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 15 of 19 — ← Prev page 1 … 13 14 [15] 16 17 … 19 Next page →
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 11:22 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ZYadnaqvdcuruBnGnZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #469267 |
On 8/27/18 8:43 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > According to Newton, force is the change of (3-)momentum per unit time: > F = dp∕dt Yes, where F is the 3-vector force applied to an object, p is the object's 3-vector momentum, and t is the time coordinate of the inertial frame relative to which the other quantities are measured. Interestingly, the generalization of this is SR is: F = dp/dt where F is the 4-vector force applied to an object, p is the object's 4-momentun, and t is the object's proper time. Note that unlike the Newtonian equation this is independent of coordinates (no need to mention any inertial frame). Moreover, this generalizes to GR: F = dp/dt where d/dt is the covariant derivative with respect to proper time (other symbols as in SR). Please note how important it is to define what the symbols mean. All too many people around here forget that. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Toloni D'antonio <uut@gwrroei.ta> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 16:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pm19bm$1c04$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #469285 |
Tom Roberts wrote: > where F is the 4-vector force applied to an object, p is the object's > 4-momentun, and t is the object's proper time. Note that unlike the > Newtonian equation this is independent of coordinates (no need to > mention any inertial frame). > > Moreover, this generalizes to GR: > > F = dp/dt You can't, since the next difference in the row is already changed. The above assumes constant difference. In GR the gradient along the path is never the same.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 10:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4193a246-b3bb-459d-944e-f04424794d59@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #469285 |
On Monday, August 27, 2018 at 9:22:20 AM UTC-7, tjrob137 wrote: > On 8/27/18 8:43 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > > According to Newton, force is the change of (3-)momentum per unit time: > > F = dp∕dt > > Yes, where F is the 3-vector force applied to an object, p is the object's > 3-vector momentum, and t is the time coordinate of the inertial frame relative > to which the other quantities are measured. > > Interestingly, the generalization of this is SR is: > > F = dp/dt > > where F is the 4-vector force applied to an object, p is the object's > 4-momentun, and t is the object's proper time. Note that unlike the Newtonian > equation this is independent of coordinates (no need to mention any inertial > frame). > > Moreover, this generalizes to GR: > > F = dp/dt > > where d/dt is the covariant derivative with respect to proper time (other > symbols as in SR). > > Please note how important it is to define what the symbols > mean. All too many people around here forget that. > > Tom Roberts It's also important when finding extensions to models how to "keep things real" for all the existing notation. That is to say, "backward compatibility" is a justification for "principles of least surprise" or "intuitive conventions". Of course, re-doing all the derivations after finding alternate suppositions deep in the model is quite relevant to working out all the question words for alternate (or complementary) conclusions. I wonder what is "3-momentum" in terms of higher-order terms of momentum and what that means in terms of all the higher- order derivatives of acceleration, or particle "momentum spectra", here in terms of "lab frame" and "center of momentum frame" vis-a-vis some usual "linear" inertial frame. https://spiral.imperial.ac.uk/bitstream/10044/1/33993/4/Nuclear%20effects%20on%20the%20transverse%20momentum%20spectra%20of%20charged%20particles%20in%20pPb%20collisions%20at%20%5bFormula%3a%20see%20text%5d%5bFormula%3a%20see%20text%5d.pdf Refers to "shadowing", "anti-shadowing". "Cronin effect vs. geometrical shadowing in d+Au collisions at RHIC"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 17:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3f996068-9731-4fed-8eb3-c6efb194c2e5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #469306 |
