Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #467924 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-08-15 09:48 -0700 |
| Last post | 2018-08-28 17:05 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 366 — 34 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-15 09:48 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-08-15 19:17 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-15 11:58 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-08-16 13:18 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light alsor@interia.pl - 2018-08-16 10:27 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-08-16 10:30 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-08-15 19:51 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-16 04:38 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-16 07:13 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-16 07:21 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-16 07:24 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-08-16 16:44 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-08-16 22:42 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-17 07:14 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-17 07:43 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-08-17 16:57 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-17 08:59 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-17 09:22 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-17 11:23 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-17 14:06 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-17 14:26 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-08-17 23:39 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Lovu Biftek <ufeli@fupuks.cl> - 2018-08-17 22:44 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-17 18:04 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-08-22 14:55 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Lovu Biftek <ufeli@fupuks.cl> - 2018-08-17 22:45 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-18 06:48 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Lovu Biftek <ufeli@fupuks.cl> - 2018-08-17 22:42 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-18 06:54 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-08-18 16:45 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-18 08:05 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Sushika Imaki <kukih@wkkss.ki> - 2018-08-18 17:52 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-18 12:46 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-08-19 00:32 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-08-17 19:08 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Lovu Biftek <ufeli@fupuks.cl> - 2018-08-17 19:07 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-17 08:04 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light egas@pacbell.net - 2018-08-17 09:20 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-08-22 14:44 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-22 14:53 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-08-22 15:07 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-08-22 23:40 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-08-28 00:35 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-08-15 12:14 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-15 20:55 +0000
Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-08-15 17:26 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-08-15 20:44 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-08-15 21:59 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 13:33 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Jed Sosebee <eue@eosgps.pn> - 2018-08-19 19:15 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-08-20 14:09 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-16 07:07 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-08-16 17:11 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-08-17 18:48 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-17 10:02 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-08-17 19:11 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-08-16 00:18 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-16 00:40 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-08-16 00:56 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-16 07:09 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-08-16 10:20 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-16 13:18 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-08-16 13:36 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-16 09:58 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-08-16 13:03 -0500
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Lovu Biftek <ufeli@fupuks.cl> - 2018-08-16 18:24 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-16 13:37 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-08-17 13:13 -0500
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-17 14:01 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-08-17 14:45 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-08-22 10:47 -0500
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-22 09:44 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light alsor@interia.pl - 2018-08-16 10:14 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-17 09:46 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-08-17 13:47 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-17 14:08 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-08-17 14:49 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-08-17 15:55 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-18 06:57 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-18 06:51 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-18 13:49 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-08-17 19:28 -0500
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-18 07:55 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-08-22 10:46 -0500
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-22 09:37 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-22 17:45 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-22 11:21 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-08-22 12:20 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-23 05:52 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-19 15:51 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-08-19 16:09 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-08-19 19:59 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-20 06:52 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-08-20 08:03 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-20 22:01 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-08-21 05:09 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-21 05:29 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Jed Sosebee <eue@eosgps.pn> - 2018-08-21 17:01 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-08-20 10:54 -0500
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-20 18:06 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Jed Sosebee <eue@eosgps.pn> - 2018-08-20 17:23 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-20 09:12 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-20 09:30 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Jed Sosebee <eue@eosgps.pn> - 2018-08-20 17:24 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-20 13:03 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Jed Sosebee <eue@eosgps.pn> - 2018-08-20 20:51 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-08-20 23:22 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-21 07:05 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-21 16:59 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-21 01:04 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-20 21:54 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 13:04 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-21 16:55 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-22 07:21 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-22 14:39 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-08-22 10:48 -0500
