Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #418393 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-05-06 07:41 -0700 |
| Last post | 2017-05-11 08:03 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 321 — 28 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-06 07:41 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-06 16:43 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-06 07:51 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-06 08:08 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-06 08:37 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-13 13:44 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-06 17:25 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2017-05-06 08:35 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Prijzen Sörözésekre <ouwu@wueidewliiut.te> - 2017-05-06 15:56 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-06 08:57 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Prijzen Sörözésekre <ouwu@wueidewliiut.te> - 2017-05-06 16:27 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-06 09:35 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Kého Resované <knau@wjf2op.we> - 2017-05-06 16:50 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-05-07 01:56 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-06 09:38 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-06 09:58 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-06 10:06 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-06 10:29 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-06 11:00 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-06 12:51 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-06 13:44 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-06 14:30 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-06 14:52 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-06 15:53 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 09:33 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 18:47 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-07 19:07 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 10:27 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-07 19:57 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Bordamos Alamidade <dd@dsmdawo.ab> - 2017-05-07 18:03 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 19:34 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 10:40 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-07 10:45 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Bordamos Alamidade <dd@dsmdawo.ab> - 2017-05-07 17:46 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-07 10:55 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 19:55 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-07 12:04 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-07 12:11 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 13:01 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-07 13:06 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 13:10 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-07 13:38 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 13:48 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math polyfrag@gmail.com - 2017-05-07 14:37 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-07 23:51 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-08 09:04 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-05-08 09:37 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-08 10:28 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-07 13:33 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Bordamos Alamidade <dd@dsmdawo.ab> - 2017-05-07 21:01 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 22:39 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 13:53 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 23:29 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Bordamos Alamidade <dd@dsmdawo.ab> - 2017-05-07 20:54 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 07:51 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-06 12:06 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-06 13:11 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-06 14:26 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 09:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 19:09 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 10:36 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 19:51 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Bordamos Alamidade <dd@dsmdawo.ab> - 2017-05-07 17:57 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-07 21:27 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 22:45 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Bordamos Alamidade <dd@dsmdawo.ab> - 2017-05-07 20:58 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Bordamos Alamidade <dd@dsmdawo.ab> - 2017-05-07 17:49 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 19:58 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Bordamos Alamidade <dd@dsmdawo.ab> - 2017-05-07 18:01 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-05-07 20:57 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-07 10:18 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-07 10:24 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2017-05-07 14:16 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 14:30 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-07 20:10 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-08 08:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-05-08 09:39 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-08 10:23 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math polyfrag@gmail.com - 2017-05-08 10:15 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-08 12:35 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-08 11:53 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-08 12:37 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-08 13:06 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-08 13:21 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 15:33 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-08 14:16 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 07:48 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-09 16:59 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 08:17 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-09 17:38 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 09:18 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-09 18:20 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 09:24 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-09 18:26 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 09:37 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-09 18:41 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 09:58 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-09 