On Monday, August 27, 2018 at 10:24:53 AM UTC-7, Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > On Monday, August 27, 2018 at 9:22:20 AM UTC-7, tjrob137 wrote: > > On 8/27/18 8:43 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > > > According to Newton, force is the change of (3-)momentum per unit time: > > > F = dp∕dt > > > > Yes, where F is the 3-vector force applied to an object, p is the object's > > 3-vector momentum, and t is the time coordinate of the inertial frame relative > > to which the other quantities are measured. > > > > Interestingly, the generalization of this is SR is: > > > > F = dp/dt > > > > where F is the 4-vector force applied to an object, p is the object's > > 4-momentun, and t is the object's proper time. Note that unlike the Newtonian > > equation this is independent of coordinates (no need to mention any inertial > > frame). > > > > Moreover, this generalizes to GR: > > > > F = dp/dt > > > > where d/dt is the covariant derivative with respect to proper time (other > > symbols as in SR). > > > > Please note how important it is to define what the symbols > > mean. All too many people around here forget that. > > > > Tom Roberts > > It's also important when finding extensions to models > how to "keep things real" for all the existing notation. > > That is to say, "backward compatibility" is a justification > for "principles of least surprise" or "intuitive conventions". > > Of course, re-doing all the derivations after finding > alternate suppositions deep in the model is quite > relevant to working out all the question words for > alternate (or complementary) conclusions. > > > > > I wonder what is "3-momentum" in terms of > higher-order terms of momentum and what > that means in terms of all the higher- > order derivatives of acceleration, or > particle "momentum spectra", here > in terms of "lab frame" and "center of > momentum frame" vis-a-vis some usual > "linear" inertial frame. > > https://spiral.imperial.ac.uk/bitstream/10044/1/33993/4/Nuclear%20effects%20on%20the%20transverse%20momentum%20spectra%20of%20charged%20particles%20in%20pPb%20collisions%20at%20%5bFormula%3a%20see%20text%5d%5bFormula%3a%20see%20text%5d.pdf > > Refers to "shadowing", "anti-shadowing". > > "Cronin effect vs. geometrical shadowing in d+Au collisions at RHIC" "Wave equations in momentum space", Levy, 1950? Bethe-Salpeter? (Or Nambu?) "Properties of Bethe-Salpeter Wave Functions", Wick 1954? Cutkosky (1954), Nakanishi (1967)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bethe%E2%80%93Salpeter_equation "In quantum theory, bound states are objects that live for an infinite time (otherwise they are called resonances), thus the constituents interact infinitely many times. By summing up, infinitely many times, all possible interactions that can occur between the two constituents, the Bethe–Salpeter equation is a tool to calculate properties of bound states. Its solution, the Bethe–Salpeter amplitude, is a description of the bound state under consideration." "Even for simple systems such as the positronium, the equation cannot be solved exactly although the equation can in principle be formulated exactly. Fortunately, a classification of the states can be achieved without the need for an exact solution. If one of the particles is significantly more massive than the other, the problem is considerably simplified as one solves the Dirac equation for the lighter particle under the external potential of the heavier particle. " This is pretty famous for being widely un-known. See also Bethe and Bethe-Bloch stopping power vis-a-vis "large, small, very small" and components of momentum, eg Gould. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19720054061
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | consequently7990662@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 17:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5e385677-04e8-4ff9-8a42-59e6ac5ff648@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #469409 |
On Monday, August 27, 2018 at 5:20:31 PM UTC-7, Ross A. Finlayson wrote > > "Wave equations in momentum space", Levy, 1950? > > Bethe-Salpeter? (Or Nambu?) > > "Properties of Bethe-Salpeter Wave Functions", Wick 1954? > > Cutkosky (1954), Nakanishi (1967)? These are theores. I am not interested is someone's theory. I am interested in facts. Experimental fact that massless light produces a momentum.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 10:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <11a89ec3-dd06-410d-87a5-f12393bf30f0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #469285 |
A photon does not produce a momentum (p) since light is massless and a momentum represents a mass.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 18:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pm1e9g$1mh3$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #469308 |
<numbernumber1964@gmail.com> wrote: > A photon does not produce a momentum (p) since light is massless and a > momentum represents a mass. > > Untrue -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 18:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <bbe44811-3437-49a4-ba33-f6c7b36d9729@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #469308 |
On Monday, August 27, 2018 at 11:51:37 AM UTC-6, numbernu...@gmail.com wrote: > > A photon does not produce a momentum (p) since light is massless > and a momentum represents a mass. How does it feel to be shown that you are stupider than a bag of rocks? According to Maxwell's equations, light has momentum. DUH!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | carleto4157990662@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 19:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <22731244-04f4-4f63-bbd9-0924e80fe3f2@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #469425 |
