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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #370504 > unrolled thread

Re: Where is the center of the universe?

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-20 17:45 -0600
    Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-20 23:48 -0800
      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 10:27 +0100
        Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 05:13 -0500
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 12:57 +0100
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 13:44 -0500
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 20:01 +0100
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 14:17 -0500
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 20:01 +0100
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 14:22 -0500
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-21 12:08 -0800
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-11-21 10:56 -0800
      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 08:05 -0600
        Re: Where is the center of the universe? Jack Monaco <jacksh@umbertopal.org> - 2015-11-21 14:18 +0000
        Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 13:48 -0500
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-11-23 10:21 -0600
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-23 17:34 +0100
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-23 11:31 -0800
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-23 15:54 -0500
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-11-23 13:04 -0800
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-23 13:43 -0800
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-23 16:49 -0500
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-23 16:17 -0800
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-24 16:52 -0500
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 22:24 +0000
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? underante <underante@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-24 15:24 -0800
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 23:43 +0000
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-30 09:55 -0500
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-12-02 12:50 +0100
    Re: Where is the center of the universe? dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-21 06:43 -0500
      Re: There's nothing special about the start of "the big bang". benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 13:45 -0500
        Re: There's nothing special about the start of "the big bang". Edward Stansfield <stansfield5REM6@linuxmail.org> - 2015-11-21 14:11 -0500
      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-21 20:37 +0000
        Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-21 21:06 -0800
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-22 11:43 +0000
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 09:01 -0500
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-22 14:59 +0000
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-22 07:12 -0800
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Walter Ilinois <walin@wej98j5q.org> - 2015-11-22 16:00 +0000
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-22 08:18 -0800
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Walter Ilinois <walin@wej98j5q.org> - 2015-11-22 17:50 +0000
                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 12:38 -0800
                          Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 14:12 -0800
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-22 23:07 +0000
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-22 16:22 -0800
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-23 22:09 +0000
                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-23 15:15 -0800
                          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 12:01 +0000
                            Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-24 04:52 -0800
                              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 14:33 +0000
                                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-24 07:05 -0800
                                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 15:23 +0000
                                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Jack Monaco <jacksh@umbertopal.org> - 2015-11-24 16:30 +0000
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-22 14:02 -0800
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 16:32 -0600
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-22 22:52 +0000
      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-11-23 10:51 -0600
        Re: Where is the center of the universe? dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-24 17:07 -0500
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 14:21 -0800
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 23:14 +0000
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 16:27 -0800
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-25 01:50 +0000
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 18:18 -0800
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-24 21:44 -0800
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 07:53 -0800
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-25 12:39 +0000
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-24 22:48 +0000
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-24 21:47 -0800
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-25 10:32 +0000
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-11-25 03:03 -0800
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-25 09:47 -0800
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-25 23:31 +0000
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 19:28 -0600
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2015-11-25 21:37 -0700
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-28 23:52 +0100
                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-12-01 21:52 -0800
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> - 2015-11-26 00:36 -0500
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-27 01:33 +0000
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-25 21:36 -0800
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-26 14:22 -0800
                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-26 14:27 -0800
                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-27 00:48 +0000
                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-26 17:34 -0800
                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-11-26 23:49 -0800
                          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-27 04:39 -0800
                            Re: Where is the center of the universe? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-11-27 04:54 -0800
                              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-27 05:11 -0800
                                Re: Where is the center of the universe? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-11-27 06:02 -0800
                          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-28 16:08 +0100
                            Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-28 17:51 +0100
                              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-29 00:20 +0100
                                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-29 11:10 +0100
                                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-29 11:45 +0100
                                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-29 13:01 +0100
                                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-29 04:55 -0800
                                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-29 14:33 +0100
                                          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-29 06:24 -0800
                                            Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-29 15:50 +0100
                                              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-29 07:06 -0800
                                                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-29 16:11 +0100
                                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-29 04:56 -0800
                                      Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-29 05:48 -0800
                                        Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-29 06:16 -0800
                                          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-30 22:50 +0100
                                            Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-30 16:27 -0800
                                              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-12-01 07:51 +0100
                                                Re: Where is the center of the universe? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2015-11-30 23:09 -0800
                                                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-12-01 08:31 +0100
                                            Re: Where is the center of the universe? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-12-01 00:15 -0800
          Re: Where is the center of the universe? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-11-25 09:59 -0600
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 11:16 -0500
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-11-25 11:02 -0600
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-11-25 09:07 -0800
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-11-25 09:16 -0800
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Jack Monaco <jacksh@umbBertopal.org> - 2015-11-25 17:37 +0000
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-25 18:47 +0100
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Jack Monaco <jacksh@umbBertopal.org> - 2015-11-25 18:11 +0000
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-25 10:06 -0800
                  Re: Where is the center of the universe? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 14:04 -0600
                    Re: Where is the center of the universe? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-11-25 23:09 -0800
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-11-25 17:50 +0100
            Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-25 10:01 -0800
              Re: Where is the center of the universe? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 14:05 -0600
                Re: Where is the center of the universe? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-25 12:42 -0800