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-22 09:48 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-22 09:54 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-22 10:13 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-22 11:46 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-22 10:09 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-22 10:16 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-22 11:39 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-22 12:54 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-22 13:02 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-22 13:06 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-22 13:07 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-22 13:28 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-22 13:31 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-22 13:39 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-22 13:57 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-22 14:11 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-22 14:35 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-23 15:47 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-22 13:55 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-22 14:31 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-22 14:46 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-23 07:38 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-23 10:00 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-23 13:54 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-23 15:51 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-23 21:20 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-24 07:49 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-22 20:16 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-08-22 16:28 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-22 20:20 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-23 08:00 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-22 10:34 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light alsor@interia.pl - 2018-08-22 11:41 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-08-22 12:24 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-08-21 21:17 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-21 22:05 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-08-22 15:12 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-22 15:20 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-08-23 10:44 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-23 20:12 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-23 11:19 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-08-24 11:24 +0100
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-24 22:53 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-19 10:36 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-19 20:51 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-19 12:47 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-19 23:15 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Jed Sosebee <eue@eosgps.pn> - 2018-08-21 17:04 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-08-20 01:15 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-20 12:54 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-20 07:28 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-20 16:48 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-20 08:12 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-20 08:39 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-20 17:51 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-20 09:02 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-20 09:45 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-08-20 12:53 -0500
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-20 13:22 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 13:41 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Jed Sosebee <eue@eosgps.pn> - 2018-08-20 21:21 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-08-22 11:11 -0500
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-22 10:01 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-08-22 20:23 -0500
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-23 08:20 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-08-23 11:52 -0500
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-23 10:15 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-23 13:37 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-23 15:15 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-23 21:13 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-24 06:20 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Eters Beckenbauer <lrrif@dnewrersd.ne> - 2018-08-24 13:25 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-25 03:33 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Brandi Hofmann <ohifu@awdwf.nr> - 2018-08-28 11:09 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-28 08:37 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-08-28 09:00 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Brandi Hofmann <ohifu@awdwf.nr> - 2018-08-28 16:07 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-24 07:30 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-24 08:12 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-24 08:47 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-24 09:02 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-24 09:12 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-08-25 23:29 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-08-24 08:53 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-20 13:11 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-20 13:55 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Jed Sosebee <eue@eosgps.pn> - 2018-08-20 15:29 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-20 09:02 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-20 09:13 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-20 09:50 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-20 12:57 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-20 13:28 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-20 13:38 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-20 13:56 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-08-21 09:54 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-21 07:09 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-21 07:10 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-21 07:18 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-21 07:51 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-21 09:55 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-21 13:51 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 14:02 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-21 23:29 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 18:05 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 18:37 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-08-21 14:48 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 15:22 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 10:28 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-21 08:52 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-21 07:39 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-08-22 10:51 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-22 02:17 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-08-22 07:13 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Jed Sosebee <eue@eosgps.pn> - 2018-08-21 17:10 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-21 14:07 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Jed Sosebee <eue@eosgps.pn> - 2018-08-22 11:36 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 10:51 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Jed Sosebee <eue@eosgps.pn> - 2018-08-21 17:09 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-21 14:01 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Jed Sosebee <eue@eosgps.pn> - 2018-08-22 11:45 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-08-20 23:24 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-08-21 20:33 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-22 15:04 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-22 07:18 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-08-22 10:45 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-22 12:08 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-08-22 18:25 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-23 04:46 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-22 20:18 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-08-22 23:36 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-23 09:23 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-23 19:55 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-08-23 15:17 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-24 03:48 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-23 08:24 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-23 00:39 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-22 17:06 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-25 01:03 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-24 16:18 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-25 02:01 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-24 17:51 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-24 18:06 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-08-25 11:39 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-25 03:33 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light alsor@interia.pl - 2018-08-24 16:41 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-25 02:45 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light alsor@interia.pl - 2018-08-25 09:49 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-08-26 23:27 -0500
