Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #380588 > unrolled thread
| Started by | HGW <hw@...> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-04-01 11:06 +1100 |
| Last post | 2016-06-04 04:06 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 209 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-01 11:06 +1100
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-31 18:46 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-04-01 13:04 +1100
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 07:35 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-09 13:15 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-10 04:06 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-11 04:28 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-11 17:28 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-11 11:33 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-11 20:17 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-11 12:10 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 14:18 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-11 20:28 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-11 12:17 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-11 20:32 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-24 20:13 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 09:03 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 11:58 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-14 10:03 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-14 15:52 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-24 20:07 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 08:53 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 08:26 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-11 04:35 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 07:44 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-11 06:26 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 09:01 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-11 07:28 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 10:52 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Jack Chardy <jackc@outlool.org> - 2016-07-11 16:19 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-11 17:43 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-11 11:29 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 13:43 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-11 12:01 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 14:09 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 08:28 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-11 17:52 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-11 17:37 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-04-02 08:42 +1100
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-04-02 16:43 +1100
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-02 19:23 +1100
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-04-02 19:40 +1100
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@home.com> - 2016-04-02 22:09 +1100
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-02 12:20 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-02 19:58 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Bimpy <pimp@pimp.com> - 2016-04-02 18:22 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-04-03 07:53 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-03 11:10 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@home.com> - 2016-04-03 21:13 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-03 06:04 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-03 15:14 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Bimpy <pimp@pimp.com> - 2016-04-03 15:10 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Bimpy <pimp@pimp.com> - 2016-04-03 15:20 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2016-04-16 07:12 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-16 07:52 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2016-04-16 09:31 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-16 15:16 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2016-04-16 20:15 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-17 04:37 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2016-04-17 06:41 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-17 10:34 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2016-04-17 10:38 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-17 15:56 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-18 08:21 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-18 08:19 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 16:51 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 08:36 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-01 00:30 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 20:18 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-01 20:39 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-03 10:52 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-03 18:24 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-03 09:46 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-03 19:15 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-03 11:54 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-03 21:04 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-03 15:44 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-04 09:10 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-04 05:17 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-04 18:49 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-04 11:23 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-03 15:28 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@home.com> - 2016-04-04 03:35 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-03 18:40 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 06:07 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Apollo <nowhere@def.com> - 2016-04-04 07:28 -0600