Page 5 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7  Next page →

#370955

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> > >
> > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> > > >> The Starmaker amok-crossposted:
> > > >> > And Einstein already proved there is no PointedEars.
> > > >> In your dreams.
> > > >
> > > > From what I know...
> > > > It is written, that the people with PointedEars
> > > > are from the planet Vulcan.
> > >
> > > That would be _pointed ears_, and they could as well be from Barradas â…¢,
> > > Romulus, and a number of other Vulcan/Romulan/Debrune colonies ;-)
> > >
> > > > Einstein proved that the planet Vulcan doesn't exist.
> > >
> > > No, he did not.  He could not.  The fact aside that Einstein has concerned
> > > himself with far more important things at the time, like world peace and a
> > > unified theory without quantum mechanics, Star Trek and the idea of the
> > > planet Vulcan (1964) was not even conceived when Einstein lived (1879–1955).
> > >
> > > > That means there is no PointedEars.
> > >
> > > Ex falso quodlibet.
> > >
> > > PointedEars
> > > --
> > > Q: What happens when electrons lose their energy?
> > > A: They get Bohr'ed.
> > >
> > > (from: WolframAlpha)
> >
> > For a guy with PointedEars, you don't know much about your
> > planet...Vulcan:
> >
> > "Einstein, Destroyer of Worlds"
> >
> > Einstein went one better. With his pen he destroyed a planet, Vulcan,
> > and simultaneously “reimagined the cosmos.”
> >
> > Although general relativity encompasses the entire universe, Einstein in
> > 1915 decided to highlight its effects on the planet Mercury for a few
> > reasons, Mr. Levenson notes. General relativity predicts that massive
> > objects warp the space around them. The larger the object, the more
> > warping that occurs. And Mercury, the closest planet to the sun, would
> > therefore feel the effects of general relativity far more than other
> > planets.
> >
> > Equally important, Mr. Levenson writes, “Einstein had a perfectly fine
> > grasp of . . . intellectual combat,” and knew he needed to make a splash
> > to win people’s attention. Solving the mystery of Mercury’s
> > orbit—something Newton’s revered theory couldn’t do—would produce an
> > intellectual tsunami.
> >
> > So Einstein sat down to calculate, and watched as the correct orbit
> > popped right out of his equations—like “magic,” he said. Far from
> > playing it cool, Einstein felt his heart shudder at the sight, and said
> > that something “snapped” inside him. A friend later speculated that
> > resolving Mercury’s orbit was the most intense emotional experience of
> > Einstein’s scientific life, maybe even his entire life. As Mr. Levenson
> > writes, “It had been said of Le Verrier that he discovered a planet
> > [Neptune] at the tip of his pen.” Einstein went one better. With his pen
> > he destroyed a planet, Vulcan, and simultaneously “reimagined the
> > cosmos.”
> >
> > Throughout the book, Mr. Levenson seems intent on using Vulcan to make
> > grand pronouncements about science and the human condition. The planet
> > exposes “the human capacity to both discover and self-deceive.” It
> > provides “an object lesson in how easy it is to see what ought to be
> > rather than what is.” And so on. More aptly, he uses Vulcan to draw
> > several thought-provoking parallels to modern science. Just like with
> > Vulcan, physicists spent decades talking about the Higgs boson based on
> > the seeming “necessity” of it—the fact that modern theories said these
> > bosons must exist, even if no one had ever seen them. The Higgs
> > eventually proved real, but what about superstrings or cosmic inflation
> > or gravitational waves? We might not be as far removed from the foibles
> > of Vulcan-hunters as we think.
> 
> And when he delivered a talk detailing his calculations at the Prussian Academy of Sciences on Nov. 18, 1915 in Berlin, his “pen destroyed Vulcan
> 
>  THE HUNT FOR VULCAN:
> 
> . . . And How Albert Einstein Destroyed a Planet, Discovered Relativity, and Deciphered the Universe
> 
> By Thomas Levenson
> 
> How Albert Einstein Destroyed The Planet...Vulcan.
> 
> He also almost destroyed the earth:
> http://pw1.netcom.com/~starmaker/Albert_Einstein/Albert_Einstein_The-Man-Who-Built-The-Atomic-Bomb.html
> 


Scientific American eventually banned all new stories about Vulcan
“discoveries” in its pages.


i guess there is too muck kooks in the 'scientific community'...isn't
there? wat is a kook to do? discover global warming? banned those too!


ban all those kooks, and wat have you left? a bunch of turkeys...

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370958

“The Starmaker” wrote:

> For a guy with PointedEars, you don't know much about your
> planet...Vulcan:

Sadly, you have lost the sense to tell reality from fiction.

