Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #451005 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-02-28 08:32 -0800 |
| Last post | 2018-03-16 10:47 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 542 — 30 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 08:32 -0800
Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-02-28 09:22 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 09:26 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-02-28 09:37 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 09:48 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-02-28 10:01 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 11:56 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-01 21:00 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 14:14 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-02 13:27 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ický Bezdrátovì <ikbe@wmkfre.np> - 2018-03-02 12:34 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-02 05:59 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 09:47 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-02 00:05 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 17:26 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 09:42 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-02-28 09:50 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 09:55 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-02-28 10:05 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 12:06 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 12:22 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-02-28 13:00 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-02-28 13:23 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-02-28 14:16 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-02-28 13:21 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 13:30 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-02-28 13:44 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 13:56 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-02-28 19:25 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-02-28 10:48 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 12:13 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-02-28 13:58 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 14:02 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-02-28 15:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 07:49 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-01 10:00 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 13:30 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-02-28 12:36 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-02-28 21:33 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 13:07 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 13:17 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-01 21:42 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 14:23 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-02-28 13:34 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 13:43 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-02-28 14:11 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 07:40 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-03-01 11:26 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 13:59 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-03-01 14:08 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 15:09 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-03-01 17:16 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 09:16 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-03-01 14:47 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 08:55 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-03-02 09:43 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 13:19 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-03-02 18:01 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 09:32 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-03-03 09:55 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-03 10:06 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 10:21 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-03-03 11:36 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 18:45 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-02 06:49 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-01 13:26 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 08:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-02-28 18:48 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-01 13:40 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-01 17:26 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-01 20:26 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-01 21:44 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-02 11:44 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-02 13:28 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-01 13:18 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-02 00:08 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 08:38 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-01 17:42 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-01 09:13 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-03-01 09:10 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-01 13:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 14:55 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-01 14:24 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-02 07:01 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 13:01 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 08:48 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 10:30 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 13:36 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 13:57 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 14:21 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 15:41 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-03-02 15:58 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 08:57 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-03 09:10 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-03-03 12:18 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 15:08 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 09:12 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-03-05 09:15 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 10:09 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 18:32 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-05 10:43 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 18:47 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-05 11:15 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 20:21 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-05 12:29 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 22:54 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 10:51 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-05 19:00 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 14:10 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-05 22:41 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 14:48 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-05 22:56 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 15:47 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-06 15:50 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 12:51 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-07 23:19 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 13:20 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-05 21:23 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 14:39 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 14:38 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 10:02 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 13:24 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 14:34 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-06 14:56 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 03:21 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 21:19 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 15:56 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 09:21 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 10:06 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 10:27 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-03 10:37 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 10:53 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 14:16 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 14:47 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 09:46 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 11:54 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 15:01 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 15:32 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 09:53 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 13:56 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 09:43 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-03-05 10:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 23:34 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-04 15:49 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-03-02 16:22 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-02 16:45 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-03 08:02 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 14:07 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-02 14:17 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 14:30 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-02 15:03 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-02 23:07 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-03 08:27 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-03 04:36 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-03 05:21 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-03 14:29 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-03 05:50 