Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #411710 > unrolled thread
| Started by | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-03-04 11:37 -0800 |
| Last post | 2017-03-10 19:07 +0000 |
| Articles | 10 on this page of 30 — 7 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Beyond The Big Bang The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-03-04 11:37 -0800
Re: Beyond The Big Bang The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-03-04 19:11 -0800
Looking Beyond The Big Bang The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-03-10 10:34 -0800
Re: Looking Beyond The Big Bang Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-10 19:03 +0000
Re: Looking Beyond The Big Bang The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-03-10 12:41 -0800
Re: Looking Beyond The Big Bang The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-03-11 15:18 -0800
Re: Looking Beyond The Big Bang The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-03-11 15:24 -0800
Re: Looking Beyond The Big Bang "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-11 15:36 -0800
Re: Looking Beyond The Big Bang The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-03-11 18:19 -0800
Re: Looking Beyond The Big Bang The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-03-11 22:08 -0800
Re: Looking Beyond The Big Bang Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> - 2017-03-12 17:20 +1100
Re: Looking Beyond The Big Bang The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-03-12 00:29 -0800
Re: Looking Beyond The Big Bang Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> - 2017-03-12 19:32 +1100
Re: Looking Beyond The Big Bang The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-03-12 01:16 -0800
Re: Looking Beyond The Big Bang Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> - 2017-03-12 17:29 +0800
Re: Looking Beyond The Big Bang The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-03-12 12:01 -0800
Re: Looking Beyond The Big Bang Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 04:07 +0800
Re: Looking Beyond The Big Bang The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-03-12 12:11 -0800
Re: Looking Beyond The Big Bang Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2017-03-11 19:27 -0800
Re: Looking Beyond The Big Bang The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-03-11 22:16 -0800
Re: Looking Beyond The Big Bang The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-03-13 11:03 -0800
Re: Beyond The Big Bang Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-05 11:37 +0000
Re: Beyond The Big Bang The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-03-05 11:45 -0800
Re: Beyond The Big Bang Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-03-05 21:00 +0100
Re: Beyond The Big Bang Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-05 21:47 +0000
Re: Beyond The Big Bang The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-03-06 10:58 -0800
Re: Beyond The Big Bang Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-07 17:15 +0000
Re: Beyond The Big Bang numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-05 14:00 -0800
Re: Beyond The Big Bang numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-03-10 10:42 -0800
Re: Beyond The Big Bang Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-03-10 19:07 +0000
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-13 11:03 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Looking Beyond The Big Bang |
| Message-ID | <58C6ED01.82A@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #412537 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > noTthaTguY wrote: > > > > because of redshifting, > > we cannot say if universe is finite, or infinite > > It is finite because you > > have redshifting > > and then a green layer under it, > and the a blue layer under the green > which is the foundation. > > There is nothing under blue. So, the universe is finite. > > If you understands Colors, you understand the whole universe. > > Not mathematics > Not Physics > > just...Colors. > > There is only one planet > with a blue surface in the universe...Earth. > > Earth is the foundation of the universe. In other words... Earth is the center of the universe. Now before yous gets your panties in a wad... I'm not saying Earth is in the center of the universe... I'm saying "Earth is the center of the universe."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-05 11:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnobnu3l.fsl.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
| In reply to | #411710 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > I notice yous people have trouble getting... > Beyond The Big Bang. It's an unnexessary postulate, based on a failed postulate, based on a broken postulate, based on in invalid (and incorrect) conclusion. You shoukd turn away. Now. Ned
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-05 11:45 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <58BC6AC7.24B2@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #411750 |
Ned Latham wrote: > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > I notice yous people have trouble getting... > > Beyond The Big Bang. > > It's an unnexessary postulate, based on a failed > postulate, based on a broken postulate, based on > in invalid (and incorrect) conclusion. > > You shoukd turn away. Now. > > Ned I understand.. they tell you there is Nothing, so it is unnexessary for you to think beyond... and they tell you the future is uncertain so it is unnexessary for you to make plans. You're in Limbo... you cannot think back, you cannot think forward.. how do you get out the door???? Let me help you..let me show you the Way. Beyond The Big Bang...there is order. beyond the future there is order. For example, Darwin evolution appears to be random..but it's missing the beginning, the order. If you look Beyond The Big Bang, you will find...order: Here is a picture of the cause of the big bang while it's taking place and beyond... http://pw1.netcom.com/~starmaker/before%20and%20after%20the%20big%20bang/untitled1.jpg
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@python.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-05 21:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <o9hqp0$uj3$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #411797 |
http://pw1.netcom.com/~starmaker/The%20Starmaker%20Science%20Journal/The-Starmaker-Science-Journal-2-abcd.jpg Is this a joke??