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 08:42 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 07:43 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 11:08 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-04 17:09 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-05 07:20 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-05 16:03 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@home.com> - 2016-04-06 03:46 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-09 03:28 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-12 08:27 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-12 09:50 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-13 08:17 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 17:57 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-13 11:29 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 23:08 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-13 19:23 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 09:48 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-14 07:34 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-13 17:44 -0400
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-14 09:02 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-12 15:02 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-13 08:04 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-13 09:23 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-13 19:35 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-13 23:16 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-14 07:49 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-14 10:39 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-14 21:29 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-14 15:13 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-15 14:19 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-15 21:48 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-16 10:31 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-16 15:13 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-17 09:10 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-16 22:19 -0400
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-17 18:45 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-17 04:58 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-16 20:25 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-17 09:16 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-17 18:47 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-13 14:49 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-14 08:12 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-14 13:57 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-15 14:26 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-15 14:54 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-16 04:29 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-18 03:48 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-18 14:40 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-18 14:50 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-04-18 18:18 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-19 04:44 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-19 21:23 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-19 20:22 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-19 14:04 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-19 12:04 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-20 08:43 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-21 11:50 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-21 12:09 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-22 09:39 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-22 09:21 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-25 23:27 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@....> - 2016-04-27 05:25 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-27 22:08 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-28 08:02 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-28 15:07 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@....> - 2016-04-29 06:37 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-05-01 14:45 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-04 14:39 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-03 21:14 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-04-04 10:23 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 06:17 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 08:44 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 07:52 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 11:10 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-04 12:47 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-04-05 07:43 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-05 06:20 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@home.com> - 2016-04-05 21:20 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-05 15:02 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-05 09:15 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@home.com> - 2016-04-06 04:14 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-05 07:00 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 17:10 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-06 13:32 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 08:25 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-08 07:01 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 09:11 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-07 03:50 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 08:27 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-08 04:31 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 07:26 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-08 20:54 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 14:17 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-09 00:18 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-10 15:41 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-17 17:38 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-19 11:57 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-10 19:02 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-03 15:21 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-03 15:05 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@home.com> - 2016-04-04 03:43 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-03 21:47 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-04-04 10:26 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-04 23:00 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-03 05:57 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@home.com> - 2016-04-04 04:07 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-03 11:26 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-04-04 10:29 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-03 19:53 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hgw@...> - 2016-04-04 14:02 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-04 12:46 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-01 19:25 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Bimpy <pimp@pimp.com> - 2016-04-01 17:28 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-04-02 08:36 +1100