19:01 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 12:59 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-16 11:15 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-16 12:55 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-16 13:03 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-05-16 13:12 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-16 16:10 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-19 06:22 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 08:39 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-19 07:01 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-19 16:30 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-19 10:03 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-19 23:18 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 12:05 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-19 13:09 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Houchiko Inatsuki <uatci@swckskuwe.io> - 2017-05-19 20:19 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math anne <0140519@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 13:43 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-20 05:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 16:17 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-19 07:04 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-19 10:04 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-19 10:04 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-16 18:54 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 10:57 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-16 19:31 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-17 12:53 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-18 05:05 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-18 05:31 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-18 06:20 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-18 06:23 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-18 06:40 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-18 06:30 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-18 06:51 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-17 12:51 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-17 15:31 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-17 23:11 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-18 20:21 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-18 12:44 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-18 19:14 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-18 17:26 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-18 23:29 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-17 14:27 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-17 14:39 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-17 14:53 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-17 14:29 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 09:03 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-17 13:01 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-16 21:43 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-16 16:11 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-16 22:31 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-17 20:53 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 15:37 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-18 20:20 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-09 09:35 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 09:45 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-09 10:01 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 13:08 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-09 13:52 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-09 13:52 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 15:03 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-09 15:13 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-09 16:19 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 08:17 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-05-10 09:11 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 09:34 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-10 12:59 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 12:04 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-10 18:51 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-10 23:31 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-05-10 11:55 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-10 14:10 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-11 15:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-10 17:10 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 08:35 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-10 17:31 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-11 08:20 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-11 16:30 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-11 16:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-12 06:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-12 07:47 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-12 09:23 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-05-12 09:31 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-12 10:18 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-12 15:12 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-12 10:24 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-12 11:45 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-12 14:03 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-12 17:12 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-12 17:14 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-12 15:40 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-13 07:18 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-13 08:17 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-13 08:34 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-13 08:43 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-13 09:13 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-13 12:14 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 15:27 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 13:47 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-14 04:03 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-13 12:07 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-13 22:37 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-13 14:45 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-13 20:21 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-13 21:02 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-13 22:27 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 11:34 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-14 05:22 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-14 05:51 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 19:57 