On Monday, August 27, 2018 at 6:13:07 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote: > On Monday, August 27, 2018 at 11:51:37 AM UTC-6, numbernu...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > A photon does not produce a momentum (p) since light is massless > > and a momentum represents a mass. > > How does it feel to be shown that you are stupider than a bag of > rocks? According to Maxwell's equations, light has momentum. DUH! Newton. defined momentum as the product of velocity v and mass m (Motte translation 1729 [1]):.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-28 21:53 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e41cfccc-1c84-22d3-4638-5cdfc7586cb5@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #469434 |
carleto4157990662@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, August 27, 2018 at 6:13:07 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote: >> On Monday, August 27, 2018 at 11:51:37 AM UTC-6, numbernu...@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>> A photon does not produce a momentum (p) since light is massless >>> and a momentum represents a mass. >> >> How does it feel to be shown that you are stupider than a bag of >> rocks? According to Maxwell's equations, light has momentum. DUH! > > Newton. defined momentum as the product of velocity v and mass m (Motte > translation 1729 [1]):. You did not even have the decency to cite the source of what you are not understanding: me. FOAD. -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hallstoncliff@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 15:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <25630966-d4dc-46af-a542-5ca6d04f08e0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #469285 |
On Monday, August 27, 2018 at 9:22:20 AM UTC-7, tjrob137 wrote: > On 8/27/18 8:43 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > > According to Newton, force is the change of (3-)momentum per unit time: > > F = dp∕dt > Yes, where F is the 3-vector force applied to an object, p is the object's > 3-vector momentum, and t is the time coordinate of the inertial frame > relative to which the other quantities are measured. Interestingly, the > generalization of this is SR is F = dp/dt where F is the 4-vector force > applied to an object, p is the object's 4-momentun, and t is the object's > proper time. Note that unlike the Newtonian equation this is independent of > coordinates (no need to mention any inertial frame). Not true, because you're using ordinary differentiation here, which doesn't work if (for example) the components of p are defined in terms of accelerating coordinates. Just as with the Newtonian 3-vector formula, it applies only when the components are defined in terms of inertial coordinates, and, just as in the Newtonian case, it applies to any inertial coordinates, so they are equally general/restricted. The advantage of the 4-vector formalism is just that it makes the Lorentz invariance manifest, not that it's more general. > Moreover, this generalizes to GR: F = dp/dt where d/dt is the covariant > derivative with respect to proper time (other symbols as in SR). This isn't related to general versus special relativity; the need for covariant differentiation arises whenever we are not using inertial coordinates (whether spacetime is curved or not), and of course the extra terms that appear when we apply covariant differentiation to non-inertial coordinates are just the terms necessary to adjust for the fact that the coordinates are not inertial, so the apparent increase in generality is really just formalistic.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 18:31 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ppydnb7hs5Z1FBnGnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #469365 |
On 8/27/18 5:10 PM, hallstoncliff@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, August 27, 2018 at 9:22:20 AM UTC-7, tjrob137 wrote: >> On 8/27/18 8:43 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >>> According to Newton, force is the change of (3-)momentum per unit >>> time: F = dp∕dt >> Yes, where F is the 3-vector force applied to an object, p is the >> object's 3-vector momentum, and t is the time coordinate of the >> inertial frame relative to which the other quantities are measured. >> Interestingly, the generalization of this is SR is F = dp/dt where >> F is the 4-vector force applied to an object, p is the object's >> 4-momentun, and t is the object's proper time. Note that unlike the >> Newtonian equation this is independent of coordinates (no need to >> mention any inertial frame). > > Not true, because you're using ordinary differentiation here, which > doesn't work if (for example) the components of p are defined in > terms of accelerating coordinates. What I said is true, because the equation is written in terms of the 4-vectors, NOT THEIR COMPONENTS. The 4-vectors are independent of coordinates, as is that equation [#]. Note also that the differentiation is with respect to t -- the object's proper time -- and not any coordinate. [#] If you choose to use a coordinate system to calculate the 4-vector p via its components, then to obtain p you must multiply each component by the corresponding