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-02 15:46 +0200
This is How it Happened...Summary PD <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 06:58 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Bimpy <pimp@pimp.com> - 2016-04-02 14:07 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-04-03 08:00 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-03 08:33 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-04-17 16:47 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-04-17 16:54 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-17 18:35 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary nero <oldogf@yahoo.it> - 2016-06-03 07:51 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary nero <oldogf@yahoo.it> - 2016-06-04 04:06 -0700
Page 8 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 Next page →
| From | HGW <hw@...> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-20 08:43 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <nf6ca1$ckf$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #381957 |
On 20/04/16 03:04, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 4/18/2016 8:18 PM, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > >> >> Domain Name: SCISITE.INFO >> Domain ID: D29703178-LRMS >> WHOIS Server: >> Referral URL: www.melbourneit.com.au >> Updated Date: 2015-08-26T21:02:43Z >> Creation Date: 2009-09-15T21:38:26Z >> Registry Expiry Date: 2016-09-15T21:38:26Z >> Sponsoring Registrar: Melbourne IT, Ltd >> Sponsoring Registrar IANA ID: 13 >> Domain Status: ok https://icann.org/epp#ok >> Registrant ID: B125303275498915 >> Registrant Name: Ralph Rabbidge >> Registrant Organization: Ralph Rabbidge >> Registrant Street: 8 Barlings Drive >> Registrant City: Tomakin >> Registrant State/Province: NSW >> Registrant Postal Code: 2537 >> Registrant Country: AU >> Registrant Phone: +61.732492500 >> Registrant Phone Ext: >> Registrant Fax: +61.738322604 >> Registrant Fax Ext: >> Registrant Email: rmrab at bigpond.com >> Admin ID: B125303275498913 >> Admin Name: Ralph Rabbidge >> Admin Organization: Ralph Rabbidge >> Admin Street: 8 Barlings Drive >> Admin City: Tomakin >> Admin State/Province: NSW >> Admin Postal Code: 2537 >> Admin Country: AU >> Admin Phone: +61.732492500 >> Admin Phone Ext: >> Admin Fax: +61.732492633 >> Admin Fax Ext: >> Admin Email: rmrab at bigpond.com >> Tech ID: B125303275498914 >> Tech Name: Hostmaster Telstra >> Tech Organization: Telstra Corporation >> Tech Street: Level 5 >> Tech Street: 400 George St >> Tech City: Sydney >> Tech State/Province: NSW >> Tech Postal Code: 2000 >> Tech Country: AU >> Tech Phone: +61.286552942 >> Tech Phone Ext: >> Tech Fax: +61.282252998 >> Tech Fax Ext: >> Tech Email: domainadmin at server-dns.com >> Billing ID: A12530376603336 >> Billing Name: Hostmaster Telstra >> Billing Organization: Telstra Corporation >> Billing Street: Level 5 >> Billing Street: 400 George St >> Billing City: Sydney >> Billing State/Province: NSW >> Billing Postal Code: 2000 >> Billing Country: AU >> Billing Phone: +61.286552942 >> Billing Phone Ext: >> Billing Fax: +61.282252998 >> Billing Fax Ext: >> Billing Email: domainadmin at server-dns.com >> Name Server: BR-DNS10.TMNS.NET.AU >> Name Server: BR-DNS11.TMNS.NET.AU >> Name Server: SJ-DNS01.TMNS.NET.AU >> DNSSEC: unsigned >>>>> Last update of WHOIS database: 2016-04-16T05:02:54Z <<< > > 8 Barlings Road in Tomakin is the one with the dirt driveway. No doubt > an irritation to the neighbors. Fully explained several years ago after my old colleague Rabbo died. There are two houses on 8 Barlings drive. Rabbo and I built holiday homes here and shared the same internet, in his name. I haven't bothered to change that. Rabbo's son still uses the other house occasionally. He is a prominant professional and has the same initial. I live in Canberra most of the time. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-21 11:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nfa7p5$i69$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #381975 |
On 20.04.2016 00:43, HGW wrote: > On 20/04/16 03:04, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 4/18/2016 8:18 PM, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: >>> >>> Domain Name: SCISITE.INFO >>> Domain ID: D29703178-LRMS >>> WHOIS Server: >>> Referral URL: www.melbourneit.com.au >>> Updated Date: 2015-08-26T21:02:43Z >>> Creation Date: 2009-09-15T21:38:26Z >>> Registry Expiry Date: 2016-09-15T21:38:26Z >>> Sponsoring Registrar: Melbourne IT, Ltd >>> Sponsoring Registrar IANA ID: 13 >>> Domain Status: ok https://icann.org/epp#ok >>> Registrant ID: B125303275498915 >>> Registrant Name: Ralph Rabbidge >>> Registrant Organization: Ralph Rabbidge >>> Registrant Street: 8 Barlings Drive >>> Registrant City: Tomakin >>> Registrant State/Province: NSW >>> Registrant Postal Code: 2537 >>> Registrant Country: AU >>> Registrant Phone: +61.732492500 >>> Registrant Phone Ext: >>> Registrant Fax: +61.738322604 >>> Registrant Fax Ext: >>> Registrant Email: rmrab at bigpond.com >>> Admin ID: B125303275498913 >>> Admin Name: Ralph Rabbidge >>> Admin Organization: Ralph Rabbidge >>> Admin Street: 8 Barlings Drive >>> Admin City: Tomakin >>> Admin State/Province: NSW >>> Admin Postal Code: 2537 >>> Admin Country: AU >>> Admin Phone: +61.732492500 >>> Admin Phone Ext: >>> Admin Fax: +61.732492633 >>> Admin Fax Ext: >>> Admin Email: rmrab at bigpond.com >>> Tech ID: B125303275498914 >>> Tech Name: Hostmaster Telstra >>> Tech Organization: Telstra Corporation >>> Tech Street: Level 5 >>> Tech Street: 400 George St >>> Tech City: Sydney >>> Tech State/Province: NSW >>> Tech Postal Code: 2000 >>> Tech Country: AU >>> Tech Phone: +61.286552942 >>> Tech Phone Ext: >>> Tech Fax: +61.282252998 >>> Tech Fax Ext: >>> Tech Email: domainadmin at server-dns.com >>> Billing ID: A12530376603336 >>> Billing Name: Hostmaster Telstra >>> Billing Organization: Telstra Corporation >>> Billing Street: Level 5 >>> Billing Street: 400 George St >>> Billing City: Sydney >>> Billing State/Province: NSW >>> Billing Postal Code: 2000 >>> Billing Country: AU >>> Billing Phone: +61.286552942 >>> Billing Phone Ext: >>> Billing Fax: +61.282252998 >>> Billing Fax Ext: >>> Billing Email: domainadmin at server-dns.com >>> Name Server: BR-DNS10.TMNS.NET.AU >>> Name Server: BR-DNS11.TMNS.NET.AU >>> Name Server: SJ-DNS01.TMNS.NET.AU >>> DNSSEC: unsigned >>>>>> Last update of WHOIS database: 2016-04-16T05:02:54Z <<< >>>>> >> 8 Barlings Road in Tomakin is the one with the dirt driveway. No doubt >> an irritation to the neighbors. > > Fully explained several years ago after my old colleague Rabbo died. > There are two houses on 8 Barlings drive. Rabbo and I built holiday > homes here and shared the same internet, in his name. I haven't bothered > to change that. Rabbo's son still uses the other house occasionally. He > is a prominant professional and has the same initial. > > I live in Canberra most of the time. | On 14.05.2010 22:53, Henry Wilson DSc wrote: |> On Fri, 14 May 2010 01:48:36 +0200, YBM<ybmess@nooos.fr.invalid> wrote: |> |>> Henry Wilson DSc a écrit : |>>> |>>> Hey, I'm the one they call 'Ralph Rabbidge'. ...because he was my old mate |>>> before he died. |>> |>> You're lying, Ralph: you still are on the yellow pages. |> |> That's his grandson R M Rabbidge is still in the phone book Phone: (02) 4471 7965 Address: 8 Barlings Drv, Tomakin NSW 2537 But you don't know if R M Rabbidge is your late friend Rabbo's son or grandson? :-D Ralph, when you are lying it is important to remember your previous lies so you don't contradict yourself. -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-21 12:09 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nfb1fl$1i0o$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #382047 |
On 4/21/2016 4:50 AM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > Ralph, when you are lying it is important to remember > your previous lies so you don't contradict yourself. You forget that this doesn't matter to someone who has lost the last remaining shred of dignity. Ralph is rather shameless nowadays about lying for the hell of it. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <hw@...> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-22 09:39 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <nfbob7$m8b$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #382051 |
On 22/04/16 03:09, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 4/21/2016 4:50 AM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> Henry, when you are lying it is important to remember >> your previous lies so you don't contradict yourself. > > You forget that this doesn't matter to someone who has lost the last > remaining shred of dignity. Henry is rather shameless nowadays about > lying for the hell of it. What was that, Paul? How many other aliases do you have now?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <hw@...> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-22 09:21 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <nfbnac$l7j$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #382047 |
On 21/04/16 19:50, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > On 20.04.2016 00:43, HGW wrote: >> >> Fully explained several years ago after my old colleague Rabbo died. >> There are two houses on 8 Barlings drive. Rabbo and I built holiday >> homes here and shared the same internet, in his name. I haven't bothered >> to change that. Rabbo's son still uses the other house occasionally. He >> is a prominant professional and has the same initial. >> >> I live in Canberra most of the time. > > | On 14.05.2010 22:53, Henry Wilson DSc wrote: > |> On Fri, 14 May 2010 01:48:36 +0200, YBM<ybmess@nooos.fr.invalid> wrote: > |> > |>> Henry Wilson DSc a écrit : > |>>> > |>>> Hey, I'm the one they call 'Ralph Rabbidge'. ...because he was my > old mate > |>>> before he died. > |>> > |>> You're lying, Ralph: you still are on the yellow pages. > |> > |> That's his grandson > > R M Rabbidge is still in the phone book > Phone: (02) 4471 7965 > Address: 8 Barlings Drv, Tomakin NSW 2537 That is Robert Rabbidge...but he must remain anonymous because of his position. He could send you to jail if he wanted to. > But you don't know if R M Rabbidge is your late friend > Rabbo's son or grandson? :-D > > Ralph, when you are lying it is important to remember > your previous lies so you don't contradict yourself. We have had no reason to change the website we still share. You wont find me in Canberra because I live in my lady friend's house.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-25 23:27 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nfm23e$1uj$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #382068 |
