trolls,
> 
> that wrote 2-3 page essays, that were interesting
> and challenge to respond. Now its all autism,
> and inquisitory questions. Everybody has his
> 
> brain amputated and fears making expositions.
> 
> So get lost, fuck yourself annonying moron.

*PLONK*

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15112

On 12/01/2025 07:10 PM, Python wrote:
> Le 02/12/2025 à 00:00, Mild Shock a écrit :
>> Hi,
>>
>> Don't you have a newsreader where you can
>> see the message source. You don't need more
>> information than Mild Shock in the message
>>
>> body, you see everything in the message
>> headers. For example I see in your message:
>>
>> From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de>
>> Injection-Info: gwaiyur.mb-net.net; logging-data="2349822";
>> mail-complaints-to="abuse@open-news-network.org"
>>
>> So you posted from INWX GmbH? Still you
>> give advice how to format a USENET post, even
>> you are not able to see the message source,
>>
>> of my posts? You can easily read off who I am.
>> 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 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_
>>>
>>>> have modelled a 3 planet system.
>>>
>>> Yes, he did, but not exactly.
>>>
>>>> Can we model a 3 planet system now ?
>>>
>>> Obviously; there are simulations of the Sol System e.g. in Universe
>>> Sandbox.
>>>   But the 3-body-problem is not about 3 planets, but more general.
>>>
>>> There is no *general* *exact* solution to this problem; just a
>>> solution for
>>> the *restricted* 3-body-problem in which one of the objects has a
>>> very large
>>> mass; the second object, e.g. a gas giant like Jupiter, has a smaller
>>> mass
>>> and is very far away from the first object; and the third object.
>>> e.g. an
>>> asteroid, has a small that is small enough to be negligible, and is
>>> comparably far away from the first and second object, respectively.
>>>
>>> And this is neglecting general-relativistic corrections that lead to an
>>> additional contribution in the precession of the perihelia (orbits
>>> are not
>>> actually ellipses, closed curves).
>>>
>>> F'up2 sci.physics
>>>
>
> you're not going well, right?
>
>

Perhaps we might ascribe it to typical brattiness, ....

That said I enjoy Lahn so it's of peripheral interest
notions like Kepler's banishment of epicycles and as
after about Bode's law then as for inverse square the
Keplerian geometric way then that the Newtonian "System
of the World" after the Keplerian "System of the World"
or Harmonisches Mundi after the Muslim "System of the
Heavens" and that, that, in the solar system today,
the force vector of gravity always points at the
source not the image, so, it's quite Newtonian and
even Galilean the current state of the solar system,
while it is yet so that space-contraction-linear and
space-contraction-rotational are in effect, 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.

I don't even mind Python/Messager, ....


The pettiness, ..., the brattiness, ....

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15113 — Orbits of planets in the Sol System (was: newsreader where you can see the message source)

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 become 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
-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15114 — Orbits of planets in the Sol System

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
-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15100

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]

#15103 — Spock thinks I am interested in his gibberish (Re: newsreader where you can see the message source)

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]

#15105 — Is it like "Wirres Mückengelaber" ? (Was: Spock thinks I am interested in his gibberish)

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] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.prolog

csiph-web