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-04 18:16 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-05 05:55 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-04 23:36 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-05 15:17 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-05 09:21 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-05 18:27 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-05 09:59 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 08:50 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-03-03 08:56 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 15:44 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 09:10 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 09:44 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 10:14 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 10:47 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 13:59 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 14:38 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 09:32 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 11:32 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 14:15 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 22:27 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 14:46 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 09:34 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-05 09:40 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 17:56 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 13:53 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 09:14 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 10:09 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 18:40 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 09:17 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 18:40 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 01:53 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 13:28 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 09:18 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 11:07 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 13:32 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 14:02 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 09:08 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 13:42 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 09:01 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-06 09:19 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 22:27 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 20:06 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-04 23:30 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 11:02 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 13:29 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-05 23:23 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-03-05 23:26 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 01:53 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-01 13:07 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-01 21:45 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-03-01 13:54 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-01 14:05 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 14:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-02 14:01 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 10:06 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-03 14:07 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-03 05:39 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 09:42 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-04 11:44 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 14:32 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-06 07:09 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-06 07:14 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 15:55 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-06 08:52 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 18:40 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-06 09:29 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 18:40 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-06 20:19 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-06 20:37 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 06:50 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 06:37 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-07 11:08 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-07 05:14 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-07 15:13 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-07 07:25 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 07:46 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-07 17:31 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-07 17:12 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-08 21:26 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-08 12:34 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-09 04:17 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-09 04:52 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-09 11:24 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-09 11:21 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-09 10:31 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-09 02:59 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-09 14:47 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-09 15:49 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-09 18:36 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 09:53 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-08 02:28 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-08 21:41 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-09 00:22 +0000
Just more BULL SHIT eh! Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-10 06:50 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-01 15:07 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-02 07:17 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-02 09:49 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 13:09 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-02 13:21 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-03 09:49 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-03 10:05 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-04 16:56 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-04 17:38 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-05 07:03 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-05 07:54 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-05 14:36 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-05 22:47 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-05 15:07 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-05 23:14 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-06 07:53 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-06 11:25 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 20:59 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-06 14:18 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-06 16:33 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 03:21 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 20:55 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-06 16:22 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 03:21 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-07 07:44 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 08:00 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 16:58 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 09:04 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-07 13:39 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 23:17 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-08 07:05 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 15:49 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 15:53 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-07 13:50 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 23:17 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 18:02 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-05 07:05 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-02 12:05 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-02 07:25 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 08:25 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-01 13:22 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 14:43 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-02-28 22:16 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-02-28 13:17 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-01 11:32 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 08:12 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-02 09:04 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 15:02 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-02 11:43 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 09:12 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 18:45 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-02 22:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 09:39 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-03 11:30 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 14:20 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-03 20:48 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-04 10:42 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-04 11:05 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 13:22 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-04 16:29 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-06 10:40 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-06 11:12 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-06 17:47 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-06 22:35 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-04 11:43 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-03-03 21:13 -0500