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light alsor@interia.pl - 2018-08-27 12:38 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-08-28 11:01 -0500
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light alsor@interia.pl - 2018-08-28 09:59 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-08-29 14:25 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light alsor@interia.pl - 2018-08-30 08:58 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-08-30 10:45 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light alsor@interia.pl - 2018-08-30 12:19 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-08-30 13:14 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light alsor@interia.pl - 2018-08-30 13:26 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-08-30 13:58 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light alsor@interia.pl - 2018-08-30 14:36 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-08-30 14:52 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light alsor@interia.pl - 2018-08-30 13:18 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-08-30 07:56 -0500
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light alsor@interia.pl - 2018-08-30 09:21 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-27 15:43 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-08-27 11:22 -0500
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Toloni D'antonio <uut@gwrroei.ta> - 2018-08-27 16:37 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-27 10:24 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-27 17:20 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-08-27 17:43 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-08-27 10:51 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-27 18:01 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-08-27 18:13 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light carleto4157990662@gmail.com - 2018-08-27 19:30 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-28 21:53 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light hallstoncliff@gmail.com - 2018-08-27 15:10 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-08-27 18:31 -0500
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light hallstoncliff@gmail.com - 2018-08-27 19:13 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-08-27 09:39 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light alsor@interia.pl - 2018-08-27 12:40 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Eters Beckenbauer <lrrif@dnewrersd.ne> - 2018-08-23 14:43 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-08-25 23:39 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-08-26 22:53 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-08-27 23:37 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-08-24 15:22 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-25 07:11 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-08-22 14:46 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-08-23 07:50 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-08-23 08:50 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-08-23 13:34 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-08-23 13:37 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-08-23 14:25 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-08-23 15:29 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-24 06:10 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-08-25 23:24 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-08-25 23:37 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-08-26 06:40 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-08-26 08:48 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-08-23 15:53 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-08-23 15:57 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-23 16:12 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-08-23 16:25 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-23 16:45 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-23 17:50 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-24 01:24 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-24 02:04 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-24 08:16 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-08-23 17:14 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light carleto4157990662@gmail.com - 2018-08-23 18:36 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-08-24 17:04 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-08-27 11:41 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-27 18:54 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-27 12:32 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-27 23:08 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-08-27 13:11 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-08-27 13:13 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-28 00:47 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-27 20:28 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-28 00:59 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 01:37 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-28 21:51 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-08-28 13:05 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-28 23:46 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-08-28 16:12 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 16:41 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 17:00 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-29 17:51 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light alsor@interia.pl - 2018-08-29 10:46 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-29 20:04 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light alsor@interia.pl - 2018-08-29 11:22 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-29 20:42 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-08-29 13:06 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-29 22:10 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-29 15:35 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-08-30 22:48 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-08-30 15:36 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light alsor@interia.pl - 2018-08-27 13:59 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-27 23:19 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-08-27 16:10 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-28 01:18 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-08-27 16:27 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-28 02:06 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-08-28 09:19 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 16:52 +0000
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 10:32 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-28 22:09 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-08-28 13:25 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-08-27 17:10 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-28 21:47 +0200
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-08-28 11:17 -0700
Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-08-28 17:05 -0700
Page 4 of 19 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 19 Next page →
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-16 10:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5B75B270.39B5@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #467999 |