basis 4-vector, and the coordinate dependence cancels. You casually switched from a 4-vector to its components -- DON'T DO THAT! Do not confuse a tensor with its components -- historically such confusion has puzzled generations of students.... > Just as with the Newtonian > 3-vector formula, it applies only when the components are defined in > terms of inertial coordinates, and, just as in the Newtonian case, it > applies to any inertial coordinates, so they are equally > general/restricted. Not true. The SR equation is in terms of the 4-vectors and the (scalar) proper time, and is MANIFESTLY independent of coordinates. In particular, it is not limited to inertial frames (how could it be, since none is involved???). > The advantage of the 4-vector formalism is just > that it makes the Lorentz invariance manifest, not that it's more > general. Hmmm. 4-vectors are MANIFESTLY independent of coordinates, which does make them more general. After all, physical phenomena MUST be independent of coordinates, so it is more appropriate to model them using quantities that are independent of coordinates. >> Moreover, this generalizes to GR: F = dp/dt where d/dt is the >> covariant derivative with respect to proper time (other symbols as >> in SR). > > This isn't related to general versus special relativity; the need for > covariant differentiation arises whenever we are not using inertial > coordinates (whether spacetime is curved or not), and of course the > extra terms that appear when we apply covariant differentiation to > non-inertial coordinates are just the terms necessary to adjust for > the fact that the coordinates are not inertial, so the apparent > increase in generality is really just formalistic. Hmmm. While differential operators expressed in terms of non-inertial coordinates are complicated, they are not the same as covariant differentiation: the latter is a MANIFOLD operator, while the former are functional operators -- the basis of the math is quite different. Granted you can apply manifold theory to SR and obtain the result you mention. But that is not how SR was derived, or how it is taught -- it's just that the Minkowski spacetime of SR is a valid manifold in GR. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hallstoncliff@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 19:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <42165936-61a0-4b5b-bc57-713235d83a90@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #469395 |
On Monday, August 27, 2018 at 4:31:58 PM UTC-7, tjrob137 wrote: > What I said is true, because the equation is written in terms of the > 4-vectors, NOT THEIR COMPONENTS. But you specified ordinary differentiation, not covariant differentiation. Ordinary differentiation of a tensor does not (in general) even yield a tensor. > The SR equation is in terms of the 4-vectors and the (scalar) > proper time, and is MANIFESTLY independent of coordinates. Again, ordinary differentiation of a tensor does not (in general) yield a tensor, even when differentiating with respect to proper time along a path. For any vector A we have the covariant derivative DA/Dtau = dA/dtau + Christoffel symbol times dx/dtau A. So any time the Christoffel symbol is non-zero (which doesn't imply curvature), the ordinary derivative is not a tensor, whereas the covariant derivative is. You can't make an expression (even formally) coordinate independent just by writing it in terms of tensors, you have to also use covariant differentiation. > In particular, it is not limited to inertial frames (how could it be, > since none is involved???). The formula works only when the Christoffel symbols vanish, because you specified ordinary differentiation, valid in inertial coordinates but not in general. The only way to (formally) make a physical equation 'coordinate independent', if it involves a derivative, is to use covariant differentiation. (Of course, even this this doesn't really eliminate the coordinate dependence, it just relegates it to the background machinery.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | consequently7990662@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 09:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <aa0abbc5-8c68-4834-aa4d-ea3597fb0338@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #469267 |
What does SR and GR have to do with Newtonian physics since Maxwell's theory originated in 1864 and Newtonian lived in the 1600's.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | alsor@interia.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 12:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <adc041af-4fcd-40db-83ca-21d7ded8e40f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #469267 |