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-14 12:13 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-14 13:12 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-15 21:34 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-15 13:47 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-15 15:45 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-15 16:53 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-15 23:16 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-16 04:40 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-16 06:20 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-16 06:58 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Houchiko Inatsuki <uatci@swckskuwe.io> - 2017-05-14 10:49 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Houchiko Inatsuki <uatci@swckskuwe.io> - 2017-05-13 14:37 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-13 17:21 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Houchiko Inatsuki <uatci@swckskuwe.io> - 2017-05-13 18:33 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-12 16:22 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-12 21:11 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-09 16:13 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 08:41 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 08:57 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 09:23 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 09:33 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 10:43 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-09 17:07 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-09 17:09 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 08:12 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 08:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-10 17:41 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-10 17:42 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 08:45 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 11:54 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 10:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 11:56 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 12:26 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 12:32 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 13:38 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-10 22:45 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Jean-Pierre Framboise <nctede@pmdcehr.cc> - 2017-05-10 21:00 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 14:29 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 20:10 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-11 08:29 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-11 17:39 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 08:43 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 17:52 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-11 09:19 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 18:25 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-11 09:30 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-11 18:30 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-11 09:36 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-11 19:21 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math shuba <thailao2558@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 22:03 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-12 11:45 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-12 03:06 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 18:28 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-12 06:52 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-12 09:21 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-12 09:33 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-12 10:04 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-12 19:39 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-12 10:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-12 15:13 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-12 20:50 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 18:47 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-11 19:19 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 18:28 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 18:25 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 16:27 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 15:31 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-09 16:50 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-11 19:57 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 14:24 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-12 21:47 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-12 16:27 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-12 23:40 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 08:33 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-13 22:26 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 19:16 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 10:57 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-14 16:46 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-15 21:55 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-15 16:46 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-16 21:59 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-15 16:47 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-16 21:43 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-18 15:50 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-19 20:22 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-19 12:31 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-19 12:33 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-19 12:39 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-20 10:27 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-20 05:09 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 08:33 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-13 22:05 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 19:03 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 11:24 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-14 16:49 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-14 16:50 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Jean-Pierre Framboise <nctede@pmdcehr.cc> - 2017-05-11 19:33 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-11 13:08 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Houchiko Inatsuki <uatci@swckskuwe.io> - 2017-05-11 21:16 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-12 20:56 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-11 13:05 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 16:07 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 15:07 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Larry Harson <johnmcandrew66@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 13:14 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 15:20 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-08 13:31 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 15:35 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Larry Harson <johnmcandrew66@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 15:27 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 08:08 -0700
Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-09 08:27 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 09:23 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-09 17:23 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 08:04 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-10 15:35 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-11 08:03 -0700
Page 1 of 17 [1] 2 3 … 17 Next page →
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-06 07:41 -0700 |
| Subject | Reality versus Math |
| Message-ID | <688e020d-7e51-49b7-abfd-ea9083e387c9@googlegroups.com> |
Yesterday, I put my paper "Time Dilation without Relativity" on viXra.org. Here's the link: http://vixra.org/pdf/1505.0234v4.pdf The paper uses SOLID EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE to show that mathematicians are arguing TOTAL NONSENSE when they claim that Time Dilation is reciprocal and/or "just an illusion." I had submitted the paper to a journal which was about to publish it when they notified me that it would cost me $508 to publish. Buried deep in one of their web pages was a single sentence that said that authors must pay $127 per published page to offset printing costs. I'd failed to notice that, and I withdrew the paper. I'm not in a "publish or perish" situation, and my only interest is in trying to figure out how science got into a situation where experiments are ignored and NONSENSE mathematics is what is taught in schools. Together with my paper http://vixra.org/pdf/1704.0256v2.pdf which is about Einstein's Second Postulate, it is clear that SOLID EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE is being ignored in physics classes and they are instead teaching TOTAL NONSENSE. I'm posting the links to the papers here in hopes someone might suggest a good way to get these papers read by the scientific community. What (non-pay) journal would be best for them? Ed Lake
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-06 16:43 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <oekne3$k9p$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #418393 |
Op 06-mei-2017 om 16:41 schreef Ed Lake: > Yesterday, I put my paper "Time Dilation without Relativity" on > viXra.org. Here's the link: http://vixra.org/pdf/1505.0234v4.pdf > > The paper uses SOLID EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE to show that > mathematicians are arguing TOTAL NONSENSE when they claim that Time > Dilation is reciprocal and/or "just an illusion." > > I had submitted the paper to a journal which was about to publish it > when they notified me that it would cost me $508 to publish. Buried > deep in one of their web pages was a single sentence that said that > authors must pay $127 per published page to offset printing costs. > I'd failed to notice that, and I withdrew the paper. I'm not in a > "publish or perish" situation, and my only interest is in trying to > figure out how science got into a situation where experiments are > ignored and NONSENSE mathematics is what is taught in schools. > > Together with my paper http://vixra.org/pdf/1704.0256v2.pdf which is > about Einstein's Second Postulate, it is clear that SOLID > EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE is being ignored in physics classes and they > are instead teaching TOTAL NONSENSE. > > I'm posting the links to the papers here in hopes someone might > suggest a good way to get these papers read by the scientific > community. What (non-pay) journal would be best for them? > > Ed Lake > Try the journal that published this: http://www.superfrink.net/athenaeum/www.apa.org/journals/psp/psp7761121.html Dirk Vdm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-06 07:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c480b1c4-ebcd-43d3-bd90-b59f52c15115@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #418395 |
Just title it "Physics without mathematics"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-06 08:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b707a371-7337-49ae-a125-e4529e00842a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #418399 |
On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 9:51:09 AM UTC-5, David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller wrote: > Just title it > "Physics without mathematics" Interestingly, I have a book in my personal library titled "Physics without Mathematics," by Clarence E. Bennett. I've had it for decades. It was copyrighted in 1949. I also have a pdf copy of the book "Relativity Simply Explained" by Martin Gardner. It fully supports what I've been saying. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-06 08:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4ebb33d9-7574-4d15-85a8-9e1fffd65ffa@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #418402 |
Ed Gibbered On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 9:51:09 AM UTC-5, David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller wrote: > Just title it > "Physics without mathematics" Interestingly, I have a book in my personal library titled "Physics without Mathematics," by Clarence E. Bennett. I've had it for decades. It was copyrighted in 1949. I also have a pdf copy of the book "Relativity Simply Explained" by Martin Gardner. It fully supports what I've been saying. Ed The Following REQUIRES Mathematics https://goo.gl/photos/dKKZprgx7LDxooaF8
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-13 13:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4ec13ed5-2015-4327-b787-d4c1dbf10917@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #418409 |
The Cretin Brother of Ken Seto, Eduardo Del Lago https://i.imgflip.com/1oz8gy.jpg
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@example.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-06 17:25 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <oekptq$o0g$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #418393 |
Le 06/05/2017 à 16:41, Ed Lake a écrit : > Yesterday, I put my paper "Time Dilation without Relativity" on viXra.org. It is bullshit from start to end.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-06 08:35 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <491faffb-cfc5-4706-b96a-8f137e837b53@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #418393 |