> "Einstein, Destroyer of Worlds"
> 
> Einstein went one better. With his pen he destroyed a planet, Vulcan,
> and simultaneously “reimagined the cosmos.”
> […]
> 
> 
> Although general relativity encompasses the entire universe, Einstein in
> 1915 decided to highlight its effects on the planet Mercury for a few
> reasons, Mr. Levenson notes.

So far that is correct and has nothing to do with the planet Vulcan which, 
mind you, is a *ficticious* planet (although maybe an example of a real one.  
Diane Duane, arguably only a writer of non-scientific books, has detailed 
the astronomical evolution of the planet Vulcan in several chapters of the 
Star Trek novel “Spock’s World” in a scientifically plausible way.  There 
may be desert planets that evolved that way.  One would have to check the 
Kepler data to determine if such a planet has been discovered.

But that has nothing to do with your nonsensical assumption that therefore 
it had to be inhabited by a humanoid lifeform with pointed ears.  Although 
one must admit the idea, and this has relevance to physics, that on a desert 
planet with a thin atmosphere such a form of ears could be an evolutionary 
advantage.)

> General relativity predicts that massive objects warp the space around 
> them.

That would have been be correct if you had said “space(-)time”.

> The larger the object, the more warping that occurs.

No, the more *mass* is concentrated within the *smaller* space, the greater 
the curvature of spacetime.

> And Mercury, the closest planet to the sun, would therefore feel the
> effects of general relativity far more than other planets.

Because Sol comprises about 99.86 % of the Sol system’s mass.

> Equally important, Mr. Levenson writes, “Einstein had a perfectly fine
> grasp of . . . intellectual combat,” and knew he needed to make a splash
> to win people’s attention. Solving the mystery of Mercury’s
> orbit—something Newton’s revered theory couldn’t do—would produce an
> intellectual tsunami.

The precession of the perihelion of Mercury was the perfect test for the 
general theory of relativity (GR) as a theory of gravity, because if GR 
could explain and predict that precisely, which Newtonian gravity failed to 
do, GR was undoubtedly the better of the two theories of gravity.  And, 
happily for Einstein, it did; if it did not, as I remember Lawrence Krauss 
saying, “Einstein would have thrown it out like yesterday’s newspaper”.  And 
that is what science is all about: The better theory, the one that explains 
and predicts observations better, wins.  Theories that make predictions that 
are worse with regard to that, are refined or replaced.

It is an historian’s fallacy to assume that Einstein chose Mercury for 
getting attention.  In fact, the record shows that Einstein was not keen and 
happy with becoming famous afterwards.  Reportedly (I just read this in the 
London Science Museum yesterday; a highly recommended place to visit, not 
just for Einstein), he said: “To punish me for my contempt for authority, 
Fate has made me an authority myself.”  (Einstein’s contempt for authority 
is well-documented; the Einstein Museum in Berne has more about that.)

> […]
> Throughout the book, Mr. Levenson seems intent on using Vulcan to make
> grand pronouncements about science and the human condition.

I am sure that either you misunderstood Levenson completely, or that he used 
a good premise and distorted it to fit his crackpot theories.

Now stop this mindbogglingly stupid crossposting across 4 newsgroups without 
Followup-To (especially to newsgroups that have nothing to do with the 
subject), and get a real name, or I stop discussing with you.


PointedEars
-- 
Q: Where are offenders sentenced for light crimes?  
A: To a prism.

(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370961

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> 
> “The Starmaker” wrote:
> 
> > For a guy with PointedEars, you don't know much about your
> > planet...Vulcan:
> 
> Sadly, you have lost the sense to tell reality from fiction.
> 
> > "Einstein, Destroyer of Worlds"
> >
> > Einstein went one better. With his pen he destroyed a planet, Vulcan,
> > and simultaneously “reimagined the cosmos.”
> > […]
> >
> >
> > Although general relativity encompasses the entire universe, Einstein in
> > 1915 decided to highlight its effects on the planet Mercury for a few
> > reasons, Mr. Levenson notes.
> 
> So far that is correct and has nothing to do with the planet Vulcan which,
> mind you, is a *ficticious* planet (although maybe an example of a real one.
> Diane Duane, arguably only a writer of non-scientific books, has detailed
> the astronomical evolution of the planet Vulcan in several chapters of the
> Star Trek novel “Spock’s World” in a scientifically plausible way.  There
> may be desert planets that evolved that way.  One would have to check the
> Kepler data to determine if such a planet has been discovered.
> 
> But that has nothing to do with your nonsensical assumption that therefore
> it had to be inhabited by a humanoid lifeform with pointed ears.  Although
> one must admit the idea, and this has relevance to physics, that on a desert
> planet with a thin atmosphere such a form of ears could be an evolutionary
> advantage.)

You are soooo wrong on so many points, it's not even worth pointing it out!


Even in 1938 War of the World broadcast peopla believed in Martians...why not Vulcans...with pointed ears??


Does your mailbox at home read 'PointedEars'???? I bet your dog has pointed ears..  


