Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #390989 > unrolled thread
| Started by | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-08-26 10:14 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-08-31 20:03 -0400 |
| Articles | 7 — 4 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Proxima b The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-26 10:14 -0700
Re: Proxima b SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> - 2016-08-28 09:22 -0400
Re: Proxima b "Michael F. Stemper" <michael.stemper@gmail.com> - 2016-08-28 13:32 -0500
Re: Proxima b The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-28 12:23 -0700
Re: Proxima b The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-29 10:32 -0700
Re: Proxima b SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> - 2016-08-31 07:00 -0400
Re: Proxima b "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-08-31 20:03 -0400
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-26 10:14 -0700 |
| Subject | Proxima b |
| Message-ID | <57C0790A.3EFC@ix.netcom.com> |
Why are people looking for other planets? Are they still looking for water?? I go to the supermaket i buy sparkling water. Do people in the 'scientific community' know what "sparkling water" is? oceans of sparkling water... ancient oceans of sparkling water (if they cannot find water, they find ancient water) How would you like a glass of ancient water? liquid anceint water i before e except after c???? i think this is ancient inglish. did i spel ancient right???? sorry, i was taught inglish by an assistant teacher who was an assistant to an assistant subsitiue teacher. she didn't speak inglish...here name was Mrs. Maria. The principle name she told me was Mister Johnny. i think she was from Chili... Where is Chili? Is that at the north or south pole? I remember Chili Willy... Proxima b....it's a Spanish planet, Right? next to planet Mexico z Where is planet Cha Cha Cha??? (don't drink the water)
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-28 09:22 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <9ro5sbh10hlichooodt45tvomlljb4vbhs@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #390989 |
This, the very "nearest", is still over 4 light years away ! Obviously, there'll never be anything, "to and / or fro" . Communications ? "Hi !" < 4+ years > "Hi !" <4+ years > "Tell us about yourself." < 4+ years > etc, etc, etc ... On Fri, 26 Aug 2016 10:14:50 -0700, The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >Why are people looking for other planets? Are they still looking for water?? > > >I go to the supermaket >i buy sparkling water. > >Do people in the 'scientific community' know what "sparkling water" is? > > > >oceans of sparkling water... > > >ancient oceans of sparkling water > > >(if they cannot find water, they find ancient water) > > >How would you like a glass of ancient water? > > >liquid anceint water > > > > >i before e except after c???? > > >i think this is ancient inglish. > > >did i spel ancient right???? > > >sorry, i was taught inglish by an assistant teacher who was an assistant to an assistant subsitiue teacher. > >she didn't speak inglish...here name was Mrs. Maria. > >The principle name she told me was Mister Johnny. > > >i think she was from Chili... > > >Where is Chili? Is that at the north or south pole? > > >I remember Chili Willy... > > > >Proxima b....it's a Spanish planet, Right? > > >next to planet Mexico z > > >Where is planet Cha Cha Cha??? > > >(don't drink the water)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Michael F. Stemper" <michael.stemper@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-28 13:32 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <npvao9$k52$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #391110 |
On 2016-08-28 08:22, SteveGG wrote: > This, the very "nearest", is still over 4 light years away ! > > Obviously, there'll never be anything, "to and / or fro" . > > Communications ? > > "Hi !" > < 4+ years > > "Hi !" > <4+ years > > "Tell us about yourself." > < 4+ years > > etc, etc, etc ... Asimov had the solution to this problem back in 1962, when he wrote "My Son, the Physicist". -- Michael F. Stemper This post contains greater than 95% post-consumer bytes by weight.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-28 12:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <57C33A3D.76EA@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #391128 |
Michael F. Stemper wrote: > > On 2016-08-28 08:22, SteveGG wrote: > > This, the very "nearest", is still over 4 light years away ! > > > > Obviously, there'll never be anything, "to and / or fro" . > > > > Communications ? > > > > "Hi !" > > < 4+ years > > > "Hi !" > > <4+ years > > > "Tell us about yourself." > > < 4+ years > > > etc, etc, etc ... > > Asimov had the solution to this problem back in 1962, when he wrote > "My Son, the Physicist". > > -- > Michael F. Stemper > This post contains greater than 95% post-consumer bytes by weight. Science fiction is just another word for...thought experiments, and 'thought experiments' is just another word for ...science fiction. Relativity...is 'just a theory', a thought experirment..science fiction. Relativity is science fiction, is it not? It's still a ...theory. Relativity, possibly true but that is not known or proven to be true, ...a theory, just a theory. To put it simply... all theories are science fiction, because all science fiction are thought experiments, and thought experiments is just another word for science fiction. It's a loop you cannot get out of.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-29 10:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <57C47198.1920@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #391110 |
SteveGG wrote: > > This, the very "nearest", is still over 4 light years away ! > > Obviously, there'll never be anything, "to and / or fro" . > > Communications ? > > "Hi !" > < 4+ years > > "Hi !" > <4+ years > > "Tell us about yourself." > < 4+ years > > etc, etc, etc ... i think if you use a little....science fiction, you can cut down to a few seconds.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-31 07:00 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <hvddsbtrctljstub2pktiuct3daa91mjht@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #391181 |
Essentially, all science agrees, that we'll be limited to 3E8 meters/second, and typically far, far less. Take it from there ..
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-31 20:03 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.32313a70a43b4b2298a4f5@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #391289 |
In article <hvddsbtrctljstub2pktiuct3daa91mjht@4ax.com>, casagiannoni@optonline.net says... > > Essentially, all science agrees, that we'll be limited to 3E8 > meters/second, and typically far, far less. Take it from there .. For certain values of "all science" that do not include General Relativity.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web