El sábado, 6 de mayo de 2017, 11:41:18 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > Yesterday, I put my paper "Time Dilation without Relativity" on viXra.org. Here's the link: http://vixra.org/pdf/1505.0234v4.pdf > > The paper uses SOLID EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE to show that mathematicians are arguing TOTAL NONSENSE when they claim that Time Dilation is reciprocal and/or "just an illusion." > > I had submitted the paper to a journal which was about to publish it when they notified me that it would cost me $508 to publish. Buried deep in one of their web pages was a single sentence that said that authors must pay $127 per published page to offset printing costs. I'd failed to notice that, and I withdrew the paper. I'm not in a "publish or perish" situation, and my only interest is in trying to figure out how science got into a situation where experiments are ignored and NONSENSE mathematics is what is taught in schools. > > Together with my paper http://vixra.org/pdf/1704.0256v2.pdf which is about Einstein's Second Postulate, it is clear that SOLID EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE is being ignored in physics classes and they are instead teaching TOTAL NONSENSE. > > I'm posting the links to the papers here in hopes someone might suggest a good way to get these papers read by the scientific community. What (non-pay) journal would be best for them? > > Ed Lake You can try Springer journals. Here is a list of them with impact factors http://www.springer.com/gp/impact-factor-2015/if-physics Probably the journal Physics in Perspective is the most related to your papers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prijzen Sörözésekre <ouwu@wueidewliiut.te> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-06 15:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oekrn8$r79$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #418408 |
Paparios wrote: >> I'm posting the links to the papers here in hopes someone might suggest >> a good way to get these papers read by the scientific community. What >> (non-pay) journal would be best for them? Ed Lake > > You can try Springer journals.Here is a list of them with impact factors > http://www.springer.com/gp/impact-factor-2015/if-physics > Probably the journal Physics in Perspective is the most related to your > papers. It reveals you don't know what is going on in Physics. Sending something through an university, you are expected to travel to a three days international conference later on. Or you don't have international conferences, taking place periodically, on your capitalist continent??
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-06 08:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4b874cec-6e45-4e3a-b838-8ba1d3e6bbd7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #418408 |
On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 10:35:44 AM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > El sábado, 6 de mayo de 2017, 11:41:18 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > Yesterday, I put my paper "Time Dilation without Relativity" on viXra.org. Here's the link: http://vixra.org/pdf/1505.0234v4.pdf > > > > The paper uses SOLID EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE to show that mathematicians are arguing TOTAL NONSENSE when they claim that Time Dilation is reciprocal and/or "just an illusion." > > > > I had submitted the paper to a journal which was about to publish it when they notified me that it would cost me $508 to publish. Buried deep in one of their web pages was a single sentence that said that authors must pay $127 per published page to offset printing costs. I'd failed to notice that, and I withdrew the paper. I'm not in a "publish or perish" situation, and my only interest is in trying to figure out how science got into a situation where experiments are ignored and NONSENSE mathematics is what is taught in schools. > > > > Together with my paper http://vixra.org/pdf/1704.0256v2.pdf which is about Einstein's Second Postulate, it is clear that SOLID EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE is being ignored in physics classes and they are instead teaching TOTAL NONSENSE. > > > > I'm posting the links to the papers here in hopes someone might suggest a good way to get these papers read by the scientific community. What (non-pay) journal would be best for them? > > > > Ed Lake > > You can try Springer journals. > > Here is a list of them with impact factors > > http://www.springer.com/gp/impact-factor-2015/if-physics > > Probably the journal Physics in Perspective is the most related to your papers. Thanks very much. For some reason, that journal isn't on the list I created. I don't know why. I probably thought it was an "open access" journal. I see that "open access" (pay to publish) is just an option. I'll check it out. Thanks again. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prijzen Sörözésekre <ouwu@wueidewliiut.te> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-06 16:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oekti2$11np$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #418412 |
Ed Lake wrote: >> Probably the journal Physics in Perspective is the most related to your >> papers. > > Thanks very much. For some reason, that journal isn't on the list I > created. I don't know why. I probably thought it was an "open access" > journal. I see that "open access" (pay to publish) is just an option. > I'll check it out. Thanks again. Ed You are battling windmills. Forget it. You have to be a nepot of another nepot, working as a secretary, uber-secretary and crap like that. It's capitalism, baby. The former universities no need professors anymore, nor assistants, associated and so on. Those days are passee. You have no chance. Your wish is like a time travel into the past. Unachievable. Just forget it. And move on.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-06 09:35 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6e2b635d-7f22-41ab-b879-ac7d5d1d4d4f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #418412 |