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-03 20:49 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-04 10:41 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-02 14:13 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-02 14:19 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 12:48 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 20:55 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-03 14:21 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-03 14:26 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 09:51 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-03 20:44 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 14:47 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-04 11:40 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 10:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-05 08:28 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 08:47 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-05 08:54 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-05 18:05 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-06 11:24 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 13:08 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 22:07 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-07 13:11 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 08:30 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 17:25 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-08 09:10 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 14:25 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 23:17 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-07 21:11 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-08 06:26 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-07 23:12 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-07 17:17 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-08 09:06 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-08 11:21 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-08 13:49 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-08 15:38 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-09 10:56 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-08 15:07 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-08 09:10 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-09 11:49 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 23:01 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 19:48 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-03 20:12 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-03 20:14 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 12:21 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-04 12:27 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-03-04 12:30 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 13:03 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 08:08 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-05 08:14 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 13:22 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 08:34 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 09:53 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 14:05 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 22:13 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 15:43 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 07:42 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-07 16:46 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 08:02 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 07:58 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 09:10 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 09:22 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-07 17:35 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-07 17:40 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 17:25 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 17:14 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-06 15:43 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 08:01 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 17:14 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 16:10 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 08:18 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 08:26 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 09:34 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 09:50 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 10:15 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-07 12:09 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 12:11 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 14:08 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-07 23:18 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 14:47 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 23:17 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 16:29 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-08 08:25 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-08 17:32 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 18:36 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 23:01 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 15:30 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-08 09:02 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 12:05 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-03-07 19:09 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-07 08:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 17:14 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 17:25 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-07 01:42 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-03-06 20:49 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 08:51 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 17:25 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-04 11:26 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 15:27 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 13:16 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-11 08:43 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-11 06:54 -0700
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-11 07:14 -0700
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-05 17:11 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 13:08 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 21:21 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-04 23:33 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 15:18 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-05 09:23 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 17:56 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-05 10:01 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 18:09 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-05 10:34 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 18:45 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-05 11:11 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-05 21:20 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-05 22:55 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-06 09:38 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-06 11:06 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 14:15 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-06 09:26 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-05 12:35 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-03-05 23:17 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 14:28 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-01 21:28 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-03-01 09:45 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 18:29 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 09:58 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-04 10:23 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 15:18 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 08:33 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 11:05 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 14:04 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 14:41 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 12:49 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 22:07 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-06 16:29 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 03:21 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-07 07:33 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 16:58 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-07 13:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-03-07 13:41 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-06 20:06 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 15:58 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-03-05 14:00 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-05 21:25 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 08:40 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-03-06 12:30 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-06 19:06 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-06 19:10 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 14:22 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-03-06 20:43 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 08:41 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 08:55 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 09:50 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 12:00 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 17:25 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-03-07 16:55 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-08 08:32 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 08:41 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-08 09:24 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 12:11 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-03-08 23:04 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-08 21:32 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-08 21:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-09 06:33 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 22:33 