Ed Lake wrote: > > On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 2:56:22 AM UTC-5, The Starmaker wrote: > > mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > > > > > > On Thursday, 16 August 2018 09:18:38 UTC+2, The Starmaker wrote: > > > > Ed Lake wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hey guys, I'm baaaack. > > > > > > > > > > I just put a new paper on vixra.org. It is titled "Variable Time and the > > > > > Variable Speed of Light." Here is the link: http://vixra.org/pdf/1607.0289v6.pdf > > > > > > > > > > And here is the opening paragraph: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since the facts in that paragraph are undeniable, I assume everyone here fully agrees with it. Nevertheless, I'd be interested in your thoughts. :-) > > > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > > > > > a 12 inch ruler is 12 inches no matter where the ruler is located. > > > > > > Obviously, a ruler not being 12 inches isn't a 12 inch ruler, no > > > matter where it is located. > > > > > > if the speed of light travels the length of a 12 inch ruler in a second > > then no matter where that ruler is located it > > will always travel 12 inches in a second. > > Why? because the ruler is 12 inches long... and in a universe where light travels the length of a 12 inch ruler in a second.. no matter where that ruler is located light will always travel at the same speed the length of a 12 inch ruler. Take a 12 inch ruler.. measure the point from the beginning and end of the ruler... 12 inches. In a universe where light travels 12 inches a second.. the length of a 12 inch ruler no matter where that ruler is located light will always travel at the same speed the length of a 12 inch ruler. Am I wrong here?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-16 13:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <cb2cbe35-56c7-4ff5-9415-db7b97af0244@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #468027 |
On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 12:20:51 PM UTC-5, The Starmaker wrote: > Ed Lake wrote: > > > > On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 2:56:22 AM UTC-5, The Starmaker wrote: > > > mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thursday, 16 August 2018 09:18:38 UTC+2, The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > Ed Lake wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey guys, I'm baaaack. > > > > > > > > > > > > I just put a new paper on vixra.org. It is titled "Variable Time and the > > > > > > Variable Speed of Light." Here is the link: http://vixra.org/pdf/1607.0289v6.pdf > > > > > > > > > > > > And here is the opening paragraph: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since the facts in that paragraph are undeniable, I assume everyone here fully agrees with it. Nevertheless, I'd be interested in your thoughts. :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a 12 inch ruler is 12 inches no matter where the ruler is located. > > > > > > > > Obviously, a ruler not being 12 inches isn't a 12 inch ruler, no > > > > matter where it is located. > > > > > > > > > if the speed of light travels the length of a 12 inch ruler in a second > > > then no matter where that ruler is located it > > > will always travel 12 inches in a second. > > > > Why? > > > because the ruler is 12 inches long... > > and in a universe > where light travels > the length of a 12 inch ruler > in a second.. > no matter where that > ruler is > located > light will always travel > at the same speed > the length of a 12 inch ruler. > > Take a 12 inch ruler.. > measure the point from the > beginning and end of the ruler... > 12 inches. > > In a universe > where light travels > 12 inches a second.. > > the length of a 12 inch ruler > > no matter where that > ruler is > located > light will always travel > at the same speed > the length of a 12 inch ruler. > > Am I wrong here? Yes, you are wrong. While a 12 inch ruler may be the same everywhere, the length of a SECOND is different virtually everywhere. You wrote, "if the speed of light travels the length of a 12 inch ruler in a second then no matter where that ruler is located it will always travel 12 inches in a second." Einstein said that if that ruler is half-way up a mountain, light will travel MORE than 12 inches per second at the top of the mountain and LESS than 12 inches per second at the bottom of the mountain. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-16 13:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <09ffaf9d-3adc-4b19-bb25-29db742cfc2a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #468065 |
On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 3:18:25 PM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote: > > Yes, you are wrong. While a 12 inch ruler may be the same everywhere, the length of a SECOND is different virtually everywhere. No Stupid Ass EdTard !!!!!!! Where Ever you Go, What Ever You Do, Meters divided by seconds WILL BE "c" (1 Planck Length) / (Planck Time) = 299792458 m / s THAT IS WHY c IS CALLED A CONSTANT.............. > > You wrote, "if the speed of light travels the length of a 12 inch ruler in a second then no matter where that ruler is located it will always travel 12 inches in a second." > > Einstein said that if that ruler is half-way up a mountain, light will travel MORE than 12 inches per second at the top of the mountain and LESS than 12 inches per second at the bottom of the mountain. > > Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-16 09:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5119974d-45b8-4a70-9020-4460a5257bd3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #467924 |
On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 11:48:17 AM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote: > Hey guys, I'm baaaack. > > I just put a new paper on vixra.org. It is titled "Variable Time and the > Variable Speed of Light." Here is the link: http://vixra.org/pdf/1607.0289v6.pdf > > And here is the opening paragraph: > > "The fact that the speed of light is variable is demonstrated almost every day. No matter where you measure the speed of light, if you measure it correctly, you will get a result of 299,792,458 meters per second. Does this mean that the speed of light is the same everywhere? No. It means the speed of light PER SECOND is the same everywhere. And, according to Einstein’s Theories of Special and General Relativity, the length of a second can be different almost everywhere. That means that if you measure the speed of light to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND in one location, and if you also measure it to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND in another location, if the length of a second is different at those two locations, then the speed of light is also different." > > Since the facts in that paragraph are undeniable, I assume everyone here fully agrees with it. Nevertheless, I'd be interested in your thoughts. :-) > > Ed If light changes frequency as it falls to Earth (becoming blue-shifted), as some people believe, wouldn't that mean that all light from the stars is extremely blue-shifted when it reaches us, because it had to fall thousands or even millions of miles? And wouldn't that mean that the Hubble telescope would observe far less blue-shifting than ground-based telescopes? Or could it be, as stated in my paper, that light is simply EMITTED at a higher frequency at the top of a mountain than at the bottom of the mountain? It doesn't change frequency as it falls, but it will be measured to be a higher frequency by equipment at the bottom of the mountain (and it will APPEAR to be blue-shifted) because time ticks slower there. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-16 13:03 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <FLCdnQ_4A6DkIejGnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #468022 |