On 22.04.2016 01:21, HGW wrote: > On 21/04/16 19:50, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> On 20.04.2016 00:43, HGW wrote: > >>> >>> Fully explained several years ago after my old colleague Rabbo died. >>> There are two houses on 8 Barlings drive. Rabbo and I built holiday >>> homes here and shared the same internet, in his name. I haven't bothered >>> to change that. Rabbo's son still uses the other house occasionally. He >>> is a prominant professional and has the same initial. >>> >>> I live in Canberra most of the time. >> >> | On 14.05.2010 22:53, Henry Wilson DSc wrote: >> |> On Fri, 14 May 2010 01:48:36 +0200, YBM<ybmess@nooos.fr.invalid> >> wrote: >> |> >> |>> Henry Wilson DSc a écrit : >> |>>> >> |>>> Hey, I'm the one they call 'Ralph Rabbidge'. ...because he was my >> old mate >> |>>> before he died. >> |>> >> |>> You're lying, Ralph: you still are on the yellow pages. >> |> >> |> That's his grandson >> >> R M Rabbidge is still in the phone book >> Phone: (02) 4471 7965 >> Address: 8 Barlings Drv, Tomakin NSW 2537 > > That is Robert Rabbidge So this Ralph Malcom Rabbidge: http://www.patentlookup.com.au/patents/341921 is living together with his son Ralph Malcom Rabbidge and his grandson Ralph Malcom Rabbidge and a fourth anonymous person named Robert M Rabbidge? >...but he must remain anonymous because of his > position. He could send you to jail if he wanted to. Wouldn't he rather send you to jail because you have revealed his name on internet? > >> But you don't know if R M Rabbidge is your late friend >> Rabbo's son or grandson? :-D >> >> Ralph, when you are lying it is important to remember >> your previous lies so you don't contradict yourself. > > We have had no reason to change the website we still share. > You wont find me in Canberra because I live in my lady friend's house. > So you are still sharing a website with a dead person? -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <HGW@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 05:25 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <nfofbq$1ojh$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #382265 |
On 26/04/16 07:27, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > On 22.04.2016 01:21, HGW wrote: > So you are still sharing a website with a dead person? In matters relating to Telco services of any kind, it is advisable to never try to change a system that works.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-27 22:08 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nfr68l$hdp$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #382301 |
On 26.04.2016 21:25, HGW wrote: > On 26/04/16 07:27, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > >> So you are still sharing a website with a dead person? > > In matters relating to Telco services of any kind, it is advisable to > never try to change a system that works. > > Give it up, Ralph. We all know that the real name of the person who is posting under the pseudonyms HGW and Henry Wilson is: Ralph Malcom Rabbidge Phone: (02) 4471 7965 Address: 8 Barlings Drv, Tomakin NSW 2537 -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <hw@...> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-28 08:02 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <nfrcss$131m$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #382364 |
On 28/04/16 06:08, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > On 26.04.2016 21:25, HGW wrote: >> On 26/04/16 07:27, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> >>> So you are still sharing a website with a dead person? >> >> In matters relating to Telco services of any kind, it is advisable to >> never try to change a system that works. >> >> > > Give it up, Ralph. > We all know that the real name of the person who is > posting under the pseudonyms HGW and Henry Wilson is: > Ralph Malcom Rabbidge > Phone: (02) 4471 7965 > Address: 8 Barlings Drv, Tomakin NSW 2537 That's my nephew-in-law, Robert. He only visits occasionally now. So do I. 8 and 8a are our holiday homes. I live mainly in Kaleen, Canberra, in my girlfriend's house.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-28 15:07 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nft1tv$ai8$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #382371 |
On 28.04.2016 00:02, HGW wrote: > On 28/04/16 06:08, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> >> Give it up, Ralph. >> We all know that the real name of the person who is >> posting under the pseudonyms HGW and Henry Wilson is: >> Ralph Malcom Rabbidge >> Phone: (02) 4471 7965 >> Address: 8 Barlings Drv, Tomakin NSW 2537 > > That's my nephew-in-law, Robert. He only visits occasionally now. So do > I. 8 and 8a are our holiday homes. I live mainly in Kaleen, Canberra, in > my girlfriend's house. So the real name of the person who is posting under the pseudonym HGW is Robert, and he is the nephew-in-law of HGW, which make HGW be nephew-in-law of himself. And since the anonymous Robert is the late Rabbo's son, and Robert also is the person who is posting under the pseudonym HGW, HGW must be the late Rabbo's son. So HWG and Robert have the name and address: name: Ralph Malcom Rabbidge Phone: (02) 4471 7965 Address: 8 Barlings Drv, Tomakin NSW 2537 But the Ralph Malcom Rabbidge who is the late Rabbo's grandson, also has the name and address: name: Ralph Malcom Rabbidge Phone: (02) 4471 7965 Address: 8 Barlings Drv, Tomakin NSW 2537 Have I got it now, Ralph (or was it Robert?) -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <HGW@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-29 06:37 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <nftsae$upc$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #382391 |
On 28/04/16 23:07, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > On 28.04.2016 00:02, HGW wrote: >> That's my nephew-in-law, Robert. He only visits occasionally now. >> So do I. 8 and 8a are our holiday homes. I live mainly in Kaleen, >> Canberra, in my girlfriend's house. > > So the real name of the person who is posting under the pseudonym > HGW is Robert, and he is the nephew-in-law of HGW, which make HGW be > nephew-in-law of himself. And since the anonymous Robert is the late > Rabbo's son, and Robert also is the person who is posting under the > pseudonym HGW, HGW must be the late Rabbo's son. We have had no reason to change the internet account. Experience with computers has shown that if one has a system that works, never attempt to change it. > So HWG and Robert have the name and address: name: Ralph Malcom > Rabbidge Phone: (02) 4471 7965 Address: 8 Barlings Drv, Tomakin NSW > 2537 There is 8 Barlings Drive and 8a Barlings Drive, We subdivided the original block. You will never know which is my half and which is his. > > But the Ralph Malcom Rabbidge who is the late Rabbo's grandson, also > has the name and address: name: Ralph Malcom Rabbidge Phone: (02) > 4471 7965 Address: 8 Barlings Drv, Tomakin NSW 2537 > > Have I got it now, Ralph (or was it Robert?) Apparently genealogy is not your strong point. I explained once before that Rabbo's son married my daughter, Her name was Wilson too, you know.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-01 14:45 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ng4tpj$44d$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #382419 |