> 
> > General relativity predicts that massive objects warp the space around
> > them.
> 
> That would have been be correct if you had said “space(-)time”.
> 
> > The larger the object, the more warping that occurs.
> 
> No, the more *mass* is concentrated within the *smaller* space, the greater
> the curvature of spacetime.
> 
> > And Mercury, the closest planet to the sun, would therefore feel the
> > effects of general relativity far more than other planets.
> 
> Because Sol comprises about 99.86 % of the Sol system’s mass.
> 
> > Equally important, Mr. Levenson writes, “Einstein had a perfectly fine
> > grasp of . . . intellectual combat,” and knew he needed to make a splash
> > to win peopleÂ’s attention. Solving the mystery of MercuryÂ’s
> > orbit—something Newton’s revered theory couldn’t do—would produce an
> > intellectual tsunami.
> 
> The precession of the perihelion of Mercury was the perfect test for the
> general theory of relativity (GR) as a theory of gravity, because if GR
> could explain and predict that precisely, which Newtonian gravity failed to
> do, GR was undoubtedly the better of the two theories of gravity.  And,
> happily for Einstein, it did; if it did not, as I remember Lawrence Krauss
> saying, “Einstein would have thrown it out like yesterday’s newspaper”.  And
> that is what science is all about: The better theory, the one that explains
> and predicts observations better, wins.  Theories that make predictions that
> are worse with regard to that, are refined or replaced.
> 
> It is an historian’s fallacy to assume that Einstein chose Mercury for
> getting attention.  In fact, the record shows that Einstein was not keen and
> happy with becoming famous afterwards.  Reportedly (I just read this in the
> London Science Museum yesterday; a highly recommended place to visit, not
> just for Einstein), he said: “To punish me for my contempt for authority,
> Fate has made me an authority myself.”  (Einstein’s contempt for authority
> is well-documented; the Einstein Museum in Berne has more about that.)
> 
> > […]
> > Throughout the book, Mr. Levenson seems intent on using Vulcan to make
> > grand pronouncements about science and the human condition.
> 
> I am sure that either you misunderstood Levenson completely, or that he used
> a good premise and distorted it to fit his crackpot theories.
> 
> Now stop this mindbogglingly stupid crossposting across 4 newsgroups without
> Followup-To (especially to newsgroups that have nothing to do with the
> subject), and get a real name, or I stop discussing with you.
> 
> PointedEars
> --
> Q: Where are offenders sentenced for light crimes?
> A: To a prism.
> 
> (from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370966

W dniu piątek, 27 listopada 2015 01:49:02 UTC+1 użytkownik Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn napisał:
> “The Starmaker” wrote:
> 
> > For a guy with PointedEars, you don't know much about your
> > planet...Vulcan:
> 
> Sadly, you have lost the sense to tell reality from fiction.
> 
> > "Einstein, Destroyer of Worlds"
> > 
> > Einstein went one better. With his pen he destroyed a planet, Vulcan,
> > and simultaneously “reimagined the cosmos.”
> > […]
> > 
> > 
> > Although general relativity encompasses the entire universe, Einstein in
> > 1915 decided to highlight its effects on the planet Mercury for a few
> > reasons, Mr. Levenson notes.
> 
> So far that is correct and has nothing to do with the planet Vulcan which, 
> mind you, is a *ficticious* planet (although maybe an example of a real one.  
> Diane Duane, arguably only a writer of non-scientific books, has detailed 
> the astronomical evolution of the planet Vulcan in several chapters of the 
> Star Trek novel “Spock’s World” in a scientifically plausible way.  There 
> may be desert planets that evolved that way.  One would have to check the 
> Kepler data to determine if such a planet has been discovered.
> 
> But that has nothing to do with your nonsensical assumption that therefore 
> it had to be inhabited by a humanoid lifeform with pointed ears.  Although 
> one must admit the idea, and this has relevance to physics, that on a desert 
> planet with a thin atmosphere such a form of ears could be an evolutionary 
> advantage.)
> 
> > General relativity predicts that massive objects warp the space around 
> > them.
> 
> That would have been be correct if you had said “space(-)time”.
> 
> > The larger the object, the more warping that occurs.
> 
> No, the more *mass* is concentrated within the *smaller* space, the greater 
> the curvature of spacetime.
> 
> > And Mercury, the closest planet to the sun, would therefore feel the
> > effects of general relativity far more than other planets.
> 
> Because Sol comprises about 99.86 % of the Sol system’s mass.
> 
> > Equally important, Mr. Levenson writes, “Einstein had a perfectly fine
> > grasp of . . . intellectual combat,” and knew he needed to make a splash
> > to win people’s attention. Solving the mystery of Mercury’s
> > orbit—something Newton’s revered theory couldn’t do—would produce an
> > intellectual tsunami.
> 
> The precession of the perihelion of Mercury was the perfect test for the 
> general theory of relativity (GR) as a theory of gravity, because if GR 
> could explain and predict that precisely

Precise prediction is quite easy 100 years after something
is measured.
And about explaination - "Geometry!!!!  of SPACETIME!!!!!!!"
Wow.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370970

On Friday, November 27, 2015 at 12:49:04 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
>
> Precise prediction is quite easy 100 years after something
> is measured.
> And about explaination - "Geometry!!!!  of SPACETIME!!!!!!!"
> Wow.