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-09 10:41 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-08 23:02 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-09 12:27 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-09 04:36 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-09 15:00 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-09 08:41 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-09 18:35 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-09 10:44 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-09 19:30 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 18:36 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-03-09 11:17 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-09 09:32 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-10 09:59 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-03-10 23:44 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-08 17:06 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-05 21:29 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-08 17:09 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-03-05 23:07 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 14:42 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-08 17:12 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-05 17:19 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-06 18:47 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 14:12 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-03-05 23:24 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-03-05 16:28 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 09:46 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 12:52 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-03-06 23:25 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-07 01:36 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 18:46 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 14:45 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 12:54 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 19:33 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-06 20:11 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 15:44 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 12:57 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-07 01:39 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-06 20:08 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 17:24 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 14:14 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 13:14 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-03-06 12:53 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 23:16 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-07 17:48 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-07 17:58 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 13:01 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 16:53 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 22:39 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 22:57 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 23:55 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-08 00:17 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 09:25 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 10:48 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-08 10:49 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 11:08 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-03-08 19:39 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-08 15:16 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-07 20:42 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-03-07 13:13 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-16 10:47 +0000
Page 26 of 28 — ← Prev page 1 … 24 25 [26] 27 28 Next page →
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-05 14:42 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <d4783040-463d-40f7-89cd-ea40bfe221eb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451604 |
On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:07:19 PM UTC-8, Dirk Van de moortel wrote: > Op 05-mrt-2018 om 21:00 schreef Tom Roberts: > > On 2/28/18 10:32 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > >> A couple weeks ago, I tried to get Tom Roberts to explain why he > >> believes the Hafele-Keating experiments do not show that clocks > >> tick at different rates in different reference frames. His entire > >> explanation was: > >> > >> Hafele and Keating compared ELAPSED PROPER TIMES of clocks, not > >> clock rates. > >> > >> How is comparing "elapsed proper times" different from comparing > >> "clock rates"? > > > > Analogy: In the Euclidean plane construct Cartesian coordinates > > (x,y); draw a line y=x. * The SLOPE of the line relative to (x,y) is > > 1; that is analogous to measuring the tick rate of a clock. This is a > > DIFFERENTIAL measurement that can be made at any point along the line > > (but for a straight line every point has the same value). * the > > LENGTH of the line from (x,y)=(0,0) to (x,y)=(1,1) is 1.414; that is > > analogous to measuring the elapsed proper time of a clock. This is an > > INTEGRAL measurement and must be made over the ENTIRE INTERVAL of > > interest. > > > > THESE ARE QUITE DIFFERENT. But they are directly analogous to your > > question. > > > > Continue the Analogy: Now construct Cartesian coordinates (x',y') > > which are rotated by 45 degrees from (x,y). The line is now long the > > x' axis. * The SLOPE of the line relative to (x',y') is 0. This is > > DIFFERENT from the slope in (x,y), because slope is COORDINATE > > DEPENDENT. * The LENGTH of the line from (x,y)=(0,0) to (x,y)=(1,1) > > is 1.414. This is THE SAME as when calculated in (x,y), because this > > used THE SAME points. Such lengths are INDEPENDENT OF COORDINATES. > > > > The coordinates (x',y') are the natural coordinates of the line, > > because the line lies along one axis, conventionally labeled x (with > > or without primes). > > > > Continue the Analogy: Measure the length of the line using an > > odometer, between those same two points. You get 1.414. This is > > OBVIOUSLY independent of coordinates. And the odometer CLEARLY > > measures 1 unit for every 1 unit it travels -- its "tick rate" NEVER > > CHANGES. > > > > When one says "the tick rate of this clock", one has mentioned ONLY > > the clock, so that is the ONLY thing that can be involved. For a > > clock, that INHERENTLY means measuring the tick rate in its rest > > frame (i.e. the frame for which its worldline lies along one axis, > > conventionally labeled t), and THAT tick rate never changes. In the > > analogy, the quantity analogous to "tick rate of this clock" is the > > "slope of the line in its own coordinates", which is always zero. > > That is, for "slope of the line" you CANNOT impose some other > > coordinate system, you MUST use the coordinates of the line itself, > > and in those coordinates its slope is ALWAYS ZERO. Draw any other > > line, use its coordinates, and you get zero for its slope. > > > > The odometer is analogous to a clock -- the odometer measures 1 inch > > for every 1 inch of the line it traverses; the clock measures 1 > > second for every 1 second of proper time it experiences (every second > > of the worldline it traverses). > > > > NEITHER TICK RATE EVER CHANGES. > > > > The tick rate of an odometer can be measured in some other frame, and > > the value can be different. This is measuring delta-x between > > odometer increments using coordinates for which the x axis is not > > along the line the odometer is traversing. > > > > THIS IS NOT THE TICK RATE OF THE ODOMETER, IT IS THE TICK RATE OF THE > > ODOMETER IN THOSE OTHER COORDINATES. > > > > The tick rate of a clock can be measured in some other frame, and the > > value can be different. This is measuring delta-t between clock > > ticks using coordinates for which the t axis is not along the > > worldline the clock is traversing. > > > > THIS IS NOT THE TICK RATE OF THE CLOCK, IT IS THE TICK RATE OF THE > > CLOCK IN THOSE OTHER COORDINATES. > > > > The constancy of clock tick rates is easily seen as a direct > > consequence of the first postulate of SR: the laws of physics are the > > same in every inertial frame. So the laws that govern the tick rate > > of a clock are INDEPENDENT of which frame it is at rest in. That > > directly implies its tick rate is also INDEPENDENT of frame. > > > > Note to the reading impaired: that paragraph discusses the tick rate > > of a clock, NOT the tick rate of a clock measured in some other > > frame. > > > > Until you learn to read well enough to distinguish those quantities, > > you will remain confused, and unaware of your own confusion. There's > > no point in reading the rest of your post, or reading the zillions of > > articles in this thread, as all you do is repeat your errors. You > > have an amazing ability to avoid learning anything, and an amazing > > persistence in repeating your errors. > > > > Learn how to read. Learn what the words you use actually mean. You > > just showed that not only can you NOT read posts around here, you > > also can NOT read the book by Taylor and Wheeler. In both cases you > > impose your personal MISCONCEPTIONS onto the words of the author. > > > > Tom Roberts > > Nice, but Ed Lake does not want to hear about Cartesian coordinates. > Ed Lake is frighteningly allergic to *anything* that has equations > or variables. Ed Lake is an analyst, remember? Ed Lake is "not a > mathematician". So Ed lake cannot read beyond the first line of > your reply. > Ed Lake expects you to answer his question about comparing "elapsed > proper times" versus comparing "clock rates" in 6 years old speak. > And when you do that, he'll demand kindergarten level. > > Ed Lake is hear to make you sweat ;-) > > Dirk Vdm Well, to me it's rather obvious that Tom's didn't address his response to Ed, he meant it more like an exposition for anyone interested. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-08 17:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p7rqtu$1vu2$4@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #451622 |