W dniu poniedziałek, 27 sierpnia 2018 15:44:01 UTC+2 użytkownik Thomas > > Newton laws are still perfectly correct. > > No. > > > F = ma > > Only approximately, if v ≪ c. > > > so, in the SR/GR the equation is correct. > > No. > > > Simply: m = m(v) = m0 * gamma; > > this means the real mass: m, is a variable, not a constant. > > > > m - this is a real mass (effective) of a body, which Newton used in his equations only. > > m0 - and this is a standard/idealized mass, which is equal to the real m for v = 0 only. > > This works for 3-momentum, but NOT, for example, for force, which is based > on 3-momentum. > > >> For example, simply F = m₍₀₎ γ a ¹) instead of F = m a is NOT the correct > >> equation for the exact (relativistic) force. You can work that out yourself > >> (if you are able to) by considering that according to NM > >> > >> F = dp∕dt > >> v = dx∕dt for motion in the x-direction only, > >> > >> and according to SR > >> > >> p = γ m v > >> γ = 1∕√(1 − v²∕c²). > >> > >> If you do that, you will also find out that as speed v increases, the force > >> F approaches infinity while the acceleration a = dv∕dt = d²x∕dt² has to > >> approach zero. Which is another way to show, and say, that an object with > >> non-zero mass cannot reach the speed of light c. (Another is via the limit > >> of relativistic kinetic energy as v approaches c: It approaches infinity.) > > > > That is a consequence of the mass variability alone. > > You have no clue what you are talking about. > > > SR/GR assume still - wrongly! the mass is a fixed quantity > > (a number of atoms), > > It should be obvious that even according YOUR logic SR and GR are CORRECT > there (too). > > THINK about what you are saying. If the mass of an object is based on the > number of atoms it is made of, why the heck should that number CHANGE when > that object is moving relative to an ARBITRARILY chosen observer or an > ARBITRARILY chosen observer is moving relative to the object (which is the > same thing)? What would be the mechanism of atoms appearing out of nothing > or into nothing? > > Observer and object have NO PHYSICAL CONNECTION other than the observation, > so this number simply DOES NOT change. That is another good reason why mass > has to be Lorentz-invariant. The mathematical one is that it is simply the > magnitude of the 4-momentum P: > > X = (c t, x, y, z) 4-position (event) > U := dX∕dτ = (c dt∕dτ, dx∕dτ, dy∕dτ, dz∕dτ) 4-velocity > 1∕dτ = γ dt rel. velocity time dilation > U = γ (c dt∕dt, dx∕dt, dy∕dt, dz∕dt) > U = γ (c, v_x, v_y, v_z) > P := m U = γ m (c, v_x, v_y, v_z) 4-momentum > P = (γ m c, γ m v_x, γ m v_y, γ m v_z) > > [I remind you that when you claim “m(v) = m0 * gamma”, then you > implicitly claim 3-momentum p = m(v) v = m0 γ v, which is correct > if (as is defined in modern physics) m = m0, and equivalent to > > p = (γ m0 v_x, γ m0 v_y, γ m0 v_z). > > The labels are different, that’s all.] > > The square of the norm of the 4-momentum is > > ‖P‖² = P_µ P^µ = [η] P^µ P^µ, > > where [η] is the matrix of the components of the metric tensor. > For the Minkowski metric (flat spacetime): > > (1 0 0 0) (γ m c ) (γ m c ) > ‖P‖² = (0 −1 0 0) (γ m v_x) (γ m v_x) > (0 0 −1 0) (γ m v_y) (γ m v_y) > (0 0 0 −1) (γ m v_z) (γ m v_z) > > = γ²m²c² − γ²m²(v_x)² − γ²m²(v_y)² − γ²m²(v_z)² > = γ²m²c² − γ²m²[(v_x)² + (v_y)² + (v_z)²] > = γ²m²c² − γ²m²v² > = m²c² (γ² − γ² v²∕c²) > = m²c² [γ² (1 − v²∕c²)] > = m²c² [1∕(1 − v²∕c²) × (1 − v²∕c²)] > ‖P‖² = m²c². > ‖P‖ = m c. > > the norm of the 4-momentum of an object does NOT depend on its relative > velocity: it is the same in all inertial frames of reference, i.e. it is a > Lorentz-INVARIANT quantity. And as the same applies to the speed of light > c, it has to apply to mass m as well. > > > hence the confusion, > > YOU are confused. > > > and fallacious conclusions about limits of applicability of the Newton theory. > > There is nothing fallacious about that. YOUR reasoning is fallacious instead. > > According to Newton, force is the change of (3-)momentum per unit time: > > F = dp∕dt > > Simply calculate this for 3-momentum as follows FROM YOUR OWN CLAIM. > > This is the second time I have to tell you. I guess that you are > simply unable to do it because you are lacking the required skills. > Big mouth attached to a small brain. You are too stupid in the math. F = dp/dt = ma
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Eters Beckenbauer <lrrif@dnewrersd.ne> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-23 14:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <plmh71$1td6$8@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #468782 |
il bella giorno di agosto *Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de>* ha scritto: > The Starmaker wrote: >> Ed Lake wrote: >>> The formula is E=M times c squared. c times c, not c times 2. It is >>> a VERY BIG number. >> >> i still don't understand what is the reasoning behind multiplying the >> speed of light... > > Read Einstein’s „Ist die Trägheit eines Körpers von seinem Energieinhalt In german, which could serve as an excuse for, why you are incapable to understand.