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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #400768

Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck

Newsgroups sci.physics.relativity
Date 2016-12-04 10:52 -0800
References (26 earlier) <o1t1e7$5ie$1@pcls7.std.com> <a3d1ccb3-5ee1-425e-8ab4-e01deff84438@googlegroups.com> <o20bfv$bf4$4@pcls7.std.com> <20fc617b-26df-4354-955f-d86845434286@googlegroups.com> <o21h6t$n3u$1@pcls7.std.com>
Message-ID <0194de80-2cc5-412c-bf29-1fb5ca453031@googlegroups.com> (permalink)
Subject Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck
From kenseto <setoken@att.net>

Show all headers | View raw

On Sunday, December 4, 2016 at 11:45:26 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes:
> 
> >On Sunday, December 4, 2016 at 1:01:42 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes:
> 
> >> >Moron, after you collect the appropriate data
> >> 
> >> Stupid Ken, "collecting the appropriate data" is called "measurement",
> >> Stupid Ken.  No wonder everyone calls you Stupid Ken.
> >> 
> >> > you use the LT to get the 
> >> >actual end result....that means that the end result is a prediction NOT a 
> >> >measurement as you asserted.
> >> 
> >> No, Stupid Ken, as I stated, the measurement is when you collected the
> >> data, as you wrote. And you got things backwards, anyway, trying to
> >> predict things after measuring them.
> 
> >Idiot.....that's not a direct measurement of the rate of a moving clock. 
> >It is a prediction based on SRT and the SRT prediction is based on the 
> >assumption that the SRT equations (the LT equations) are correct. 
> 
> No, Stupid Ken.  Collecting the data *is* the measurement.  No need to
> refer to either SR or LT at all, unless you want to verify them.  It is
> entirely possible to measure the rate of the moving clock without even
> knowing about SR or LT (or GR...) at all! It's just a measurement of the
> tick rate of the moving clock.

Moron-y

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-28 08:33 -0600
  Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-11-28 07:44 -0800
    Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-28 09:56 -0600
      Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-11-29 05:19 -0800
        Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-11-29 14:50 +0000
          Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-11-30 06:37 -0800
            Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-30 09:59 -0600
        Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-29 08:57 -0600
          Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-11-30 06:45 -0800
        Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-29 09:00 -0600
          Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-11-30 06:53 -0800
            Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-30 10:21 -0600
              Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-03 05:45 -0800
          Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-11-30 19:56 -0600
            Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-01 08:05 -0800
              Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-12-01 11:00 -0600
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-01 12:00 -0800
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-12-01 15:20 -0600
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-02 04:37 -0800
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-02 15:24 +0000
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-02 14:38 -0800
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-02 14:45 -0800
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-02 23:51 +0000
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-03 04:49 -0800
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-04 06:01 +0000
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-04 05:53 -0800
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-04 16:45 +0000
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-04 10:52 -0800
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-03 06:27 -0800
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-12-02 09:38 -0600
            Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-03 05:41 -0800

csiph-web