On 8/16/18 11:58 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 11:48:17 AM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote: >> I just put a new paper on vixra.org. [...] So you just wasted more time writing nonsense (your quoted first paragraph proves this). > If light changes frequency as it falls to Earth (becoming blue-shifted), as > some people believe, This is not what "some people believe", this is WHAT IS MEASURED. > wouldn't that mean that all light from the stars is > extremely blue-shifted when it reaches us, because it had to fall thousands > or even millions of miles? When you choose to keep yourself PROFOUNDLY IGNORANT of modern physics, then you make such silly and unfounded claims (or such silly and unfounded questions). And your "thousands or even millions of miles" is LAUGHINGLY wrong. The nearest star is ~ 23 million million miles away; astronomers observe objects many millions of times further than that. It is AMAZING how ignorant you manage to keep yourself -- you don't even know what most schoolkids know. BTW the distance the light has fallen is IRRELEVANT; the blueshift is determined by the change in gravitational potential between source and detector, not the distance. In fact, the gravitational blueshift from far, far away to earth's surface is quite small (a few parts per million, IIRC). Other objects, relative velocity, and cosmological redshift can have a MUCH larger effect. > And wouldn't that mean that the Hubble telescope > would observe far less blue-shifting than ground-based telescopes? Nope. GPS satellites are much higher than Hubble, and the GRAVITATIONAL blueshift from GPS satellite to earth's surface is a few parts in 10^10. So Hubble sees only a mini-micro-smidgen less blue-shifting than ground-based telescopes. Physics is a QUANTITATIVE science, and when you keep yourself PROFOUNDLY IGNORANT of modern physics you have no hope of making sensible claims (or asking sensible questions). Essentially everything you write is nonsense. > [... further nonsense omitted] Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lovu Biftek <ufeli@fupuks.cl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-16 18:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pl4fhm$128e$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #468035 |
Tom Roberts wrote: > When you choose to keep yourself PROFOUNDLY IGNORANT of modern physics, > then you make such silly and unfounded claims (or such silly and > unfounded questions). > And your "thousands or even millions of miles" is LAUGHINGLY wrong. The > nearest star is ~ 23 million million miles away; astronomers observe > objects many millions of times further than that. It is AMAZING how > ignorant you manage to keep yourself -- you don't even know what most > schoolkids know. Classic classroom case study error committed. Astronomers are not observing that. What you do is to detect some photons, LOCALLY. That's all.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-16 13:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <01eb62c8-dbf6-4c24-9b36-b21dca235a95@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #468035 |
On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 1:03:45 PM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote: > On 8/16/18 11:58 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 11:48:17 AM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote: > >> I just put a new paper on vixra.org. [...] > > So you just wasted more time writing nonsense (your quoted first paragraph > proves this). > > > If light changes frequency as it falls to Earth (becoming blue-shifted), as > > some people believe, > > This is not what "some people believe", this is WHAT IS MEASURED. No, it is NOT what is measured. What is measured is that the light is EMITTED at a higher frequency at the top. Thus it remains a higher frequency when it reaches the bottom. It did NOT change frequencies along the way. > > > wouldn't that mean that all light from the stars is > > extremely blue-shifted when it reaches us, because it had to fall thousands > > or even millions of miles? > > When you choose to keep yourself PROFOUNDLY IGNORANT of modern physics, then you > make such silly and unfounded claims (or such silly and unfounded questions). > > And your "thousands or even millions of miles" is LAUGHINGLY > wrong. The nearest star is ~ 23 million million miles away; > astronomers observe objects many millions of times further than > that. It is AMAZING how ignorant you manage to keep yourself > -- you don't even know what most schoolkids know. You just interpret things incorrectly to suit your beliefs. While a star may be many millions of miles away, its light will not start to accelerate and change frequency until it is "within range" of the earth. Beyond thousands of miles and certainly beyond millions of miles, OTHER planets will exert more force on the light. > > BTW the distance the light has fallen is IRRELEVANT; the > blueshift is determined by the change in gravitational > potential between source and detector, not the distance. And, near the Earth the "gravitational potential" differs as a result of distance. > > In fact, the gravitational blueshift from far, far away to earth's surface is > quite small (a few parts per million, IIRC). Other objects, relative velocity, > and cosmological redshift can have a MUCH larger effect. I agree. > > > And wouldn't that mean that the Hubble telescope > > would observe far less blue-shifting than ground-based telescopes? > > Nope. GPS satellites are much higher than Hubble, and the GRAVITATIONAL > blueshift from GPS satellite to earth's surface is a few parts in 10^10. So > Hubble sees only a mini-micro-smidgen less blue-shifting than ground-based > telescopes. Make up your mind. First you say "Nope" and then you say Yes, but it is just "a mini-micro-smidgen less blue-shifting than ground-based telescopes." > > Physics is a QUANTITATIVE science, and when you keep yourself PROFOUNDLY > IGNORANT of modern physics you have no hope of making sensible claims (or asking > sensible questions). Essentially everything you write is nonsense. Science is about UNDERSTANDING, not measuring. So, is physics. First you have to UNDERSTAND what is happening, then you can quantify it and make predictions. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 13:13 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <U6qdnbRXQ_uljerGnZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #468070 |
On 8/16/18 3:37 PM, Ed Lake wrote: > On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 1:03:45 PM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote: >> On 8/16/18 11:58 AM, Ed Lake wrote: >>> If light changes frequency as it falls to Earth (becoming blue-shifted), >>> as some people believe, >> >> This is not what "some people believe", this is WHAT IS MEASURED. > > No, it is NOT what is measured. What is measured is that the light is > EMITTED at a higher frequency at the top. This is just plain wrong. You are attempting to impose your personal fantasies on nature, and on physicists who make such measurements. The GPS chip rate, measured in a satellite, is 10.22999999543 MHz. It is measured on the ground as 10.23000000000 MHz. That blueshift is indeed a "mini-micro-smidgen", but for the GPS it is important. > While a star may > be many millions of miles away, its light will not start to accelerate and > change frequency until it is "within range" of the earth. This is just not true. While the effect of earth's gravity is quite small far away, it is not zero. Gravitation is of infinite range. >>> And wouldn't that mean that the Hubble telescope would observe far less >>> blue-shifting than ground-based telescopes? >> >> Nope. [...] Hubble sees only a mini-micro-smidgen less blue-shifting than >> ground-based telescopes. > > Make up your mind. First you say "Nope" and then you say Yes, but it is just > "a mini-micro-smidgen less blue-shifting than ground-based telescopes." Please READ WHAT YOU WROTE, AND WHAT I WROTE: "a mini-micro-smidgen less" is not "far less" -- that's my "nope". >> Physics is a QUANTITATIVE science, and when you keep yourself PROFOUNDLY >> IGNORANT of modern physics you have no hope of making sensible claims (or >> asking sensible questions). Essentially everything you write is nonsense. > > Science is about UNDERSTANDING, not measuring. So, is physics. First you > have to UNDERSTAND what is happening, then you can quantify it and make > predictions. You can do none of that. What you THINK is "understanding" is just your personal fantasies and dreams, unsupported by any actual experiments or measurements, because YOU CANNOT READ and "interpret" what your eyes pass over in an outrageously incorrect manner. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 14:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1a3ee9dc-6ab9-42a0-a794-3e89ca05b085@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #468160 |