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-25 23:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5B824B06.14FA@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #468666 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > Ed Lake wrote: > > > > > > On Monday, August 20, 2018 at 3:15:27 AM 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 > > > > > > > > > > While doing some research this morning, I realized that many of my arguments were previously stated by Cal-Tech's Carver Mead. https://en.wikipedia.or > > > > > > > > > > Example: > > > > > > > > > > "Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with mathematics--it's the language we use to express the precise relations of physical law. But there is an increasing tendency to mistake the language for the physics itself. Once we lose the conceptual foundations, the whole thing becomes a shell game." > > > > > > > > > > Source: http://worrydream.com/refs/Mead%20-%20American%20Spectator%20Interview.html > > > > > > > > > > Here's another article about Carver Mead: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/02/20/carver_mead_on_the_future_of_science/ > > > > > > > > > > It says, > > > > > > > > > > "Einstein, of course, was mightily influenced by what the ex–patent clerk called Mach's Principle, which Mead explained as the proposition that "the inertia of every element of matter is due to its interaction with all the other elements of matter in the universe." > > > > > > > > > > "We haven't fully followed that investigative road, Mead said. "Instead what we've done is we've treated isolated objects as if all their attributes were just given us, and [we] haven't asked where they came from," he said. "Things like the inertia of an object, the rest energy of an object, the velocity of light — all those things. We have a list of fundamental constants that we're not allowed to ask where they come from." > > > > > > > > > > "If we want to get that stalled 100-year-old revolution unstuck, Mead said, we've got to ask – and discover – where those constants come from, and not just believe in them as handed down by academics and buried in mountains of math. We need to discover their basis in the interactions and interrelationships of all matter in the universe." > > > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > > > > > The truth is...Albert Einstein has no idea what the speed of light is. Can you imagine the mind of Einstein...in 1905 when he wrote relativity he didn't know what galaxies were...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-26 22:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5B8391C8.1F09@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #469205 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > Ed Lake wrote: > > > > > > > > On Monday, August 20, 2018 at 3:15:27 AM 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > While doing some research this morning, I realized that many of my arguments were previously stated by Cal-Tech's Carver Mead. https://en.wikipedia. > > > > > > > > > > > > Example: > > > > > > > > > > > > "Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with mathematics--it's the language we use to express the precise relations of physical law. But there is an increasing tendency to mistake the language for the physics itself. Once we lose the conceptual foundations, the whole thing becomes a shell game." > > > > > > > > > > > > Source: http://worrydream.com/refs/Mead%20-%20American%20Spectator%20Interview.html > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's another article about Carver Mead: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/02/20/carver_mead_on_the_future_of_science/ > > > > > > > > > > > > It says, > > > > > > > > > > > > "Einstein, of course, was mightily influenced by what the ex–patent clerk called Mach's Principle, which Mead explained as the proposition that "the inertia of every element of matter is due to its interaction with all the other elements of matter in the universe." > > > > > > > > > > > > "We haven't fully followed that investigative road, Mead said. "Instead what we've done is we've treated isolated objects as if all their attributes were just given us, and [we] haven't asked where they came from," he said. "Things like the inertia of an object, the rest energy of an object, the velocity of light — all those things. We have a list of fundamental constants that we're not allowed to ask where they come from." > > > > > > > > > > > > "If we want to get that stalled 100-year-old revolution unstuck, Mead said, we've got to ask – and discover – where those constants come from, and not just believe in them as handed down by academics and buried in mountains of math. We need to discover their basis in the interactions and interrelationships of all matter in the universe." > > > > > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The truth is...Albert Einstein has no idea what the speed of light is. > > Can you imagine the mind of Einstein...in 1905 when he wrote relativity he didn't know what galaxies were... and in 1905 Einstein probably thought the age of the earth was around 40 millions years old... what was really inside Einstein's mind with all those...wrong numbers in his head? and he didn't know what the speed of light was either. Here's a question: What size bomb was Einstein thinking of when he wrote this... "A single bomb of this type, carried by boat and exploded in a port, might very well destroy the whole port together with some of the surrounding territory." https://hypertextbook.com/eworld/einstein/#first I guess it was bigger than he thought...