"If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid." -- Naval Ops Manual

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370972

W dniu piątek, 27 listopada 2015 13:39:04 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał:
> On Friday, November 27, 2015 at 12:49:04 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
> >
> > Precise prediction is quite easy 100 years after something
> > is measured.
> > And about explaination - "Geometry!!!!  of SPACETIME!!!!!!!"
> > Wow.
> 
> "If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid." -- Naval Ops Manual

Unfortunately, your Shit is stupid and doesn't work.
Why do GPS clocks ignore your "standard" of a "proper 
clock"?
The reason is simple. It doesn't work. 
Common sense did warn your moronic guru.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370974

On Friday, November 27, 2015 at 5:54:23 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
>
> W dniu piątek, 27 listopada 2015 13:39:04 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał:
> >
> > On Friday, November 27, 2015 at 12:49:04 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
> > >
> > > Precise prediction is quite easy 100 years after something
> > > is measured.
> > > And about explaination - "Geometry!!!!  of SPACETIME!!!!!!!"
> > > Wow.
> > 
> > "If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid." -- Naval Ops Manual
> 
> Unfortunately, your Shit is stupid and doesn't work.

Unfortunately for YOU, you're a despicable liar.  As you have been informed,
no experiment has refuted GR and all have confirmed it.  To deny reality
puts you squarely in the stupid category.

> Why do GPS clocks ignore your "standard" of a "proper clock"?

The GPS embraces GR, as anyone with a smattering of sense knows.

> The reason is simple. It doesn't work.

What doesn't work is your pathetic sophistry.

> Common sense did warn your moronic guru.

You obviously have no sense of integrity at all.  Come back when you have
learned to be a decent human being instead of the ugly troll you are now.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#370977

W dniu piątek, 27 listopada 2015 14:11:35 UTC+1 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał:

> > > "If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid." -- Naval Ops Manual
> > 
> > Unfortunately, your Shit is stupid and doesn't work.
> 
> Unfortunately for YOU, you're a despicable liar.  As you have been informed,
> no experiment has refuted GR and all have confirmed it.

Unfortunately, it's a despicable lie. Common between
relativistic morons.

> > Why do GPS clocks ignore your "standard" of a "proper clock"?
> 
> The GPS embraces GR, as anyone with a smattering of sense knows.

But it ignores your moronic "standard" of "proper clocks".
Or, rather, it breaks your  moronic "standard" of "proper 
clocks". Because your moronic "standard" doesn't work, and 
it's so obvious, that even morons like you are not stupid 
enough to try defending it.
Common sense warned your moronic guru...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#371023

mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote:

> W dniu piątek, 27 listopada 2015 01:49:02 UTC+1 użytkownik Thomas
> 'PointedEars' Lahn napisał:
>> “The Starmaker” wrote:
>> > Equally important, Mr. Levenson writes, “Einstein had a perfectly fine
>> > grasp of . . . intellectual combat,” and knew he needed to make a
>> > splash to win people’s attention. Solving the mystery of Mercury’s
>> > orbit—something Newton’s revered theory couldn’t do—would produce an
>> > intellectual tsunami.
>> 
>> The precession of the perihelion of Mercury was the perfect test for the
>> general theory of relativity (GR) as a theory of gravity, because if GR
>> could explain and predict that precisely […]
> 
> Precise prediction is quite easy 100 years after something
> is measured.

Unfortunately, you still have no clue what you are talking about.

What you fail to understand is that, by *calculating* Mercury’s position 
using Newton’s law of universal gravitation, the result was always slightly 
off from where the planet was actually observed.  That puzzled researchers, 
first Urbain Le Verrier in 1859, because something was clearly missing.  One 
assumption made by astronomers in reply to his challenge, which I had been 
reminded of here, had been that Newtonian gravity is correct but there is a 
previously unknown moon of Mercury or another planet that is causing the 
perturbation of the orbit.  But no such moon or planet had been found.

And when Einstein used his field equations of GR for the calculations 
instead, without assuming an extra moon or planet, in 1915 (that was only 56 
years after Le Verrier’s discovery, not 100), Mercury’s position was 
*calculated* to be very closely where it was observed, much better than with 
Newtonian gravity theory.  Thus, GR was confirmed.