JanPB wrote: >> > Tom Roberts >> >> Nice, but Ed Lake does not want to hear about Cartesian coordinates. Ed >> Lake is frighteningly allergic to *anything* that has equations or >> variables. Ed Lake is an analyst, remember? Ed Lake is "not a >> mathematician". So Ed lake cannot read beyond the first line of your >> reply. >> Ed Lake expects you to answer his question about comparing "elapsed >> proper times" versus comparing "clock rates" in 6 years old speak. And >> when you do that, he'll demand kindergarten level. >> >> Ed Lake is hear to make you sweat ;-) Dirk Vdm > > Well, to me it's rather obvious that Tom's didn't address his response > to Ed, he meant it more like an exposition for anyone interested. But you need years of study on universities, being dedicated, to understand that. Doing the homework.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-05 17:19 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <5A9DEC8E.5614@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #451604 |
Dirk Van de moortel wrote: > > Op 05-mrt-2018 om 21:00 schreef Tom Roberts: > > On 2/28/18 10:32 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > >> A couple weeks ago, I tried to get Tom Roberts to explain why he > >> believes the Hafele-Keating experiments do not show that clocks > >> tick at different rates in different reference frames. His entire > >> explanation was: > >> > >> Hafele and Keating compared ELAPSED PROPER TIMES of clocks, not > >> clock rates. > >> > >> How is comparing "elapsed proper times" different from comparing > >> "clock rates"? > > > > Analogy: In the Euclidean plane construct Cartesian coordinates > > (x,y); draw a line y=x. * The SLOPE of the line relative to (x,y) is > > 1; that is analogous to measuring the tick rate of a clock. This is a > > DIFFERENTIAL measurement that can be made at any point along the line > > (but for a straight line every point has the same value). * the > > LENGTH of the line from (x,y)=(0,0) to (x,y)=(1,1) is 1.414; that is > > analogous to measuring the elapsed proper time of a clock. This is an > > INTEGRAL measurement and must be made over the ENTIRE INTERVAL of > > interest. > > > > THESE ARE QUITE DIFFERENT. But they are directly analogous to your > > question. > > > > Continue the Analogy: Now construct Cartesian coordinates (x',y') > > which are rotated by 45 degrees from (x,y). The line is now long the > > x' axis. * The SLOPE of the line relative to (x',y') is 0. This is > > DIFFERENT from the slope in (x,y), because slope is COORDINATE > > DEPENDENT. * The LENGTH of the line from (x,y)=(0,0) to (x,y)=(1,1) > > is 1.414. This is THE SAME as when calculated in (x,y), because this > > used THE SAME points. Such lengths are INDEPENDENT OF COORDINATES. > > > > The coordinates (x',y') are the natural coordinates of the line, > > because the line lies along one axis, conventionally labeled x (with > > or without primes). > > > > Continue the Analogy: Measure the length of the line using an > > odometer, between those same two points. You get 1.414. This is > > OBVIOUSLY independent of coordinates. And the odometer CLEARLY > > measures 1 unit for every 1 unit it travels -- its "tick rate" NEVER > > CHANGES. > > > > When one says "the tick rate of this clock", one has mentioned ONLY > > the clock, so that is the ONLY thing that can be involved. For a > > clock, that INHERENTLY means measuring the tick rate in its rest > > frame (i.e. the frame for which its worldline lies along one axis, > > conventionally labeled t), and THAT tick rate never changes. In the > > analogy, the quantity analogous to "tick rate of this clock" is the > > "slope of the line in its own coordinates", which is always zero. > > That is, for "slope of the line" you CANNOT impose some other > > coordinate system, you MUST use the coordinates of the line itself, > > and in those coordinates its slope is ALWAYS ZERO. Draw any other > > line, use its coordinates, and you get zero for its slope. > > > > The odometer is analogous to a clock -- the odometer measures 1 inch > > for every 1 inch of the line it traverses; the clock measures 1 > > second for every 1 second of proper time it experiences (every second > > of the worldline it traverses). > > > > NEITHER TICK RATE EVER CHANGES. > > > > The tick rate of an odometer can be measured in some other frame, and > > the value can be different. This is measuring delta-x between > > odometer increments using coordinates for which the x axis is not > > along the line the odometer is traversing. > > > > THIS IS NOT THE TICK RATE OF THE ODOMETER, IT IS THE TICK RATE OF THE > > ODOMETER IN THOSE OTHER COORDINATES. > > > > The tick rate of a clock can be measured in some other frame, and the > > value can be different. This is measuring delta-t between clock > > ticks using coordinates for which the t axis is not along the > > worldline the clock is traversing. > > > > THIS IS NOT THE TICK RATE OF THE CLOCK, IT IS THE TICK RATE OF THE > > CLOCK IN THOSE OTHER COORDINATES. > > > > The constancy of clock tick rates is easily seen as a direct > > consequence of the first postulate of SR: the laws of physics are the > > same in every inertial frame. So the laws that govern the tick rate > > of a clock are INDEPENDENT of which frame it is at rest in. That > > directly implies its tick rate is also INDEPENDENT of frame. > > > > Note to the reading impaired: that paragraph discusses the tick rate > > of a clock, NOT the tick rate of a clock measured in some other > > frame. > > > > Until you learn to read well enough to distinguish those quantities, > > you will remain confused, and unaware of your own confusion. There's > > no point in reading the rest of your post, or reading the zillions of > > articles in this thread, as all you do is repeat your errors. You > > have an amazing ability to avoid learning anything, and an amazing > > persistence in repeating your errors. > > > > Learn how to read. Learn what the words you use actually mean. You > > just showed that not only can you NOT read posts around here, you > > also can NOT read the book by Taylor and Wheeler. In both cases you > > impose your personal MISCONCEPTIONS onto the words of the author. > > > > Tom Roberts > > Nice, but Ed Lake does not want to hear about Cartesian coordinates. > Ed Lake is frighteningly allergic to *anything* that has equations > or variables. Ed Lake is an analyst, remember? Ed Lake is "not a > mathematician". So Ed lake cannot read beyond the first line of > your reply. > Ed Lake expects you to answer his question about comparing "elapsed > proper times" versus comparing "clock rates" in 6 years old speak. > And when you do that, he'll demand kindergarten level. i thought dat was i was giving him.. > > Ed Lake is hear to make you sweat ;-) > > Dirk Vdm i didn't sweat because i provided photographic proof...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-06 18:47 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <fg6vc4Fuai6U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #451604 |
On 6/03/2018 9:07 AM, Dirk Van de moortel wrote: > Nice, but Ed Lake does not want to hear about Cartesian coordinates. > Ed Lake is frighteningly allergic to *anything* that has equations > or variables. Ed Lake is an analyst, remember? Ed Lake is "not a > mathematician". So Ed lake cannot read beyond the first line of > your reply. I did estimate the probability the Ed would read it to end. But I'll keep the result to myself. It's my secret. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-05 14:12 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3983cdff-9b34-4a12-9d2a-22331c5c8cd3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451576 |
On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:00:32 PM UTC-6, tjrob137 wrote: > On 2/28/18 10:32 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > > A couple weeks ago, I tried to get Tom Roberts to explain why he believes > > the Hafele-Keating experiments do not show that clocks tick at different > > rates in different reference frames. His entire explanation was: > > > > Hafele and Keating compared ELAPSED PROPER TIMES of clocks, not clock rates. > > > > How is comparing "elapsed proper times" different from comparing "clock > > rates"? > > Analogy: > In the Euclidean plane construct Cartesian coordinates (x,y); draw a line y=x. > * The SLOPE of the line relative to (x,y) is 1; that is analogous to > measuring the tick rate of a clock. This is a DIFFERENTIAL measurement > that can be made at any point along the line (but for a straight line > every point has the same value). > * the LENGTH of the line from (x,y)=(0,0) to (x,y)=(1,1) is 1.414; that > is analogous to measuring the elapsed proper time of a clock. This is > an INTEGRAL measurement and must be made over the ENTIRE INTERVAL of > interest. > > THESE ARE QUITE DIFFERENT. But they are directly analogous to your question. > > Continue the Analogy: > Now construct Cartesian coordinates (x',y') which are rotated by 45 degrees from > (x,y). The line is now long the x' axis. > * The SLOPE of the line relative to (x',y') is 0. This is DIFFERENT from > the slope in (x,y), because slope is COORDINATE DEPENDENT. > * The LENGTH of the line from (x,y)=(0,0) to (x,y)=(1,1) is 1.414. This is > THE SAME as when calculated in (x,y), because this used THE SAME points. > Such lengths are INDEPENDENT OF COORDINATES. > > The coordinates (x',y') are the natural coordinates of the line, because the > line lies along one axis, conventionally labeled x (with or without primes). > > Continue the Analogy: > Measure the length of the line using an odometer, between those same two points. > You get 1.414. This is OBVIOUSLY independent of coordinates. And the odometer > CLEARLY measures 1 unit for every 1 unit it travels -- its "tick rate" NEVER > CHANGES. > > When one says "the tick