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-27 23:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5B84EDC5.24F0@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #469247 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > > > Ed Lake wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, August 20, 2018 at 3:15:27 AM 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > While doing some research this morning, I realized that many of my arguments were previously stated by Cal-Tech's Carver Mead. https://en.wikipedi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Example: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with mathematics--it's the language we use to express the precise relations of physical law. But there is an increasing tendency to mistake the language for the physics itself. Once we lose the conceptual foundations, the whole thing becomes a shell game." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Source: http://worrydream.com/refs/Mead%20-%20American%20Spectator%20Interview.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's another article about Carver Mead: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/02/20/carver_mead_on_the_future_of_science/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It says, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Einstein, of course, was mightily influenced by what the ex–patent clerk called Mach's Principle, which Mead explained as the proposition that "the inertia of every element of matter is due to its interaction with all the other elements of matter in the universe." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "We haven't fully followed that investigative road, Mead said. "Instead what we've done is we've treated isolated objects as if all their attributes were just given us, and [we] haven't asked where they came from," he said. "Things like the inertia of an object, the rest energy of an object, the velocity of light — all those things. We have a list of fundamental constants that we're not allowed to ask where they come from." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "If we want to get that stalled 100-year-old revolution unstuck, Mead said, we've got to ask – and discover – where those constants come from, and not just believe in them as handed down by academics and buried in mountains of math. We need to discover their basis in the interactions and interrelationships of all matter in the universe." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The truth is...Albert Einstein has no idea what the speed of light is. > > > > Can you imagine the mind of Einstein...in 1905 when he wrote relativity he didn't know what galaxies were... > > and in 1905 Einstein probably thought the age of the earth was around 40 millions years old... > > what was really inside Einstein's mind with all those...wrong numbers in his head? > > and he didn't know what the speed of light was either. > > Here's a question: What size bomb was Einstein thinking of when he wrote this... > > "A single bomb of this > > type, carried by boat and exploded in a port, might very well destroy > > the whole port together with some of the surrounding territory." > > https://hypertextbook.com/eworld/einstein/#first > > I guess it was bigger than he thought... or as the 'scientific community' puts it...'it was bigger than thought'. You have to ask yourself a question...in 1905, what is it that Einstein 'didn't' know? He probably didn't even know what ...Gravity was. (probably spent the next ten years tryin to figure it out) (you spend ten years at anything and you become a genuis at it)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-24 15:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <677e2fec-1599-4cd5-be54-330c38126cd6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #468429 |
On August 20, Ed Lake wrote: > C is a "constant" only in that it is 299,792,458 meters > PER SECOND at any given location. > However, because a second will have a different duration in > different locations, c is NOT a "universal constant." > > However, he was also saying that when time slows for an emitter, > the light that is emitted is equally slowed. > C remains 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND, but the duration of > a second changes. So, light always travels at c = 299,792,458 m/sec, at any given location. But if time - that is, the true length of a second - varies by location, then the speed of light also varies, even though it's still c. How about, if the speed of light slows, does that mean time has also slowed? My house contains a room divider of smoked acrylic. Light penetrates slightly, then dies. Which means, a few mm inside the glass, light speed goes to zero. Does that mean time has suspended, inside the wall? Let's say we build a resort, a health spa, entirely enclosed by smoked acrylic. Does time time stop, for the guests? Have we finally discovered, thanks to Mr. Lake's investigations, the fabled Fountain of Youth? This could be the most valuable patent since canned beer - -- Rich
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 15 of 19 — ← Prev page 1 … 13 14 [15] 16 17 … 19 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web