On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 10:57:14 AM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote: > On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 10:35:44 AM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > El sábado, 6 de mayo de 2017, 11:41:18 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > Yesterday, I put my paper "Time Dilation without Relativity" on viXra.org. Here's the link: http://vixra.org/pdf/1505.0234v4.pdf > > > > > > The paper uses SOLID EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE to show that mathematicians are arguing TOTAL NONSENSE when they claim that Time Dilation is reciprocal and/or "just an illusion." > > > > > > I had submitted the paper to a journal which was about to publish it when they notified me that it would cost me $508 to publish. Buried deep in one of their web pages was a single sentence that said that authors must pay $127 per published page to offset printing costs. I'd failed to notice that, and I withdrew the paper. I'm not in a "publish or perish" situation, and my only interest is in trying to figure out how science got into a situation where experiments are ignored and NONSENSE mathematics is what is taught in schools. > > > > > > Together with my paper http://vixra.org/pdf/1704.0256v2.pdf which is about Einstein's Second Postulate, it is clear that SOLID EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE is being ignored in physics classes and they are instead teaching TOTAL NONSENSE. > > > > > > I'm posting the links to the papers here in hopes someone might suggest a good way to get these papers read by the scientific community. What (non-pay) journal would be best for them? > > > > > > Ed Lake > > > > You can try Springer journals. > > > > Here is a list of them with impact factors > > > > http://www.springer.com/gp/impact-factor-2015/if-physics > > > > Probably the journal Physics in Perspective is the most related to your papers. > > Thanks very much. For some reason, that journal isn't on the list I created. I don't know why. I probably thought it was an "open access" journal. I see that "open access" (pay to publish) is just an option. I'll check it out. > > Thanks again. > > Ed Ah! I see. It's a Swiss journal. That is why I didn't put it on my list. But, I see now I should have included it - and probably a lot of journals from other countries. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kého Resované <knau@wjf2op.we> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-06 16:50 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oekutj$13ih$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #418417 |
Ed Lake wrote: > Ah! I see. It's a Swiss journal. That is why I didn't put it on my > list. But, I see now I should have included it - and probably a lot of > journals from other countries. Ed How about the $RECYCLE.BIN, a hidden folder?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-07 01:56 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <46702256.nE0WNdEWbH@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #418423 |
The ’nym-shifting troll trolled as "Kého Resované": > Ed Lake wrote: >> Ah! I see. It's a Swiss journal. That is why I didn't put it on my >> list. But, I see now I should have included it - and probably a lot of >> journals from other countries. Ed > > How about the $RECYCLE.BIN, a hidden folder? [x] You only know Microsoft Windows. [psf 2.8] *PLONK* -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dancouriann@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-06 09:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e6ef5689-b58f-41b7-9fa1-31e861d84eae@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #418393 |
On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 7:41:18 AM UTC-7, Ed Lake wrote: > I'm posting the links to the papers here in hopes someone > might suggest a good way to get these papers read by the > scientific community. What (non-pay) journal would be best > for them? I think what you're seeking is to get your papers published in a reputable peer-reviewed journal. (Note that 'Physics Essays' is not a reputable journal - in fact, it is highly disreputable - so you were wise to back away from them.) The main difficulty you face is that your papers could not get through peer review at any reputable journal. In fact, a quick reading of your papers makes this so obvious that any editor of a reputable journal would not even bother sending them out for review. This is not because of your lack of qualifications, it's because your papers are filled with obvious errors and misconceptions, both in terms of the history and in terms of the physics. Let's take just one example. You say LIDAR guns disprove special relativity. The problem is that LIDAR guns work by measuring the timing of reflected pulses, and then they compute the speed of the target object based on the premise that the speed of light has the invariant value c. (The reflected pulses arrive closer together because they travel less distance as the target object gets closer.) The speed computed from this premise turns out to be correct, so the successful operation of LIDAR guns obviously does not disprove the premise that the speed of light is c. To the contrary, it provides evidence in favor of that premise. So, when you claim that LIDAR disproves special relativity, you are obviously mistaken. Any reputable journal would require you to remove that erroneous section from your paper. Unfortunately, the same goes for every other section, so there wouldn't be any paper left. This is the basic problem with getting your papers published in a reputable journal. I think posting them online is the best you can do, at least until you significantly improve your papers by removing all the errors.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-06 09:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <92e2b214-2d50-40e8-a29a-4967be63d640@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #418419 |
On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 11:38:36 AM UTC-5, danco...@gmail.com wrote: > On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 7:41:18 AM UTC-7, Ed Lake wrote: > > I'm posting the links to the papers here in hopes someone > > might suggest a good way to get these papers read by the > > scientific community. What (non-pay) journal would be best > > for them? > > I think what you're seeking is to get your papers published in a reputable peer-reviewed journal. (Note that 'Physics Essays' is not a reputable journal - in fact, it is highly disreputable - so you were wise to back away from them.) > > The main difficulty you face is that your papers could not get through peer review at any reputable journal. In fact, a quick reading of your papers makes this so obvious that any editor of a reputable journal would not even bother sending them out for review. This is not because of your lack of qualifications, it's because your papers are filled with obvious errors and misconceptions, both in terms of the history and in terms of the physics. > > Let's take just one example. You say LIDAR guns disprove special relativity. The problem is that LIDAR guns work by measuring the timing of reflected pulses, and then they compute the speed of the target object based on the premise that the speed of light has the invariant value c. (The reflected pulses arrive closer together because they travel less distance as the target object gets closer.) The speed computed from this premise turns out to be correct, so the successful operation of LIDAR guns obviously does not disprove the premise that the speed of light is c. To the contrary, it provides evidence in favor of that premise. > > So, when you claim that LIDAR disproves special relativity, you are obviously mistaken. Any reputable journal would require you to remove that erroneous section from your paper. Unfortunately, the same goes for every other section, so there wouldn't be any paper left. This is the basic problem with getting your papers published in a reputable journal. I think posting them online is the best you can do, at least until you significantly improve your papers by removing all the errors. I do NOT say or even imply that "LIDAR guns disprove special relativity." Your analysis is totally wrong. The paper does not say or even suggest that the speed of light is not c. It simply disproves the absurd notion that ALL OBSERVERS will measure light to travel at c, regardless of their own motion. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dancouriann@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-06 10:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a07de96f-a537-458a-b019-09cd000d3244@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #418424 |