On 28.04.2016 22:37, HGW wrote: > > We have had no reason to change the internet account. Experience with > computers has shown that if one has a system that works, never attempt > to change it. Quite. And Telstra Corporation will accept payment of the domain 'scisite' from a person who has been dead for several years. -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-04 14:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ndtuar$kfj$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #380868 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 2:40:47 PM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote: >> No, Lorenz started off with the assumption of an aether and came to a >> conclusion, the LT. Einstein went an entirely different route, one that >> didn't involve any aether (as he explicitly stated) and came up with a >> mathematically identical solution. >Idiot....the inertial frame in SR is just another name for different >location in the stationary ether, No, LET may have such an assumption, but SR does not. Einstein explicitly stated that an aether isn't required for his theory AT ALL. His SR does _not_ need it, much less assume it. The only time aether is mentioned in his SR paper of 1905 was where he stated an aether was completely unnecessary and won't be used. So why won't you learn SR, Ken? Don't you think you should learn SR before you try to "improve" it with IRT? Instead you post incorrect crap such as trying to attach obsolete concepts such as aether to SR. All you are doing is to make people laugh at you, and at IRT.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-03 21:14 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1498297.Kngbc5MIqC@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #380831 |
HGW wrote: > On 04/04/16 01:28, Michael Moroney wrote: >> HGW <HGW@home.com> writes: >>>> Conclusion: You have not the slightest clue what you are talking about. >>> Well, I knew this would be too hard for anyone here. Einstein used the >>> word superfluous... and he was right...as long as the speed of all light >>> in space was presumed to be unified, ie was source independent, the >>> aether frame did not need to be mentioned. >> So here you agree with Einstein in his 1905 paper that there is no need >> for any aether. > > Of course. Having included the aether's fundamental role as part of P2, > Einstein had no need to mention it by name. Utter nonsense. >>> By stating that light speed was independent of the movement of its >>> source in his P2, Einstein was accepting the existence of the absolute >>> aether. >> >> No, Henry, you cannot read. Einstein writes: "The introduction of a >> 'luminiferous ether' will prove to be superfluous inasmuch as the view >> here to be developed will not require an 'absolutely stationary space' >> provided with special properties, nor assign a velocity-vector to a point >> of the empty space in which electromagnetic processes take place." >> He explicitly states there is no need of any special 'absolutely >> stationary space', and explicitly states that points in empty space do >> not have a velocity, explicitly ruling out any aether. > > That is what I said. […] No, it is not. What you said does not even come a light-year close to what Einstein says. You have not the slightest shadow of a trace of a clue what you are blathering about. Einstein says there that his theory (“the view to be developed”) neither assumes nor requires or uses *any* of the luminiferous (i.e., light- supporting) (a)ethers that had been conceived of before (neither of which could be experimentally confirmed; Einstein is explicitly referring to the null result of the Michelson–Morley experiment). The “*introduction*” of such an ether “will prove to be superfluous”. In plain English: The theory works *without* such a medium. He says that (the) special (theory of) relativity (that the theory, of which the cited one is the first paper, had come to be called) neither assumes nor requires an ether against which movement could be measured, which would be an “absolutely stationary space”. And he says that it neither assumes nor requires an ether that would be dragged with a moving body, the kind of ether for which “a velocity-vector to a point of the empty space in which electromagnetic processes take place [would be] [assigned].” Bottom line: Einstein says that an ether is _not_ a requirement for his theory: he does _not_ assume it, he does _not_ need it; it is a *superfluous* concept to him there. You say that an ether is a requirement for and a part of Einstein’s theory. That is a contradiction. Now, what have you been smoking to believe that you know Einstein’s theory better than Einstein? PointedEars -- Q: What did the nuclear physicist post on the laboratory door when he went camping? A: 'Gone fission'. (from: WolframAlpha)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <xxx@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-04 10:23 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ovb3gb9m5d1lg0r6ansuanvn9d5mgun2f9@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #380840 |