It was the first of many observations that confirmed GR.  Following ones 
include Eddington’s of the deflection of light by the Sun during the solar 
eclipse of 1919, and the Pound-Rebka experiment in 1959 that measured the 
gravitional redshift of light precisely as predicted by Einstein from the 
equivalence principle in 1907.  More recently, as you have been told 
numerous times before, satellite navigation like the GPS is based on the 
equations of both special relativity and GR (if it would not, all 
positioning data would be wrong), and we observe galaxies that formed 
shortly after the Big Bang based on general-relativistic redshift.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity>

> And about explaination - "Geometry!!!!  of SPACETIME!!!!!!!"

Get well soon.


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]

#371032

Użytkownik "Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn"  napisał w wiadomości grup 
dyskusyjnych:49985978.Bblok4DqYo@PointedEars.de...

|Unfortunately, you still have no clue what you are talking about.

Unfortunately, there is nothing hidden behind your yellings.


|What you fail to understand is that, by *calculating* Mercury’s position
|using Newton’s law of universal gravitation, the result was always slightly
|off from where the planet was actually observed.  That puzzled researchers,
|first Urbain Le Verrier in 1859, because something was clearly missing.

And 70 (not hundred, as I saifd before) years later Great Guru
"predicted" it. Wow.

|equivalence principle in 1907.  More recently, as you have been told
|numerous times before, satellite navigation like the GPS is based on the
|equations of both special relativity and GR (if it would not, all
|positioning data would be wrong),

How brilliantly and how precisely The Shit predicted, how  much its
idiotic standards will be pissed at. Really great.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#371050

Maciej Woźniak wrote:

> Użytkownik "Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn"  napisał w wiadomości grup
> dyskusyjnych:49985978.Bblok4DqYo@PointedEars.de...

It’s attribution line, not attribution novel.  When will you ever learn?

> > Unfortunately, you still have no clue what you are talking about.
>
> Unfortunately, there is nothing hidden behind your yellings.

Only nothing that you would accept, apparently.

> > What you fail to understand is that, by *calculating* Mercury’s position
> > using Newton’s law of universal gravitation, the result was always
> > slightly off from where the planet was actually observed.  That puzzled
> > researchers, first Urbain Le Verrier in 1859, because something was
> > clearly missing.
> 
> And 70 (not hundred, as I saifd before) years later Great Guru
> "predicted" it. Wow.

No, you seem to be positively challenged with understanding a simple concept 
such as prediction by calculation, which, sorry to break this to you, is the 
bread and butter of physics.  (Probably someone has told you this before: If 
you have a solid body, and you know where it has been and the mathematics of 
how it moves – i.e. its position as a function of time –, then you can 
predict where it is going to be at a certain time simply by calculating the 
function value for that time value.)

The EFEs do not only predict very closely where Mercury has been, but also 
*where it is now* and *where it will be*.  IOW, GR provides a good model to 
calculate *precisely* the orbit of that planet and of other planets (Mercury 
is not the only planet in the Sol system and elsewhere whose perihelion 
moves) – at which Newtonian gravity theory, for centuries before the 
postulation of the EFEs and now for more than a century after that, had 
failed, fails and will continue to fail.


PointedEars
-- 
A neutron walks into a bar and inquires how much a drink costs.
The bartender replies, "For you? No charge."

(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#371064

Użytkownik "Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn"  napisał w wiadomości grup 
dyskusyjnych:1634481.LseP5FOuOW@PointedEars.de...

Maciej Woźniak wrote:

> Użytkownik "Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn"  napisał w wiadomości grup
> dyskusyjnych:49985978.Bblok4DqYo@PointedEars.de...

|It’s attribution line, not attribution novel.  When will you ever learn?

I don't care. When will you ever learn?

|No, you seem to be positively challenged with understanding a simple 
concept
|such as prediction by calculation, which, sorry to break this to you, is 
the
|bread and butter of physics.  (Probably someone has told you this before: 
If
|you have a solid body, and you know where it has been and the mathematics 
of
|how it moves – i.e. its position as a function of time –, then you can
|predict where it is going to be at a certain time simply by calculating the
|function value for that time value.)

:)
Well, was true 100 years ago, but now it's only a common  sense prejudice,
refuted by Great Guru. These "where" and  "when" questions are primitive and
obsolete; so is "position as a function  of time".
Your Shit calculates METRIC of SPACETIME instead; and TENSORS. Nobody
knows, what your Shit calculates it for, but  it surely  has to have a very
important reason... 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#371066

Maciej Woźniak wrote:

> Użytkownik "Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn"  napisał w wiadomości grup
> dyskusyjnych:1634481.LseP5FOuOW@PointedEars.de...
> 
> Maciej Woźniak wrote:
> 
>> Użytkownik "Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn"  napisał w wiadomości grup
>> dyskusyjnych:49985978.Bblok4DqYo@PointedEars.de...
> 
> |It’s attribution line, not attribution novel.  When will you ever learn?
> 
> I don't care. When will you ever learn?

I am not the one who has to do the learning here, you are.
 