rate of this clock", one has mentioned ONLY the clock, > so that is the ONLY thing that can be involved. For a clock, that INHERENTLY > means measuring the tick rate in its rest frame (i.e. the frame for which its > worldline lies along one axis, conventionally labeled t), and THAT tick rate > never changes. In the analogy, the quantity analogous to "tick rate of this > clock" is the "slope of the line in its own coordinates", which is always zero. > That is, for "slope of the line" you CANNOT impose some other coordinate system, > you MUST use the coordinates of the line itself, and in those coordinates its > slope is ALWAYS ZERO. Draw any other line, use its coordinates, and you get zero > for its slope. > > The odometer is analogous to a clock -- the odometer measures 1 inch for every 1 > inch of the line it traverses; the clock measures 1 second for every 1 second of > proper time it experiences (every second of the worldline it traverses). > > NEITHER TICK RATE EVER CHANGES. > > The tick rate of an odometer can be measured in some other frame, and the value > can be different. This is measuring delta-x between odometer increments using > coordinates for which the x axis is not along the line the odometer is traversing. > > THIS IS NOT THE TICK RATE OF THE ODOMETER, IT IS THE TICK RATE > OF THE ODOMETER IN THOSE OTHER COORDINATES. > > The tick rate of a clock can be measured in some other frame, and the value can > be different. This is measuring delta-t between clock ticks using coordinates > for which the t axis is not along the worldline the clock is traversing. > > THIS IS NOT THE TICK RATE OF THE CLOCK, IT IS THE TICK RATE > OF THE CLOCK IN THOSE OTHER COORDINATES. > > The constancy of clock tick rates is easily seen as a direct consequence of the > first postulate of SR: the laws of physics are the same in every inertial frame. > So the laws that govern the tick rate of a clock are INDEPENDENT of which frame > it is at rest in. That directly implies its tick rate is also INDEPENDENT of frame. > > Note to the reading impaired: that paragraph discusses the tick > rate of a clock, NOT the tick rate of a clock measured in some > other frame. > > Until you learn to read well enough to distinguish those quantities, you will > remain confused, and unaware of your own confusion. There's no point in reading > the rest of your post, or reading the zillions of articles in this thread, as > all you do is repeat your errors. You have an amazing ability to avoid learning > anything, and an amazing persistence in repeating your errors. > > Learn how to read. Learn what the words you use actually mean. You just showed > that not only can you NOT read posts around here, you also can NOT read the book > by Taylor and Wheeler. In both cases you impose your personal MISCONCEPTIONS > onto the words of the author. > > Tom Roberts Yes, Tom, you have stated your OPINIONS many times before. The problem here is to get out of OPINION vs OPINION arguments and into RESOLVING DISAGREEMENTS. Of course, in your OPINION the only way that can happen is if I study what you have studied and learn to believe as you believe. I'm trying to find another way. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-05 23:24 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <p7kg39$1s9d$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #451606 |
Op 05-mrt-2018 om 23:12 schreef Ed Lake: > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:00:32 PM UTC-6, tjrob137 wrote: [snip] >> Learn how to read. Learn what the words you use actually mean. You >> just showed that not only can you NOT read posts around here, you >> also can NOT read the book by Taylor and Wheeler. In both cases you >> impose your personal MISCONCEPTIONS onto the words of the author. >> >> Tom Roberts > > Yes, Tom, you have stated your OPINIONS many times before. The > problem here is to get out of OPINION vs OPINION arguments and into > RESOLVING DISAGREEMENTS. You are not here to RESOLVE DISAGREEMENTS. You are here to MAKE PEOPLE SWEAT. And you know what? You are good at that. *Almost* as good as Ken Seto. Congratulations! :-) Dirk Vdm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-05 16:28 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <bZmdnYM49vTrWQDHnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #451606 |
On 3/5/18 4:12 PM, Ed Lake wrote: > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:00:32 PM UTC-6, tjrob137 wrote: >> [...] > > Yes, Tom, you have stated your OPINIONS many times before. This is not "opinion", what I described are FACTS about these theories. > I'm trying to find another way [other than studying]. Hopeless. Why do you think people go to universities for YEARS to learn this stuff? Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-06 09:46 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <48249503-3758-4b4b-b6ac-8254655a7f0a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451614 |
On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 4:28:13 PM UTC-6, tjrob137 wrote: > On 3/5/18 4:12 PM, Ed Lake wrote: > > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:00:32 PM UTC-6, tjrob137 wrote: > >> [...] > > > > Yes, Tom, you have stated your OPINIONS many times before. > > This is not "opinion", what I described are FACTS about these theories. > > > I'm trying to find another way [other than studying]. > > Hopeless. Why do you think people go to universities for YEARS to learn this stuff? > > Tom Roberts Twisting my words and pasting YOUR words together with mine out of context just shows you have no valid arguments, Tom. I'm constantly studying. I'm just not studying math. I'm studying SCIENCE. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-06 12:52 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <bb47c0a7-42da-4e3c-81ab-537b9b6ee932@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451702 |
On Tuesday, March 6, 2018 at 9:46:37 AM UTC-8, Ed Lake wrote: > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 4:28:13 PM UTC-6, tjrob137 wrote: > > On 3/5/18 4:12 PM, Ed Lake wrote: > > > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:00:32 PM UTC-6, tjrob137 wrote: > > >> [...] > > > > > > Yes, Tom, you have stated your OPINIONS many times before. > > > > This is not "opinion", what I described are FACTS about these theories. > > > > > I'm trying to find another way [other than studying]. > > > > Hopeless. Why do you think people go to universities for YEARS to learn this stuff? > > > > Tom Roberts > > Twisting my words and pasting YOUR words together with mine out of context just shows you have no valid arguments, Tom. > > I'm constantly studying. I'm just not studying math. That's a contradiction. > I'm studying SCIENCE. There is no such thing as Santa Claus. There is also no such thing as "physics without math". You are wasting your life away on daydreaming. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-06 23:25 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <p7n4gv$8mq$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #451727 |
Op 06-mrt-2018 om 21:52 schreef JanPB: > On Tuesday, March 6, 2018 at 9:46:37 AM UTC-8, Ed Lake wrote: >> On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 4:28:13 PM UTC-6, tjrob137 wrote: >>> On 3/5/18 4:12 PM, Ed Lake wrote: >>>> On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:00:32 PM UTC-6, tjrob137 wrote: >>>>> [...] >>>> >>>> Yes, Tom, you have stated your OPINIONS many times before. >>> >>> This is not "opinion", what I described are FACTS about these theories. >>> >>>> I'm trying to find another way [other than studying]. >>> >>> Hopeless. Why do you think people go to universities for YEARS to learn this stuff? >>> >>> Tom Roberts >> >> Twisting my words and pasting YOUR words together with mine out of context just shows you have no valid arguments, Tom. >> >> I'm constantly studying. I'm just not studying math. > > That's a contradiction. > >> I'm studying SCIENCE. > > There is no such thing as Santa Claus. There is also no such thing as > "physics without math". > > You are wasting your life away on daydreaming. And everyone here on trying to wake him ;-) Dirk Vdm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@python.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-07 01:36 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <5a9f3414$0$3701$426a74cc@news.free.fr> |
| In reply to | #451702 |
Ed Lake wrote: ... > I'm constantly studying. I'm just not studying math. I'm studying SCIENCE. You know Ed (well you probably don't), this very group (sci.physics.relativity) has been created back in the glorious days of Usenet (around 1991?) in order to expel relativity deniers out of sci.physics where the kind of discussion with stubborn ignorant idiots like you took all the place. There is not much people around, far less than 25 years ago, but my guess is that the number of lurkers (people just reading, not posting) is still quite high, especially here. What makes no doubt is that when noticing that a new kind of crank, like you, arrives here, there are comfortably installed on their sofa, with pop corn, waiting for which kind of incredibly idiot claim you will do. Thanks for them, you didn't deceive them. You are actually quite entertaining.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-06 18:46 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <1a952baa-59fd-47de-8682-d84d8c734081@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451760 |
On Tuesday, March 6, 2018 at 4:36:37 PM UTC-8, Python wrote: > Ed Lake wrote: > ... > > I'm constantly studying. I'm just not studying math. I'm studying SCIENCE. > > You know Ed (well you probably don't), this very group > (sci.physics.relativity) has been created back in the glorious > days of Usenet (around 1991?) in order to expel relativity > deniers out of sci.physics Yes. It was a bit later, like 1995 or 1996. What kept happening was every week or two someone would post on sci.physics his (it was invariably a male for some reason) "proof" that the twin paradox was "fatal" to relativity. So after umpteenth instance of that sci.physics.relativity was created. Endless entertainment ever since. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-05 14:45 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <18c93d86-a549-4040-b4d8-dea2314a7840@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451606 |