On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 9:58:08 AM UTC-7, Ed Lake wrote: > I do NOT say or even imply that "LIDAR guns disprove special > relativity." Great. So when you say there is experimental evidence disproving special relativity, what evidence are you referring to? > The paper does not say or even suggest that the speed > of light is not c. Excellent. > It simply disproves the absurd notion that ALL OBSERVERS will > measure light to travel at c, regardless of their own motion. The problem is that if we perform the LIDAR calculation in terms of any system of inertial coordinates, including the coordinates in which the target is at rest, and apply the premise that the speed of light is c in terms of those coordinates, we get exactly the same answer. So this does not disprove the premise that the speed of light is c in terms of every system of inertial coordinates. To the contrary, it provides experimental support for that premise. So, any reputable journal would require you to remove that erroneous section... along with all the others.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-06 10:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1eb36426-1636-422e-b201-1205f7e496c8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #418427 |
On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 12:06:47 PM UTC-5, danco...@gmail.com wrote: > On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 9:58:08 AM UTC-7, Ed Lake wrote: > > I do NOT say or even imply that "LIDAR guns disprove special > > relativity." > > Great. So when you say there is experimental evidence disproving special relativity, what evidence are you referring to? > Can't you read? I do NOT say or even imply that "there is experimental evidence disproving special relativity." You are posting NONSENSE. > > The paper does not say or even suggest that the speed > > of light is not c. > > Excellent. > > > It simply disproves the absurd notion that ALL OBSERVERS will > > measure light to travel at c, regardless of their own motion. > > The problem is that if we perform the LIDAR calculation in terms of any system of inertial coordinates, including the coordinates in which the target is at rest, and apply the premise that the speed of light is c in terms of those coordinates, we get exactly the same answer. So this does not disprove the premise that the speed of light is c in terms of every system of inertial coordinates. To the contrary, it provides experimental support for that premise. So, any reputable journal would require you to remove that erroneous section... along with all the others. The LIDAR gun doesn't have access to different coordinates or frames of reference. It only has IT'S frame of reference. You are complicating things with irrelevant information and mistaken beliefs. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-06 11:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f739c141-3f79-47b0-856c-9bbc3fe35f9e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #418431 |
On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 11:29:16 AM UTC-6, Ed Lake wrote: > > The LIDAR gun doesn't have access to different coordinates or frames of > reference. It only has IT'S frame of reference. What if you put it in a car moving at 50 MPH? Suppose you had two of them, both calibrated to read exactly the same on the ground, one in the car and one on the ground, the former pointed at a tree ahead of you and the latter pointed at the car. Do you believe they would give different readings? > You are complicating things with irrelevant information and mistaken > beliefs. > > Ed Pot, kettle, black.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-06 12:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <da146849-4307-4446-90c1-149dd02be005@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #418433 |
On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 1:00:02 PM UTC-5, Gary Harnagel wrote: > On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 11:29:16 AM UTC-6, Ed Lake wrote: > > > > The LIDAR gun doesn't have access to different coordinates or frames of > > reference. It only has IT'S frame of reference. > > What if you put it in a car moving at 50 MPH? Suppose you had two of them, > both calibrated to read exactly the same on the ground, one in the car and > one on the ground, the former pointed at a tree ahead of you and the latter > pointed at the car. Do you believe they would give different readings? > > > You are complicating things with irrelevant information and mistaken > > beliefs. > > > > Ed > > Pot, kettle, black. You make NO SENSE. "What if you put it in a car moving at 50 MPH?" "Put" WHAT "in" WHERE? "Suppose you had two of them,..." Two of WHAT? .."both calibrated to read exactly the same on the ground ..." Gibberish! What are you calibrating? "... one in the car and one on the ground, .." One WHAT in the car and one WHAT on the ground? "..the former pointed at a tree ahead of you and the latter pointed at the car." More GIBBERISH. There are RADAR guns that work with a moving police car. There may be LIDAR guns that do the same thing. The gun is pointed at a speeding vehicle, and it sends out radio waves (or light pulses) toward the speeder, while another part of the gun does the same thing toward the ground moving under the police car. The gun is thus able to add or subtract the speed of the police car from the speed of the car at which the gun is aimed. The problem with RADAR guns was that the radio waves covered too much territory and thus it was difficult to determine which car on a busy highway was being measured by the gun as the speeding car. LIDAR has a better focus and can be more easily pointed at a single car on a highway filled with vehicles. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 17 [1] 2 3 … 17 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web