Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #386937

Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries).

From	"HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....>
Newsgroups	sci.physics.relativity
Subject	Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries).
Date	2016-06-30 07:44 +1000
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<nl1ff6$1odd$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(13 earlier) <nl0h1d$8lo$1@gioia.aioe.org> <nl0j56$c3q$1@gioia.aioe.org> <nl0ltb$fcp$5@gioia.aioe.org> <nl1bfm$1inp$1@gioia.aioe.org> <nl1c34$1jhq$1@gioia.aioe.org>

Show all headers | View raw

On 30/06/16 06:46, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 6/29/2016 3:36 PM, HGWilson, DSc. wrote:
>> On 30/06/16 00:27, Odd Bodkin wrote:

>
> Well, that method doesn't satisfy the operational definition of length,
> does it? Do you see why recording the position of one end, and then
> walking to the other end to record the position of the other end, does
> not meet the operational definition of length?
> Do you even KNOW the operational definition of length?
>
>> If you subsequently try to measure it when it is
>> going flat out past you and you get a different answer, then quite
>> obviously there is something wrong with the method you used.
>
> Obviously. It would be better to use a method that adheres to the
> operational definition of length.

In physics, a standard metre 'length' used to be that defined by a 
platinum-iridium rod. Because of possible extraneous physical changes 
that might afflict the rod, no matter how carefully it was kept, that 
definition was recently changed so that lengths are now defined in terms 
of the time light takes to traverse them. For convenience, the speed of 
light has been assigned the precise value of 299792458 metres/second.
Lengths can be measured via the direct timing of two-way light signals 
or more accurately with interferometry.

Bodkin, no length has been standardized according to that definition 
with anything other than a source at rest with the object being 
measured. There is no proof that a rod standardized that way is 
identical to one standardized using a relatively moving source.

>>
>>> I'm going with the definition that is used by scientists and engineers
>>> and not going with yours.
>>
>> No bodkin, you are using the definition used by an insane section of the
>> physics fraternity that appeared somewhere around 1905...and no engineer
>> ever considers any of Einsteins crap.
>
> I disagree. The standard, which invokes the operational definition of
> length, is created by an organization of scientists AND ENGINEERS.

There is nothing wrong with the definition as long as all experimental 
components and the rod are MAR.

Thread

Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). HGW <hw@...> - 2016-06-04 09:32 +1000
  Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-03 19:09 -0700
    Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-05 04:01 +1000
      Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-04 11:33 -0700
        Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-05 19:25 +1000
          Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 05:29 -0700
            Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-06-07 07:13 -0700
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 08:37 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-06-07 09:09 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 11:17 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 09:31 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-06-08 06:41 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 09:09 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-06-08 21:31 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 11:41 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 06:28 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-06-09 08:15 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 11:57 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 12:17 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-09 21:36 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 12:56 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-09 22:36 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 13:48 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-09 23:30 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 14:50 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 13:01 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-12 07:02 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-07 18:42 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 11:20 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-07 20:28 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 11:41 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-07 21:08 +0200
          Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 11:45 -0700
  Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-06-04 17:15 +1000
    Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). HGW <hw@...> - 2016-06-06 11:42 +1000
      Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-06-06 23:11 +1000
        Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-06 17:08 +0200
          Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 10:50 -0700
            Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-06 20:03 +0200
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 12:18 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-06 21:37 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 14:58 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-06 23:35 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 03:50 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-07 04:12 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 05:03 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-07 18:40 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 05:19 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-07 05:31 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 06:02 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-07 06:07 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 16:15 -0700
      Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-06 11:45 -0700
        Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). HGW <hw@...> - 2016-06-07 10:09 +1000
          Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 19:05 -0700
            Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-08 07:11 +1000
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 17:10 -0700
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-06-08 01:48 +0000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-08 20:00 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 08:19 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-08 11:33 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-08 18:46 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 09:50 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-08 18:58 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 05:33 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-11 08:55 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-11 14:46 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). HGW <hw@...> - 2016-06-12 11:17 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-11 19:17 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-12 20:44 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-12 05:23 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-13 07:46 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-12 15:44 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-14 09:16 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-13 19:30 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-06-12 03:08 +0000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-12 20:49 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-06-13 03:06 +0000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-14 09:20 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-06-14 02:09 +0000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-06-12 05:16 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-13 07:48 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-06-13 07:17 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-14 09:25 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 11:00 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). HGW <hw@...> - 2016-06-21 09:18 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-20 16:47 -0700
          Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-06 22:16 -0500
            Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-06 23:35 -0700
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 03:47 -0700
            Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-08 07:07 +1000
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 16:30 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-08 20:05 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 08:20 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-08 11:58 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 12:32 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-12 16:15 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-13 07:59 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 10:07 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-28 20:21 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-29 00:36 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 08:04 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-29 23:40 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 09:27 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-30 06:36 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 15:46 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-30 07:44 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 16:52 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-30 20:54 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-30 08:20 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-30 23:48 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-02 05:56 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 15:49 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). HGW <hw@...> - 2016-07-02 10:19 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-29 06:44 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 09:30 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-29 08:48 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-29 11:02 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "Dr. Bob John" <drbobjohn@hotmail.org> - 2016-06-29 14:35 +0000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-07-01 14:18 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 14:57 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-02 06:25 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 15:55 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-07-03 22:56 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). PD <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 08:54 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-07-05 19:13 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). PD <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 10:45 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-07-05 20:49 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). PD <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 13:01 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-06 06:50 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 16:29 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-07 04:57 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-06 19:23 +0000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-06 14:46 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-07 07:07 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-06 16:25 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-07-05 23:02 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). PD <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> - 2016-07-06 13:19 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-07-06 23:28 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). PD <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> - 2016-07-06 14:39 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-07-06 23:57 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-09 07:40 -0700
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "Dr. Bob John" <drbobjohn@hotmail.org> - 2016-07-05 21:44 +0000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-02 06:04 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-10 09:03 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-09 07:13 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 16:18 -0500
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-08 11:52 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-08 19:01 +0200
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-09 20:55 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 11:51 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-11 08:51 +1000
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 05:21 -0700
          Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-06 20:44 -0700
          Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-06 20:46 -0700
            Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-08 07:09 +1000
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 17:01 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-09 07:17 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 16:21 -0500
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-11 08:48 +1000
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 05:03 -0700
        Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-08 19:56 +1000
          Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 08:18 -0500
      Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-06-07 07:21 -0700
  Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-04 11:45 -0700
    Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-05 19:26 +1000
  Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kkhrapko@gmail.com - 2016-06-09 09:57 -0700
  Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). kkhrapko@gmail.com - 2016-06-09 10:01 -0700
    Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-09 13:04 -0700
      Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-13 08:21 +1000
        Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-12 15:47 -0700
          Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-14 09:30 +1000
            Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Neil <Neil@inethub.org> - 2016-06-14 00:12 +0000
              Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-06-15 05:32 +1000
                Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-14 12:58 -0700
  Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). astrofoton@interia.pl - 2016-07-08 12:25 -0700
    Re: Simple, Fundamental Question (probably too hard for dingleberries). "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-12 04:45 +1000

csiph-web