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-05 21:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnobp1qr.oph.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
| In reply to | #411797 |
The Starmaker wrote: > Ned Latham wrote: > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > I notice yous people have trouble getting... > > > Beyond The Big Bang. > > > > It's an unnexessary postulate, based on a failed > > postulate, based on a broken postulate, based on > > in invalid (and incorrect) conclusion. > > > > You shoukd turn away. Now. > > I understand.. No, you dopn't. > they tell you there is Nothing, so it is unnexessary for you > to think beyond... What "they" tell me is always considered, often rejected, and does not affect my thinking. ----snip---- Ned
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-06 10:58 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <58BDB16D.26C2@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #411828 |
Ned Latham wrote: > > The Starmaker wrote: > > Ned Latham wrote: > > > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > I notice yous people have trouble getting... > > > > Beyond The Big Bang. > > > > > > It's an unnexessary postulate, based on a failed > > > postulate, based on a broken postulate, based on > > > in invalid (and incorrect) conclusion. > > > > > > You shoukd turn away. Now. > > > > I understand.. > > No, you dopn't. You spel 'dope' wrong. > > > they tell you there is Nothing, so it is unnexessary for you > > to think beyond... > > What "they" tell me is always considered, often rejected, and does > not affect my thinking. > > ----snip---- > > Ned I would say "often rejected" is your M.O. It's a pattern with you...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-07 17:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnobtql5.qgc.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
| In reply to | #411929 |
The Starmaker wrote: > Ned Latham wrote: > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > Ned Latham wrote: > > > > > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I notice yous people have trouble getting... > > > > > Beyond The Big Bang. > > > > > > > > It's an unnexessary postulate, based on a failed > > > > postulate, based on a broken postulate, based on > > > > in invalid (and incorrect) conclusion. > > > > > > > > You shoukd turn away. Now. > > > > > > I understand.. > > > > No, you dopn't. > > You spel 'dope' wrong. Picky, picky. (That was me not telling you that you spelt "spell" incorrectly.) > > > they tell you there is Nothing, so it is unnexessary for you > > > to think beyond... > > > > What "they" tell me is always considered, often rejected, and does > > not affect my thinking. > > I would say "often rejected" is your M.O. It's a pattern with you... It's neither. My MO is very simple: consider, reject nonsense and falsehood, assimilate the rest. Rejection happens about as often as do nonsense and falsehood. Ned
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-05 14:00 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3bcb259a-d79a-43e5-bac3-176394bae685@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #411710 |
Astronomy in Cambridge detected a blackhole of the Perseus Clustera that is 250 millions light years from the earth, using the Chandra X-ray space telescope but X-rays cannot be focused as light can be focus using a lens which would make it extremely difficult to detect stellar X-rays produced by a 250 million ly blackhole. Blackholes represent the maximum range of an optical telescope and have absolute no other physical significance. If you viewed the celestial universe using a pair of binoculars and could not see any star at a certain section in the universe is that also a blackhole too, too, too? Genius are not really geniuses, physicists call people like me genius so other people do not realize that physicists are really as stupid as a turnip.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-10 10:42 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <987b8110-96bd-4297-9209-48cfa8b0e008@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #411710 |
I have a solution to Global warming but I need a patent Attorney but first I have another invention---a dog condom. It would make it so that we would not have to neuter dogs and attorneys. We could just ask them to ware a dog condom before that special intimate contact. What do you think?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-10 19:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnoc5uca.mkd.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
| In reply to | #412407 |
numbernumber1964 wrote: > > I have a solution to Global warming but I need a patent Attorney > but first I have another invention---a dog condom. It would make > it so that we would not have to neuter dogs and attorneys. > We could just ask them to ware a dog condom before that special > intimate contact. What do you think? Do you *really* think a lawter would voluntarily wear one? Ned
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web