Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #409017

Re: MMX violates the second postulate

From	Emmaline Coots <ealoa@loealoioa.los>
Newsgroups	sci.physics.relativity
Subject	Re: MMX violates the second postulate
Date	2017-02-13 12:58 +0000
Organization	Emmaline Coots Institute
Message-ID	<o7sagn$347$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(6 earlier) <99130943.nniJfEyVGO@PointedEars.de> <5f06ba3d-0517-45a5-ab82-9d326197429a@googlegroups.com> <o7peeq$f3l$1@dont-email.me> <35300905-5d7f-451a-abe7-4705115fa2de@googlegroups.com> <o7rkqf$1jl$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

Poutnik wrote:

>> This inconsistency makes MMX an invalid experiment within SR. To me it
>> is valid and proves anisotropy.
> 
> There is no inconsistency, but inconsistency of your ideas wrt known
> experimental evidence.  Expectation the ignorance in math and physics
> leads to superior conclusions is foolish. Not being aware of it is not
> foolish, it is a diagnose.

Potty, you can't prove anything, much less General Relativity, 
which describes by tensors. You don't know tensors, Potty, hence 
you do not understand Relativity. Consequently, using your wording, 
your big mouth indicates a severe diagnose. Even know, you are not 
alone around here.

http://www.nature.com/news/long-awaited-mathematics-proof-could-help-scan-earth-s-innards-1.21439

Thread

MMX violates the second postulate Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-08 23:57 -0800
  Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 19:06 +1100
    Re: MMX violates the second postulate Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-09 00:11 -0800
      Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 19:14 +1100
        Re: MMX violates the second postulate Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-09 01:13 -0800
          Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 10:53 +0100
          Re: MMX violates the second postulate Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 08:39 -0600
            Re: MMX violates the second postulate Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-02-11 23:37 +0100
              Re: MMX violates the second postulate Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-12 01:53 -0800
                Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-12 11:22 +0100
                Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-12 11:48 +0100
                Re: MMX violates the second postulate Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-12 16:30 -0800
                Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 07:49 +0100
                Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-12 23:25 -0800
                Re: MMX violates the second postulate Emmaline Coots <ealoa@loealoioa.los> - 2017-02-13 12:58 +0000
                Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 08:52 +0100
                Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-13 00:18 -0800
                Re: MMX violates the second postulate Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-13 04:03 -0800
                Re: MMX violates the second postulate Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-12 08:45 -0600
                Re: MMX violates the second postulate Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-12 16:14 -0800
                Re: MMX violates the second postulate "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-13 08:19 -0800
          Re: MMX violates the second postulate "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-09 07:09 -0800
      Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 09:19 +0100
        Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 00:31 -0800
      Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 09:27 +0100
        Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 19:36 +1100
          Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 10:49 +0100
        Re: MMX violates the second postulate Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-09 01:16 -0800
          Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 10:58 +0100
            Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 02:13 -0800
          Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 21:38 +1100
    Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 09:13 +0100
    Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 00:30 -0800
      Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 19:32 +1100
        Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 00:41 -0800
          Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 20:00 +1100
            Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 01:13 -0800
              Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 21:39 +1100
                Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 03:09 -0800
                Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 22:25 +1100
                Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 03:57 -0800
                Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 23:53 +1100
                Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 05:38 -0800
                Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-10 10:52 +1100
                Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 23:29 -0800
        Re: MMX violates the second postulate benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-09 17:17 -0500
          Re: MMX violates the second postulate The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-02-11 10:20 -0800
  Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 09:09 +0100
  Re: MMX violates the second postulate Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 08:37 -0600
    Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 08:16 -0800
  Re: MMX violates the second postulate "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-09 07:07 -0800
  Re: MMX violates the second postulate numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-11 15:11 -0800
    Re: MMX violates the second postulate Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-12 01:46 -0800

csiph-web