> |No, you seem to be positively challenged with understanding a simple
> concept
> |such as prediction by calculation, which, sorry to break this to you, is
> the
> |bread and butter of physics.  (Probably someone has told you this before:
> If
> |you have a solid body, and you know where it has been and the mathematics
> of
> |how it moves – i.e. its position as a function of time –, then you can
> |predict where it is going to be at a certain time simply by calculating
> |the function value for that time value.)

Do you think that such a character desert is readable?  Ah, so you don’t 
care about your readers?  Then why should your readers care about your 
postings?
 
> :)
> Well, was true 100 years ago, but now it's only a common  sense prejudice,
> refuted by Great Guru. These "where" and  "when" questions are primitive
> and
> obsolete; so is "position as a function  of time".

Utter nonsense.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-vector#Fundamental_four-vectors>

> Your Shit calculates METRIC of SPACETIME instead;

_Not_ *instead*.

> and TENSORS.

Tensors are used to describe the metric of spacetime and the energy-momentum 
in the corresponding area.

> Nobody knows,

*You* don’t.

> what your Shit calculates it for,
> but  it surely  has to have a
> very important reason...

Because it describes reality so well.  For example, moving clocks, such as 
on a satellite in orbit, *are* observed to tick slower, and clocks on a 
higher gravitational potential (lower spacetime curvature), such as in 
orbit, *are* observed to tick faster.  And those effects do not cancel each 
other out.  So one has to compensate for those facts.  Think of your hubris 
now the next time you get lost in a foreign city and have only your car 
navigation system/smartphone with GPS/GLONASS/GALILEO/BeiDou-2 support to 
help you out.


EOD

PointedEars
-- 
Q: What happens when electrons lose their energy?  
A: They get Bohr'ed.

(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#371070

Użytkownik "Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn"  napisał w wiadomości grup 
dyskusyjnych:4204306.PgI3GLYfg2@PointedEars.de...

Maciej Woźniak wrote:

> Użytkownik "Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn"  napisał w wiadomości grup
> dyskusyjnych:1634481.LseP5FOuOW@PointedEars.de...
>
> Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>
>> Użytkownik "Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn"  napisał w wiadomości grup
>> dyskusyjnych:49985978.Bblok4DqYo@PointedEars.de...
>
> |It’s attribution line, not attribution novel.  When will you ever learn?
>
> I don't care. When will you ever learn?

|I am not the one who has to do the learning here, you are.

No, poor idiot, I'm not. It's only your imagination.


|Do you think that such a character desert is readable?

For those, who want to read, it is.

> :)
> Well, was true 100 years ago, but now it's only a common  sense prejudice,
> refuted by Great Guru. These "where" and  "when" questions are primitive
> and
> obsolete; so is "position as a function  of time".

|Utter nonsense.

A sad truth. The Shit is unable to establish coordinate
system in a general, non-inertial case, even for a single
observer.

> Your Shit calculates METRIC of SPACETIME instead;

|_Not_ *instead*.

Yes, exactly - instead. "where" and "when" are questions
of coordinates. You don't have them.

> Nobody knows,
> what your Shit calculates it for,
> but  it surely  has to have a
> very important reason...

|Because it describes reality so well.

It has nothing in common with reality, and you don't even
know, how to measure your "metric" and your "tensors"
in non-inertial case (i.e. in real case).


|For example, moving clocks, such as

Yeah, yeah, I know. Your Shit predicted so brilliantly
and so precisely, how much its idiotic "standards" will
be pissed at...
Of course, the prediction was made after it happened,
as usual.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#371074

On Sunday, November 29, 2015 at 5:01:41 AM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>
> Użytkownik "Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn"  napisał w wiadomości grup 
> dyskusyjnych:4204306.PgI3GLYfg2@PointedEars.de...
> >
> > For example, moving clocks, such as
> 
> Yeah, yeah, I know. Your Shit predicted so brilliantly
> and so precisely, how much its idiotic "standards" will
> be pissed at...
> Of course, the prediction was made after it happened,
> as usual.

How can you live with yourself after telling such STUPID lies?

http://www.phys.lsu.edu/mog/mog9/node9.html

You have many things in common with sociopaths:

http://www.naturalnews.com/036112_sociopaths_cults_influence.html

"#3) Sociopaths are incapable of feeling shame, guilt or remorse. Their
brains simply lack the circuitry to process such emotions. This allows
them to betray people, threaten people or harm people without giving it
a second thought."

#4) Sociopaths invent outrageous lies about their experiences. They wildly
exaggerate things to the point of absurdity,"

#5) Sociopaths seek to dominate others and "win" at all costs. They hate to
lose any argument or fight and will viciously defend their web of lies,
even to the point of logical absurdity.

#9) Sociopaths never apologize. They are never wrong. They never feel guilt.
They can never apologize. Even if shown proof that they were wrong, they
will refuse to apologize and instead go on the attack.

Describes you to a tee, doesn't it?  Now crawl back into your hole and
pull the divot back over it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#371078

Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel"  napisał w wiadomości grup 
dyskusyjnych:3df54f92-350f-4c2e-8f2f-c6cf038b352d@googlegroups.com...