On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 21:14:13 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote: >>>> By stating that light speed was independent of the movement of its >> That is what I said. […] > >No, it is not. What you said does not even come a light-year close to what >Einstein says. You have not the slightest shadow of a trace of a clue what >you are blathering about. > >Einstein says there that his theory (“the view to be developed”) neither >assumes nor requires or uses *any* of the luminiferous (i.e., light- >supporting) (a)ethers that had been conceived of before (neither of which >could be experimentally confirmed; Einstein is explicitly referring to the >null result of the Michelson–Morley experiment). The “*introduction*” of >such an ether “will prove to be superfluous”. In plain English: The theory >works *without* such a medium. Well it works as well as Lorentz's theory because he simply replaced the speed unifying medium with a postulate. It is still well and truly incorporated in SR as a fundamental requirement...he just doesn't have to mention it because postulate says it all. Einstein was an expert conartist...and idiots like you have been well and truly deceived by his smooth talk. >He says that (the) special (theory of) relativity (that the theory, of which >the cited one is the first paper, had come to be called) neither assumes nor >requires an ether against which movement could be measured, which would be >an “absolutely stationary space”. And he says that it neither assumes nor >requires an ether that would be dragged with a moving body, the kind of >ether for which “a velocity-vector to a point of the empty space in which >electromagnetic processes take place [would be] [assigned].” Then why the hell did he admit later that his whole theory would collapse if the aether did not exist? >Bottom line: > >Einstein says that an ether is _not_ a requirement for his theory: he does >_not_ assume it, he does _not_ need it; it is a *superfluous* concept to him >there. He doesn't have to call it 'aether'or anything else. His second postulate says it is automatically incorporated. How else could light speed be independent of source speed? Nobody at the time except Walter Ritz and his followers believed that light was not just a traveling wave in an absolute medium. Ritz's version of relativity was the true one. >You say that an ether is a requirement for and a part of Einstein’s theory. >That is a contradiction. It is a fundamental assumption. It follows directly from Lorentz's theory. Lorentz also knew that the aether APPEARED TO BE superfluous after he developed his maths a bit more. >Now, what have you been smoking to believe that you know Einstein’s theory >better than Einstein? I don't want to know Einstein's theory better than the man did himself, I'm quite content to know why it is bullshit from start to finish. >PointedEars, hollow head...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-04 06:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <870d731c-9f57-45e6-b3c7-458a9a33f2b4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #380840 |
On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 3:14:16 PM UTC-4, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> HGW wrote:
>
> > On 04/04/16 01:28, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> HGW <HGW@home.com> writes:
> >>>> Conclusion: You have not the slightest clue what you are talking about.
> >>> Well, I knew this would be too hard for anyone here. Einstein used the
> >>> word superfluous... and he was right...as long as the speed of all light
> >>> in space was presumed to be unified, ie was source independent, the
> >>> aether frame did not need to be mentioned.
> >> So here you agree with Einstein in his 1905 paper that there is no need
> >> for any aether.
> >
> > Of course. Having included the aether's fundamental role as part of P2,
> > Einstein had no need to mention it by name.
>
> Utter nonsense.
>
> >>> By stating that light speed was independent of the movement of its
> >>> source in his P2, Einstein was accepting the existence of the absolute
> >>> aether.
> >>
> >> No, Henry, you cannot read. Einstein writes: "The introduction of a
> >> 'luminiferous ether' will prove to be superfluous inasmuch as the view
> >> here to be developed will not require an 'absolutely stationary space'
> >> provided with special properties, nor assign a velocity-vector to a point
> >> of the empty space in which electromagnetic processes take place."
> >> He explicitly states there is no need of any special 'absolutely
> >> stationary space', and explicitly states that points in empty space do
> >> not have a velocity, explicitly ruling out any aether.
> >
> > That is what I said. [...]
>
> No, it is not. What you said does not even come a light-year close to what
> Einstein says. You have not the slightest shadow of a trace of a clue what
> you are blathering about.
>
> Einstein says there that his theory ("the view to be developed") neither
> assumes nor requires or uses *any* of the luminiferous (i.e., light-
> supporting) (a)ethers that had been conceived of before (neither of which
> could be experimentally confirmed; Einstein is explicitly referring to the
> null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment). The "*introduction*" of
> such an ether "will prove to be superfluous". In plain English: The theory
> works *without* such a medium.
>
> He says that (the) special (theory of) relativity (that the theory, of which
> the cited one is the first paper, had come to be called) neither assumes nor
> requires an ether against which movement could be measured, which would be
> an "absolutely stationary space". And he says that it neither assumes nor
> requires an ether that would be dragged with a moving body, the kind of
> ether for which "a velocity-vector to a point of the empty space in which
> electromagnetic processes take place [would be] [assigned]."
>
> Bottom line:
>
> Einstein says that an ether is _not_ a requirement for his theory: he does
> _not_ assume it, he does _not_ need it; it is a *superfluous* concept to him
> there.
Idiot....the inertial frame in SR is just another name for the ether frame. Think about it....there is no inertial frame exists on earth. That means that both SR and LET used the ether frame to derive their math and that's why they have the same math.
>
> You say that an ether is a requirement for and a part of Einstein's theory.
> That is a contradiction.
>
> Now, what have you been smoking to believe that you know Einstein's theory
> better than Einstein?
>
>
> PointedEars
> --
> Q: What did the nuclear physicist post on the laboratory door
> when he went camping?