On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 1:13:20 PM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote: > On 8/16/18 3:37 PM, Ed Lake wrote: > > On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 1:03:45 PM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote: > >> On 8/16/18 11:58 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > >>> If light changes frequency as it falls to Earth (becoming blue-shifted), > >>> as some people believe, > >> > >> This is not what "some people believe", this is WHAT IS MEASURED. > > > > No, it is NOT what is measured. What is measured is that the light is > > EMITTED at a higher frequency at the top. > > This is just plain wrong. You are attempting to impose your personal fantasies > on nature, and on physicists who make such measurements. It is what some textbooks say. But they never say it as clearly as I do. Instead, they say that someone at the bottom of a mountain will perceive light emitted at the top of the mountain to be blue-shifted. They do not say that the light changes frequencies on the way down. Others, of course, do say that light changes frequencies as it moves downward or upward. BUT, there is NO EVIDENCE that light changes frequencies on the way down. It is just assumed. You get the SAME TEST RESULTS either way. REPEAT: YOU GET THE SAME TEST RESULTS EITHER WAY. < snip repetitious arguments over wording > > >> Physics is a QUANTITATIVE science, and when you keep yourself PROFOUNDLY > >> IGNORANT of modern physics you have no hope of making sensible claims (or > >> asking sensible questions). Essentially everything you write is nonsense. > > > > Science is about UNDERSTANDING, not measuring. So, is physics. First you > > have to UNDERSTAND what is happening, then you can quantify it and make > > predictions. > > You can do none of that. What you THINK is "understanding" is just your personal > fantasies and dreams, unsupported by any actual experiments or measurements, > because YOU CANNOT READ and "interpret" what your eyes pass over in an > outrageously incorrect manner. Your beliefs are irrelevant. The facts say that light is EMITTED at different frequencies at the top of a mountain versus at the bottom. The frequency does NOT CHANGE en route. The frequency is measured PER SECOND. The length of a second is different at the top than at the bottom of a mountain. There is NO REASON for light to change frequencies while moving. It makes NO SENSE for light to change frequencies while moving. The light we receive from distant stars has the same wavelength at which the light was emitted. NOTHING changes it, even though it may have passed near many objects en route to Earth. The Doppler shift does NOT change the frequency of light, it just changes how it is PERCEIVED. A gravitational mass BENDS light, but it does not change the light's frequency. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 14:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7fda8a73-fa8a-4f77-a9f6-f42e9b8f5b58@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #468170 |
On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 2:01:06 PM UTC-7, Ed Lake wrote: > The length of a second is different at the top than at the bottom of a mountain. You must be related to Ken Shito. Same imbecilities
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-22 10:47 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <_dSdnTLzkbgMGODGnZ2dnUU7_81QAAAA@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #468170 |
On 8/17/18 4:01 PM, Ed Lake wrote: > The facts say that light is EMITTED at different frequencies at the top of a > mountain versus at the bottom. The frequency does NOT CHANGE en route. You've got your "facts" WRONG. There is no experiment that demonstrates that. This is just a figment of your imagination, based on your INABILITY TO READ. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-22 09:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1b4a8813-5e15-47cb-9b69-1d35ac7f7071@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #468718 |
On Wednesday, August 22, 2018 at 10:47:36 AM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote: > On 8/17/18 4:01 PM, Ed Lake wrote: > > The facts say that light is EMITTED at different frequencies at the top of a > > mountain versus at the bottom. The frequency does NOT CHANGE en route. > > You've got your "facts" WRONG. There is no experiment that demonstrates that. > This is just a figment of your imagination, based on your INABILITY TO READ. > > Tom Roberts Any experiment which says carbon light has the same frequency PER SECOND at the top of a mountain (where seconds are shorter) AND at the bottom of a mountain (where seconds are longer) says that the frequency of carbon light is different atop the mountain than at the bottom. It says there is NO REASON for the light to change frequencies WHILE traveling down or up. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | alsor@interia.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-16 10:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e787743c-94e7-4fc7-9603-21855c163243@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #467924 |
W dniu środa, 15 sierpnia 2018 18:48:17 UTC+2 użytkownik Ed Lake napisał: > Hey guys, I'm baaaack. > > I just put a new paper on vixra.org. It is titled "Variable Time and the > Variable Speed of Light." Here is the link: http://vixra.org/pdf/1607.0289v6.pdf > > And here is the opening paragraph: > > "The fact that the speed of light is variable is demonstrated almost every day. No matter where you measure the speed of light, if you measure it correctly, you will get a result of 299,792,458 meters per second. Does this mean that the speed of light is the same everywhere? No. It means the speed of light PER SECOND is the same everywhere. And, according to Einstein’s Theories of Special and General Relativity, the length of a second can be different almost everywhere. That means that if you measure the speed of light to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND in one location, and if you also measure it to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND in another location, if the length of a second is different at those two locations, then the speed of light is also different." > > Since the facts in that paragraph are undeniable, I assume everyone here fully agrees with it. Nevertheless, I'd be interested in your thoughts. :-) > > Ed Indeed. The normalization based on c provide automatically c = inv. Simple algebra: |c - v| => c, it is an equation only, which can be assumed. c = (cosf, sinf); v = (v, 0); // |c| = 1 for simplicity then: c-v = (cosf - v, sinf) thus: |c-v| = ... and using the standard algebra finally we get: x' = g (x - vt); t' = g (t - xv); The so-called Lorentz transform.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 09:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <17ac85e4-a387-4576-a197-16f26c590375@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #467924 |
On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 11:48:17 AM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote: > Hey guys, I'm baaaack. > > I just put a new paper on vixra.org. It is titled "Variable Time and the > Variable Speed of Light." Here is the link: http://vixra.org/pdf/1607.0289v6.pdf > > And here is the opening paragraph: > > "The fact that the speed of light is variable is demonstrated almost every day. No matter where you measure the speed of light, if you measure it correctly, you will get a result of 299,792,458 meters per second. Does this mean that the speed of light is the same everywhere? No. It means the speed of light PER SECOND is the same everywhere. And, according to Einstein’s Theories of Special and General Relativity, the length of a second can be different almost everywhere. That means that if you measure the speed of light to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND in one location, and if you also measure it to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND in another location, if the length of a second is different at those two locations, then the speed of light is also different." > > Since the facts in that paragraph are undeniable, I assume everyone here fully agrees with it. Nevertheless, I'd be interested in your thoughts. :-) > > Ed Okay, let's describe the problem in a different way: 1. The speed of light is measured to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND atop a mountain. 2. The speed of light is measured to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND at the bottom of the mountain. 3. A second is measured to be "9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium-133 atom” at BOTH the top and the bottom of the mountain. 4. HOWEVER, A COMPARISON of seconds accomplished by sending timed pulses up and down the mountain shows that a second is shorter at the top of the mountain than it is at the bottom of the mountain. 5. And many other experiments also show that time ticks faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain even though the COUNT of ticks per second is the same in both locations. Whatever you use to measure local time will measure time to be faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain. 6. This means that, since the length of a second is shorter at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain, then 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND is faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain. If this is wrong, please explain in plain English where it is wrong. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 13:47 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5B773477.2812@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #468150 |