On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:12:32 PM UTC-8, Ed Lake wrote: > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:00:32 PM UTC-6, tjrob137 wrote: > > On 2/28/18 10:32 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > > > A couple weeks ago, I tried to get Tom Roberts to explain why he believes > > > the Hafele-Keating experiments do not show that clocks tick at different > > > rates in different reference frames. His entire explanation was: > > > > > > Hafele and Keating compared ELAPSED PROPER TIMES of clocks, not clock rates. > > > > > > How is comparing "elapsed proper times" different from comparing "clock > > > rates"? > > > > Analogy: > > In the Euclidean plane construct Cartesian coordinates (x,y); draw a line y=x. > > * The SLOPE of the line relative to (x,y) is 1; that is analogous to > > measuring the tick rate of a clock. This is a DIFFERENTIAL measurement > > that can be made at any point along the line (but for a straight line > > every point has the same value). > > * the LENGTH of the line from (x,y)=(0,0) to (x,y)=(1,1) is 1.414; that > > is analogous to measuring the elapsed proper time of a clock. This is > > an INTEGRAL measurement and must be made over the ENTIRE INTERVAL of > > interest. > > > > THESE ARE QUITE DIFFERENT. But they are directly analogous to your question. > > > > Continue the Analogy: > > Now construct Cartesian coordinates (x',y') which are rotated by 45 degrees from > > (x,y). The line is now long the x' axis. > > * The SLOPE of the line relative to (x',y') is 0. This is DIFFERENT from > > the slope in (x,y), because slope is COORDINATE DEPENDENT. > > * The LENGTH of the line from (x,y)=(0,0) to (x,y)=(1,1) is 1.414. This is > > THE SAME as when calculated in (x,y), because this used THE SAME points. > > Such lengths are INDEPENDENT OF COORDINATES. > > > > The coordinates (x',y') are the natural coordinates of the line, because the > > line lies along one axis, conventionally labeled x (with or without primes). > > > > Continue the Analogy: > > Measure the length of the line using an odometer, between those same two points. > > You get 1.414. This is OBVIOUSLY independent of coordinates. And the odometer > > CLEARLY measures 1 unit for every 1 unit it travels -- its "tick rate" NEVER > > CHANGES. > > > > When one says "the tick rate of this clock", one has mentioned ONLY the clock, > > so that is the ONLY thing that can be involved. For a clock, that INHERENTLY > > means measuring the tick rate in its rest frame (i.e. the frame for which its > > worldline lies along one axis, conventionally labeled t), and THAT tick rate > > never changes. In the analogy, the quantity analogous to "tick rate of this > > clock" is the "slope of the line in its own coordinates", which is always zero. > > That is, for "slope of the line" you CANNOT impose some other coordinate system, > > you MUST use the coordinates of the line itself, and in those coordinates its > > slope is ALWAYS ZERO. Draw any other line, use its coordinates, and you get zero > > for its slope. > > > > The odometer is analogous to a clock -- the odometer measures 1 inch for every 1 > > inch of the line it traverses; the clock measures 1 second for every 1 second of > > proper time it experiences (every second of the worldline it traverses). > > > > NEITHER TICK RATE EVER CHANGES. > > > > The tick rate of an odometer can be measured in some other frame, and the value > > can be different. This is measuring delta-x between odometer increments using > > coordinates for which the x axis is not along the line the odometer is traversing. > > > > THIS IS NOT THE TICK RATE OF THE ODOMETER, IT IS THE TICK RATE > > OF THE ODOMETER IN THOSE OTHER COORDINATES. > > > > The tick rate of a clock can be measured in some other frame, and the value can > > be different. This is measuring delta-t between clock ticks using coordinates > > for which the t axis is not along the worldline the clock is traversing. > > > > THIS IS NOT THE TICK RATE OF THE CLOCK, IT IS THE TICK RATE > > OF THE CLOCK IN THOSE OTHER COORDINATES. > > > > The constancy of clock tick rates is easily seen as a direct consequence of the > > first postulate of SR: the laws of physics are the same in every inertial frame. > > So the laws that govern the tick rate of a clock are INDEPENDENT of which frame > > it is at rest in. That directly implies its tick rate is also INDEPENDENT of frame. > > > > Note to the reading impaired: that paragraph discusses the tick > > rate of a clock, NOT the tick rate of a clock measured in some > > other frame. > > > > Until you learn to read well enough to distinguish those quantities, you will > > remain confused, and unaware of your own confusion. There's no point in reading > > the rest of your post, or reading the zillions of articles in this thread, as > > all you do is repeat your errors. You have an amazing ability to avoid learning > > anything, and an amazing persistence in repeating your errors. > > > > Learn how to read. Learn what the words you use actually mean. You just showed > > that not only can you NOT read posts around here, you also can NOT read the book > > by Taylor and Wheeler. In both cases you impose your personal MISCONCEPTIONS > > onto the words of the author. > > > > Tom Roberts > > Yes, Tom, you have stated your OPINIONS many times before. You new strategy of calling expert responses "opinions" is only going to hurt _you_. You may find it a revelation but I'll, state it anyway: merely renaming something, and arguing on the basis of such newly coined _word_ is invalid. -- Jan -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-06 12:54 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <d09635c3-0e68-4ffb-b0a0-3e7a34d42438@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451623 |
On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 4:45:56 PM UTC-6, JanPB wrote: > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:12:32 PM UTC-8, Ed Lake wrote: > > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:00:32 PM UTC-6, tjrob137 wrote: <snip> > > > Learn how to read. Learn what the words you use actually mean. You just showed > > > that not only can you NOT read posts around here, you also can NOT read the book > > > by Taylor and Wheeler. In both cases you impose your personal MISCONCEPTIONS > > > onto the words of the author. > > > > > > Tom Roberts > > > > Yes, Tom, you have stated your OPINIONS many times before. > > You new strategy of calling expert responses "opinions" is only going > to hurt _you_. > > You may find it a revelation but I'll, state it anyway: merely renaming > something, and arguing on the basis of such newly coined _word_ is invalid. I'm arguing about what the experiments say. You are arguing OPINIONS that the people who performed the experiments are either LYING or "DUMBING DOWN" or "VULGARIZING" the results of their experiments to create LIES, because, in your OPINION, what the experiments showed is not possible. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-06 19:33 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <62c02f34-286f-4c43-bdc5-13b3f7c5b861@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451729 |
On Tuesday, March 6, 2018 at 12:54:59 PM UTC-8, Ed Lake wrote: > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 4:45:56 PM UTC-6, JanPB wrote: > > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:12:32 PM UTC-8, Ed Lake wrote: > > > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:00:32 PM UTC-6, tjrob137 wrote: > <snip> > > > > > Learn how to read. Learn what the words you use actually mean. You just showed > > > > that not only can you NOT read posts around here, you also can NOT read the book > > > > by Taylor and Wheeler. In both cases you impose your personal MISCONCEPTIONS > > > > onto the words of the author. > > > > > > > > Tom Roberts > > > > > > Yes, Tom, you have stated your OPINIONS many times before. > > > > You new strategy of calling expert responses "opinions" is only going > > to hurt _you_. > > > > You may find it a revelation but I'll, state it anyway: merely renaming > > something, and arguing on the basis of such newly coined _word_ is invalid. > > I'm arguing about what the experiments say. You are arguing OPINIONS that the people who performed the experiments are either LYING or "DUMBING DOWN" or "VULGARIZING" the results of their experiments to create LIES, because, in your OPINION, what the experiments showed is not possible. What I say are not "opinions". That's the final word on the matter. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-06 20:11 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <03cf98ae-9b33-43bb-984b-6bb686eff344@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451780 |