> A: 'Gone fission'.
> (from: WolframAlpha)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-04 08:44 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ndtr39$1lq3$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #380870 |
On 4/4/2016 8:17 AM, kenseto wrote: > Idiot....the inertial frame in SR is just another name for the ether > frame. Think about it....there is no inertial frame exists on earth. That's simply not true. What's true is that no reference frame that is not moving relative to the ground is inertial. That does NOT mean there is no inertial frames available on earth. They are frames moving relative to the ground. > That means that both SR and LET used the ether frame to derive their math > and that's why they have the same math. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-04 07:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1354a745-2aa9-4d78-a664-c36e11500761@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #380875 |
On Monday, April 4, 2016 at 9:44:13 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 4/4/2016 8:17 AM, kenseto wrote: > > Idiot....the inertial frame in SR is just another name for the ether > > frame. Think about it....there is no inertial frame exists on earth. > > That's simply not true. What's true is that no reference frame that is > not moving relative to the ground is inertial. ROTFLOL.....so you are saying that "no reference frame" on earth is inertial....right? >That does NOT mean there > is no inertial frames available on earth. They are frames moving > relative to the ground. There is no inertial frame in a gravitational field. The SR inertial frame is imaginary.....it is just another name for the ether frame and that's why SR and LET derived the same math using the ether frame.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-04 11:10 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ndu3m9$60n$6@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #380881 |
On 4/4/2016 9:52 AM, kenseto wrote: > On Monday, April 4, 2016 at 9:44:13 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 4/4/2016 8:17 AM, kenseto wrote: >>> Idiot....the inertial frame in SR is just another name for the ether >>> frame. Think about it....there is no inertial frame exists on earth. >> >> That's simply not true. What's true is that no reference frame that is >> not moving relative to the ground is inertial. > > ROTFLOL.....so you are saying that "no reference frame" on earth is inertial....right? No, not saying that at all. Please reread what I said. I said "no reference frame that is not moving relative to the ground" is inertial. That's different from "no reference frame" on earth is inertial. > >> That does NOT mean there >> is no inertial frames available on earth. They are frames moving >> relative to the ground. > > There is no inertial frame in a gravitational field. The SR inertial frame is imaginary. That's simply not true. There are certainly inertial reference frames in a gravitational field. Any frame freely falling in a gravitational field is inertial. > ....it is just another name for the ether frame and that's why SR and LET derived the same math using the ether frame. > > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-04 12:47 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nIqdnawRNbAKNZ_KnZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #380885 |
On 4/4/16 4/4/16 - 11:10 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 4/4/2016 9:52 AM, kenseto wrote: >> On Monday, April 4, 2016 at 9:44:13 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> On 4/4/2016 8:17 AM, kenseto wrote: >>>> Idiot....the inertial frame in SR is just another name for the ether >>>> frame. Think about it....there is no inertial frame exists on earth. >>> That's simply not true. What's true is that no reference frame that is >>> not moving relative to the ground is inertial. >> ROTFLOL.....so you are saying that "no reference frame" on earth is >> inertial....right? > > No, not saying that at all. Please reread what I said. I said "no reference > frame that is not moving relative to the ground" is inertial. That's different > from "no reference frame" on earth is inertial. Hmmmm. One must be more precise, as the meaning of "inertial frame" has CHANGED. In Newtonian mechanics and in SR, by definition an inertial frame is ASSUMED to extend forever in all directions and in time, so each one covers the (infinite) manifold being used to model the universe. That assumption was not challenged until Einstein was well along the road from SR to GR. In GR we know that no such "inertial frame" can exist in the world we inhabit. The problem is with implicitly extending it forever in all directions and in time, not with what "inertial" means. In GR, there are LOCALLY inertial frames whose maximum extent depends on how accurately they should be inertial (i.e. what measurement resolution is applicable). And as I keep emphasizing, almost all laboratory experiments can be analyzed using SR and a locally inertial frame. The lab does not extend forever. It is true that in the world we inhabit there are no inertial frames in the sense of NM and SR -- there never were (but this was not realized until after 1915). There most definitely are locally inertial frames in the sense of GR; indeed one can ALWAYS find an infinite set of them [#] everywhere and everywhen. They all share the property that they are freely falling, and thus near earth's surface none are at rest relative to the ground. [#] And the members of each set are related by Lorentz transforms. Note that an "ether frame" has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with this, and there _IS_ no "ether" in either SR or GR. This is so regardless of how a few illiterate people attempt to interpret some of Einstein's casual remarks. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web