Ed Lake wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 11:48:17 AM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote: > > Hey guys, I'm baaaack. > > > > I just put a new paper on vixra.org. It is titled "Variable Time and the > > Variable Speed of Light." Here is the link: http://vixra.org/pdf/1607.0289v6.pdf > > > > And here is the opening paragraph: > > > > > > > Since the facts in that paragraph are undeniable, I assume everyone here fully agrees with it. Nevertheless, I'd be interested in your thoughts. :-) > > > > Ed > > Okay, let's describe the problem in a different way: > > 1. The speed of light is measured to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND atop a mountain. > > 2. The speed of light is measured to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND at the bottom of the mountain. > > 3. A second is measured to be "9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium-133 atom†at BOTH the top and the bottom of the mountain. > > 4. HOWEVER, A COMPARISON of seconds accomplished by sending timed pulses up and down the mountain shows that a second is shorter at the top of the mountain than it is at the bottom of the mountain. > > 5. And many other experiments also show that time ticks faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain even though the COUNT of ticks per second is the same in both locations. Whatever you use to measure local time will measure time to be faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain. > > 6. This means that, since the length of a second is shorter at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain, then 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND is faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain. > > If this is wrong, please explain in plain English where it is wrong. > > Ed Time is not measured in seconds.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 14:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <936d16ec-0730-45c4-a663-7a2848b550fd@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #468169 |
On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 3:47:40 PM UTC-5, The Starmaker wrote: > Ed Lake wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 11:48:17 AM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote: > > > Hey guys, I'm baaaack. > > > > > > I just put a new paper on vixra.org. It is titled "Variable Time and the > > > Variable Speed of Light." Here is the link: http://vixra.org/pdf/1607.0289v6.pdf > > > > > > And here is the opening paragraph: > > > > > > > > > > > Since the facts in that paragraph are undeniable, I assume everyone here fully agrees with it. Nevertheless, I'd be interested in your thoughts. :-) > > > > > > Ed > > > > Okay, let's describe the problem in a different way: > > > > 1. The speed of light is measured to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND atop a mountain. > > > > 2. The speed of light is measured to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > 3. A second is measured to be "9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium-133 atom” at BOTH the top and the bottom of the mountain. > > > > 4. HOWEVER, A COMPARISON of seconds accomplished by sending timed pulses up and down the mountain shows that a second is shorter at the top of the mountain than it is at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > 5. And many other experiments also show that time ticks faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain even though the COUNT of ticks per second is the same in both locations. Whatever you use to measure local time will measure time to be faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > 6. This means that, since the length of a second is shorter at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain, then 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND is faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > If this is wrong, please explain in plain English where it is wrong. > > > > Ed > > > Time is not measured in seconds. Instead of must making silly statements, why don't you explain yourself? If "Time is not measured in seconds," HOW is time measured? I can find a thousand sources which give the speed of light per second. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 14:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5B7742DA.2D1E@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #468173 |
Ed Lake wrote: > > On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 3:47:40 PM UTC-5, The Starmaker wrote: > > Ed Lake wrote: > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 11:48:17 AM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote: > > > > Hey guys, I'm baaaack. > > > > > > > > I just put a new paper on vixra.org. It is titled "Variable Time and the > > > > Variable Speed of Light." Here is the link: http://vixra.org/pdf/1607.0289v6.pdf > > > > > > > > And here is the opening paragraph: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since the facts in that paragraph are undeniable, I assume everyone here fully agrees with it. Nevertheless, I'd be interested in your thoughts. :-) > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > Okay, let's describe the problem in a different way: > > > > > > 1. The speed of light is measured to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND atop a mountain. > > > > > > 2. The speed of light is measured to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > 3. A second is measured to be "9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium-133 atom†at BOTH the top and the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > 4. HOWEVER, A COMPARISON of seconds accomplished by sending timed pulses up and down the mountain shows that a second is shorter at the top of the mountain than it is at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > 5. And many other experiments also show that time ticks faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain even though the COUNT of ticks per second is the same in both locations. Whatever you use to measure local time will measure time to be faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > 6. This means that, since the length of a second is shorter at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain, then 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND is faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > If this is wrong, please explain in plain English where it is wrong. > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > Time is not measured in seconds. > > Instead of must making silly statements, why don't you explain yourself? > > If "Time is not measured in seconds," HOW is time measured? I can find a thousand sources which give the speed of light per second. > > Ed I used plain English where it is wrong. Nature does not use seconds to measure time. That's a human thing... Time does not flow forward in...seconds.