On Wednesday, 7 March 2018 04:33:58 UTC+1, JanPB wrote: > On Tuesday, March 6, 2018 at 12:54:59 PM UTC-8, Ed Lake wrote: > > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 4:45:56 PM UTC-6, JanPB wrote: > > > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:12:32 PM UTC-8, Ed Lake wrote: > > > > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:00:32 PM UTC-6, tjrob137 wrote: > > <snip> > > > > > > > Learn how to read. Learn what the words you use actually mean. You just showed > > > > > that not only can you NOT read posts around here, you also can NOT read the book > > > > > by Taylor and Wheeler. In both cases you impose your personal MISCONCEPTIONS > > > > > onto the words of the author. > > > > > > > > > > Tom Roberts > > > > > > > > Yes, Tom, you have stated your OPINIONS many times before. > > > > > > You new strategy of calling expert responses "opinions" is only going > > > to hurt _you_. > > > > > > You may find it a revelation but I'll, state it anyway: merely renaming > > > something, and arguing on the basis of such newly coined _word_ is invalid. > > > > I'm arguing about what the experiments say. You are arguing OPINIONS that the people who performed the experiments are either LYING or "DUMBING DOWN" or "VULGARIZING" the results of their experiments to create LIES, because, in your OPINION, what the experiments showed is not possible. > > What I say are not "opinions". That's the final word on the matter. I'm a GURU!!! Others have opinions I only say the truth!!!!!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-05 15:44 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b7ba7ab2-276e-4586-9b65-c1d1dcc01a38@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451606 |
On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:12:32 PM UTC-8, Ed Lake wrote: > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:00:32 PM UTC-6, tjrob137 wrote: > > On 2/28/18 10:32 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > > > A couple weeks ago, I tried to get Tom Roberts to explain why he believes > > > the Hafele-Keating experiments do not show that clocks tick at different > > > rates in different reference frames. His entire explanation was: > > > > > > Hafele and Keating compared ELAPSED PROPER TIMES of clocks, not clock rates. > > > > > > How is comparing "elapsed proper times" different from comparing "clock > > > rates"? > > > > Analogy: > > In the Euclidean plane construct Cartesian coordinates (x,y); draw a line y=x. > > * The SLOPE of the line relative to (x,y) is 1; that is analogous to > > measuring the tick rate of a clock. This is a DIFFERENTIAL measurement > > that can be made at any point along the line (but for a straight line > > every point has the same value). > > * the LENGTH of the line from (x,y)=(0,0) to (x,y)=(1,1) is 1.414; that > > is analogous to measuring the elapsed proper time of a clock. This is > > an INTEGRAL measurement and must be made over the ENTIRE INTERVAL of > > interest. > > > > THESE ARE QUITE DIFFERENT. But they are directly analogous to your question. > > > > Continue the Analogy: > > Now construct Cartesian coordinates (x',y') which are rotated by 45 degrees from > > (x,y). The line is now long the x' axis. > > * The SLOPE of the line relative to (x',y') is 0. This is DIFFERENT from > > the slope in (x,y), because slope is COORDINATE DEPENDENT. > > * The LENGTH of the line from (x,y)=(0,0) to (x,y)=(1,1) is 1.414. This is > > THE SAME as when calculated in (x,y), because this used THE SAME points. > > Such lengths are INDEPENDENT OF COORDINATES. > > > > The coordinates (x',y') are the natural coordinates of the line, because the > > line lies along one axis, conventionally labeled x (with or without primes). > > > > Continue the Analogy: > > Measure the length of the line using an odometer, between those same two points. > > You get 1.414. This is OBVIOUSLY independent of coordinates. And the odometer > > CLEARLY measures 1 unit for every 1 unit it travels -- its "tick rate" NEVER > > CHANGES. > > > > When one says "the tick rate of this clock", one has mentioned ONLY the clock, > > so that is the ONLY thing that can be involved. For a clock, that INHERENTLY > > means measuring the tick rate in its rest frame (i.e. the frame for which its > > worldline lies along one axis, conventionally labeled t), and THAT tick rate > > never changes. In the analogy, the quantity analogous to "tick rate of this > > clock" is the "slope of the line in its own coordinates", which is always zero. > > That is, for "slope of the line" you CANNOT impose some other coordinate system, > > you MUST use the coordinates of the line itself, and in those coordinates its > > slope is ALWAYS ZERO. Draw any other line, use its coordinates, and you get zero > > for its slope. > > > > The odometer is analogous to a clock -- the odometer measures 1 inch for every 1 > > inch of the line it traverses; the clock measures 1 second for every 1 second of > > proper time it experiences (every second of the worldline it traverses). > > > > NEITHER TICK RATE EVER CHANGES. > > > > The tick rate of an odometer can be measured in some other frame, and the value > > can be different. This is measuring delta-x between odometer increments using > > coordinates for which the x axis is not along the line the odometer is traversing. > > > > THIS IS NOT THE TICK RATE OF THE ODOMETER, IT IS THE TICK RATE > > OF THE ODOMETER IN THOSE OTHER COORDINATES. > > > > The tick rate of a clock can be measured in some other frame, and the value can > > be different. This is measuring delta-t between clock ticks using coordinates > > for which the t axis is not along the worldline the clock is traversing. > > > > THIS IS NOT THE TICK RATE OF THE CLOCK, IT IS THE TICK RATE > > OF THE CLOCK IN THOSE OTHER COORDINATES. > > > > The constancy of clock tick rates is easily seen as a direct consequence of the > > first postulate of SR: the laws of physics are the same in every inertial frame. > > So the laws that govern the tick rate of a clock are INDEPENDENT of which frame > > it is at rest in. That directly implies its tick rate is also INDEPENDENT of frame. > > > > Note to the reading impaired: that paragraph discusses the tick > > rate of a clock, NOT the tick rate of a clock measured in some > > other frame. > > > > Until you learn to read well enough to distinguish those quantities, you will > > remain confused, and unaware of your own confusion. There's no point in reading > > the rest of your post, or reading the zillions of articles in this thread, as > > all you do is repeat your errors. You have an amazing ability to avoid learning > > anything, and an amazing persistence in repeating your errors. > > > > Learn how to read. Learn what the words you use actually mean. You just showed > > that not only can you NOT read posts around here, you also can NOT read the book > > by Taylor and Wheeler. In both cases you impose your personal MISCONCEPTIONS > > onto the words of the author. > > > > Tom Roberts > > Yes, Tom, you have stated your OPINIONS many times before. The problem here is to get out of OPINION vs OPINION arguments and into RESOLVING DISAGREEMENTS. Nope. That's only your wishful thinking and arrogance speaking now. What's really happening is that on this topic you have opinions and Tom has facts. In your current situation, you cannot disagree with the above assessment. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-06 12:57 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <988fa5c5-07d0-4d23-9e9f-7742e923e89d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451632 |
On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 5:44:34 PM UTC-6, JanPB wrote: > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:12:32 PM UTC-8, Ed Lake wrote: > > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 2:00:32 PM UTC-6, tjrob137 wrote: > > > Until you learn to read well enough to distinguish those quantities, you will > > > remain confused, and unaware of your own confusion. There's no point in reading > > > the rest of your post, or reading the zillions of articles in this thread, as > > > all you do is repeat your errors. You have an amazing ability to avoid learning > > > anything, and an amazing persistence in repeating your errors. > > > > > > Learn how to read. Learn what the words you use actually mean. You just showed > > > that not only can you NOT read posts around here, you also can NOT read the book > > > by Taylor and Wheeler. In both cases you impose your personal MISCONCEPTIONS > > > onto the words of the author. > > > > > > Tom Roberts > > > > Yes, Tom, you have stated your OPINIONS many times before. The problem here is to get out of OPINION vs OPINION arguments and into RESOLVING DISAGREEMENTS. > > Nope. That's only your wishful thinking and arrogance speaking now. What's > really happening is that on this topic you have opinions and Tom has facts. > > In your current situation, you cannot disagree with the above assessment. See, you are WRONG again! I DO disagree with the above assessment. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@python.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-07 01:39 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <5a9f34b7$0$3701$426a74cc@news.free.fr> |
| In reply to | #451730 |
Idiot Ed Lake wrote: > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 5:44:34 PM UTC-6, JanPB wrote: ... >> Nope. That's only your wishful thinking and arrogance speaking now. What's >> really happening is that on this topic you have opinions and Tom has facts. >> >> In your current situation, you cannot disagree with the above assessment. > > See, you are WRONG again! I DO disagree with the above assessment. It's your opinion, as you say "you DISAGREE". It is not the one of knowledgeable people.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-06 20:08 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <e997c64f-69d8-4661-a121-44e48c8abec7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451762 |
On Wednesday, 7 March 2018 01:39:20 UTC+1, Python wrote: > Idiot Ed Lake wrote: > > On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 5:44:34 PM UTC-6, JanPB wrote: > ... > >> Nope. That's only your wishful thinking and arrogance speaking now. What's > >> really happening is that on this topic you have opinions and Tom has facts. > >> > >> In your current situation, you cannot disagree with the above assessment. > > > > See, you are WRONG again! I DO disagree with the above assessment. > > It's your opinion, as you say "you DISAGREE". It is not the one of > knowledgeable people. Rather, it is not one of fanatic idiots following some insane mumble of a mad guru.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 26 of 28 — ← Prev page 1 … 24 25 [26] 27 28 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web