On Sunday, November 29, 2015 at 5:01:41 AM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>
> Użytkownik "Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn"  napisał w wiadomości grup
> dyskusyjnych:4204306.PgI3GLYfg2@PointedEars.de...
> >
> > For example, moving clocks, such as
>
> Yeah, yeah, I know. Your Shit predicted so brilliantly
> and so precisely, how much its idiotic "standards" will
> be pissed at...
> Of course, the prediction was made after it happened,
> as usual.

|How can you live with yourself after telling such STUPID lies?
|http://www.phys.lsu.edu/mog/mog9/node9.html

Yell and spit, as expected from a relativistic moron.
Can't change facts. First GPS satellites launched were
unsynchronizing. Your "predictions" were made
AFTER.
Of course, to predict GPS corrections after they
happened,  your Shit still had to forget that its idiotic
"standard" FORBIDS these corrections directly. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#371081

On Sunday, November 29, 2015 at 6:33:27 AM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>
> Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel"  napisał w wiadomości grup 
> dyskusyjnych:3df54f92-350f-4c2e-8f2f-c6cf038b352d@googlegroups.com...
> >
> > How can you live with yourself after telling such STUPID lies?
> > http://www.phys.lsu.edu/mog/mog9/node9.html
> 
> Yell and spit, as expected from a relativistic moron.

Nobody's yelling and nobody's spitting.  That's your sociopathic delusions.

> Can't change facts.

No, you can't, even though you desperately try, which brings us to #10:

#10) Sociopaths are delusional and literally believe that what they say becomes truth merely because they say it!

> First GPS satellites launched were unsynchronizing. Your "predictions"
> were made AFTER.

Which proves you are a sociopath:

#4) Sociopaths invent outrageous lies about their experiences. They wildly 
exaggerate things to the point of absurdity," 

The fact that you can't change is that the first bird flown had the capability
to adjust the clock to agree with the GR prediction.  You are a liar and a
sociopath.

> Of course, to predict GPS corrections after they
> happened,  your Shit still had to forget that its idiotic
> "standard" FORBIDS these corrections directly.

Regurgitating baloney is your stock in trade.  #10 again.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#371083

Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel"  napisał w wiadomości grup 
dyskusyjnych:f63ff6a5-e4f1-4caf-baad-5d95c02c9829@googlegroups.com...

> Yell and spit, as expected from a relativistic moron.

|Nobody's yelling and nobody's spitting.  That's your sociopathic delusions.

A lie, as expected from a  relativistic moron.

|#10) Sociopaths are delusional and literally believe that what they say 
becomes truth merely because they say it!

You don't know much about sociopaths too. And about the truth.
Well, you don't know much generally.

> First GPS satellites launched were unsynchronizing. Your "predictions"
> were made AFTER.


|The fact that you can't change is that the first bird flown had the 
capability
|to adjust the clock to agree with the GR prediction.

Well, capability of adjusting clocks isn't anything
special. Still, of course, Shit's standard is - no
adjustment. Shit states it very clearly.
This "adjustment to agree with GR predictions"of
yours is directly FORBIDDEN by your Shit and its
standard. Yell, spit and lie -  maybe you'll succeed
to mask  this simple fact for some time  more.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#371084

On Sunday, November 29, 2015 at 7:50:36 AM UTC-7, The Delusional Sociopath wrote:
>
> [Yellings and spittings proving he is a sociopath]
> 
> > Yell and spit, as expected from a relativistic moron.
> ....
> A lie, as expected from a  relativistic moron.
> 
> > #10) Sociopaths are delusional and literally believe that what they say
> > becomes truth merely because they say it!
> 
> You don't know much about sociopaths too.

No, I don't.  I depend on people who DO know.  You ought to try trusting
others a bit.  It would be good for your soul, if you have one left.

> And about the truth.
> Well, you don't know much generally.

And you DO? :-))))

> > > First GPS satellites launched were unsynchronizing. Your "predictions"
> > > were made AFTER.
> > 
> > The fact that you can't change is that the first bird flown had the
> > capability to adjust the clock to agree with the GR prediction.
> 
> Well, capability of adjusting clocks isn't anything
> special.

So you admit that you were not only wrong, but a lying weasel, too.  That's
a start to healing your delusional mind.

> [Moronic, lying regurgitation deleted]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#371085

Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel"  napisał w wiadomości grup 
dyskusyjnych:f36954df-cfe8-4422-a412-d58ae95fa421@googlegroups.com...

> >
> > The fact that you can't change is that the first bird flown had the
> > capability to adjust the clock to agree with the GR prediction.
>
> Well, capability of adjusting clocks isn't anything
> special.

|So you admit that you were not only wrong, but a lying weasel, too.  That's

That's a sorry lie of a stupid, lying shit.
I admit, that there is a capability to adjust clocks. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 5 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web