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 15:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5B775261.30D1@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #468180 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > Ed Lake wrote: > > > > On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 3:47:40 PM UTC-5, The Starmaker wrote: > > > Ed Lake wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 11:48:17 AM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote: > > > > > Hey guys, I'm baaaack. > > > > > > > > > > I just put a new paper on vixra.org. It is titled "Variable Time and the > > > > > Variable Speed of Light." Here is the link: http://vixra.org/pdf/1607.0289v6.pdf > > > > > > > > > > And here is the opening paragraph: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since the facts in that paragraph are undeniable, I assume everyone here fully agrees with it. Nevertheless, I'd be interested in your thoughts. :-) > > > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > Okay, let's describe the problem in a different way: > > > > > > > > 1. The speed of light is measured to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND atop a mountain. > > > > > > > > 2. The speed of light is measured to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > 3. A second is measured to be "9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium-133 atom†at BOTH the top and the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > 4. HOWEVER, A COMPARISON of seconds accomplished by sending timed pulses up and down the mountain shows that a second is shorter at the top of the mountain than it is at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > 5. And many other experiments also show that time ticks faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain even though the COUNT of ticks per second is the same in both locations. Whatever you use to measure local time will measure time to be faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > 6. This means that, since the length of a second is shorter at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain, then 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND is faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > If this is wrong, please explain in plain English where it is wrong. > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > > Time is not measured in seconds. > > > > Instead of must making silly statements, why don't you explain yourself? > > > > If "Time is not measured in seconds," HOW is time measured? I can find a thousand sources which give the speed of light per second. > > > > Ed > > I used plain English where it is wrong. > > Nature does not use seconds to measure time. That's a human thing... > > Time does not flow forward in...seconds. let me put it this way... if you film light traveling at the speed of light...and you fast forward the film, does the light travel faster? and you showing the same film but at slower motion..does the light travel slower? Has the speed of light changed?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-18 06:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <efa9081c-65dc-4f09-a037-8f0fe6473bb4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #468186 |
On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 5:55:16 PM UTC-5, The Starmaker wrote: > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > Ed Lake wrote: > > > > > > On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 3:47:40 PM UTC-5, The Starmaker wrote: > > > > Ed Lake wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 11:48:17 AM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote: > > > > > > Hey guys, I'm baaaack. > > > > > > > > > > > > I just put a new paper on vixra.org. It is titled "Variable Time and the > > > > > > Variable Speed of Light." Here is the link: http://vixra.org/pdf/1607.0289v6.pdf > > > > > > > > > > > > And here is the opening paragraph: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since the facts in that paragraph are undeniable, I assume everyone here fully agrees with it. Nevertheless, I'd be interested in your thoughts. :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > > > Okay, let's describe the problem in a different way: > > > > > > > > > > 1. The speed of light is measured to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND atop a mountain. > > > > > > > > > > 2. The speed of light is measured to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > > > 3. A second is measured to be "9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium-133 atom” at BOTH the top and the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > > > 4. HOWEVER, A COMPARISON of seconds accomplished by sending timed pulses up and down the mountain shows that a second is shorter at the top of the mountain than it is at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > > > 5. And many other experiments also show that time ticks faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain even though the COUNT of ticks per second is the same in both locations. Whatever you use to measure local time will measure time to be faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > > > 6. This means that, since the length of a second is shorter at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain, then 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND is faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > > > If this is wrong, please explain in plain English where it is wrong. > > > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > > > > > Time is not measured in seconds. > > > > > > Instead of must making silly statements, why don't you explain yourself? > > > > > > If "Time is not measured in seconds," HOW is time measured? I can find a thousand sources which give the speed of light per second. > > > > > > Ed > > > > I used plain English where it is wrong. > > > > Nature does not use seconds to measure time. That's a human thing... > > > > Time does not flow forward in...seconds. > > > > let me put it this way... > > if you film light traveling at the speed of light...and you fast forward the film, does the light travel faster? > > and you showing the same film but at slower motion..does the light travel slower? Has the speed of light changed? Your question makes no sense. I cannot see what point you are trying to make. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-18 06:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4a21c647-20a3-4fa1-a5bd-a429bfa48fdf@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #468180 |
On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 4:49:02 PM UTC-5, The Starmaker wrote: > Ed Lake wrote: > > > > On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 3:47:40 PM UTC-5, The Starmaker wrote: > > > Ed Lake wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 11:48:17 AM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote: > > > > > Hey guys, I'm baaaack. > > > > > > > > > > I just put a new paper on vixra.org. It is titled "Variable Time and the > > > > > Variable Speed of Light." Here is the link: http://vixra.org/pdf/1607.0289v6.pdf > > > > > > > > > > And here is the opening paragraph: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since the facts in that paragraph are undeniable, I assume everyone here fully agrees with it. Nevertheless, I'd be interested in your thoughts. :-) > > > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > Okay, let's describe the problem in a different way: > > > > > > > > 1. The speed of light is measured to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND atop a mountain. > > > > > > > > 2. The speed of light is measured to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > 3. A second is measured to be "9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium-133 atom” at BOTH the top and the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > 4. HOWEVER, A COMPARISON of seconds accomplished by sending timed pulses up and down the mountain shows that a second is shorter at the top of the mountain than it is at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > 5. And many other experiments also show that time ticks faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain even though the COUNT of ticks per second is the same in both locations. Whatever you use to measure local time will measure time to be faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > 6. This means that, since the length of a second is shorter at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain, then 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND is faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > If this is wrong, please explain in plain English where it is wrong. > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > > Time is not measured in seconds. > > > > Instead of must making silly statements, why don't you explain yourself? > > > > If "Time is not measured in seconds," HOW is time measured? I can find a thousand sources which give the speed of light per second. > > > > Ed > > > I used plain English where it is wrong. > > Nature does not use seconds to measure time. That's a human thing... > > Time does not flow forward in...seconds. You are just babbling. We are humans who are trying to understand how Nature works. We measure time in seconds. Saying "Nature does not use seconds to measure time" may be true but it is meaningless. What is your point? Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 19 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 19 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web