Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #671087 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-06-06 12:59 +0200 |
| Last post | 2026-06-07 10:54 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 61 — 10 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-06 12:59 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-06-06 18:07 +0000
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-06 20:19 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-06 21:23 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-06 16:57 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-06-07 10:54 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-07 13:13 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 08:25 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:06 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:21 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:50 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:59 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-08 08:46 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-06-09 13:41 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:15 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity marika <marika5000@gmail.com> - 2026-06-14 05:01 +0000
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-07 13:30 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-07 13:37 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-06-07 11:40 +0000
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-07 13:58 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-06-08 10:17 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-07 21:43 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-07 21:48 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-08 07:41 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-08 09:50 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-08 10:46 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-08 19:16 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-08 19:42 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-08 16:54 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 07:34 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 10:59 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 11:06 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 20:22 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 20:55 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 21:27 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 21:37 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 10:32 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 11:00 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 20:56 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 21:01 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 21:46 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 22:03 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:10 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:22 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:31 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:40 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 21:05 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-10 08:39 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-10 14:53 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-10 18:20 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-10 20:48 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-12 08:13 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-12 08:42 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-10 22:54 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-12 13:39 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-14 09:05 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-06 21:24 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-07 13:45 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-07 15:14 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Auburn Morandi <bia@auuur.it> - 2026-06-07 15:39 +0000
Re: Nobody understands relativity nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-06-07 10:54 +0200
Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-09 21:46 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1109q5v$81g4$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #671157 |
Den 09.06.2026 21:01, skrev Maciej Woźniak: > On 6/9/2026 8:56 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> >> Even you must understand that the adjusted atomic clock >> must have the SI-definition inbuilt to make the adjusted 'second' >> be exactly (1 + 4.4647e-10) second. >> >> Or don't you understand it? > > Yeah, poor trash, any unadjusted atomic clock is > for sure adjusted to your SI idiocy, no doubt. > > It's indeed amazing what The Shit of Einstein > is making with the brains of its unfortunate > victims. Does this mean that you don't understand that any atomic clock has the SI-definition of second inbuilt? >>> Quoting, >>> "An SI-clock in GPS orbit must be adjusted down[...] >>> to make it stay in sync." >>> Oh yes, poor trash, if talking about "the synchronisation >>> of the rate of atomic clocks" - it must be. Greenwich >>> museum is not necessary for that, however. >> >> Does that mean that you know that atomic clocks has >> the SI-definition inbuilt > > Fortunately, even such a disgusting > piece of lying shit as you are can't lie > non stop, so sometimes you admit that > they're [sometimes] adjusted down compared > to your religious absurd. Does this mean that you still don't understand that any atomic clock has the SI-definition of second inbuilt? Can you name a way to synch an atomic clock without the "SI-idiocy"? -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-09 22:03 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18b7824a620065a2$37682$260416$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #671160 |
On 6/9/2026 9:46 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > Den 09.06.2026 21:01, skrev Maciej Woźniak: >> On 6/9/2026 8:56 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > >>> >>> Even you must understand that the adjusted atomic clock >>> must have the SI-definition inbuilt to make the adjusted 'second' >>> be exactly (1 + 4.4647e-10) second. >>> >>> Or don't you understand it? > >> >> Yeah, poor trash, any unadjusted atomic clock is >> for sure adjusted to your SI idiocy, no doubt. >> >> It's indeed amazing what The Shit of Einstein >> is making with the brains of its unfortunate >> victims. > > Does this mean that you don't understand that any > atomic clock has the SI-definition of second inbuilt? Fortunately, even such a disgusting piece of lying shit as you are can't lie non stop, so sometimes you admit that they're [sometimes] adjusted down compared to your religious absurd.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-09 07:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <Cmmdnf68yMJEg7X3nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #671138 |
On 06/09/2026 01:32 AM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > Den 08.06.2026 19:42, skrev Maciej Woźniak: >> On 6/8/2026 7:16 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > >>> Which definition of second is used in the synchronisation >>> of the rate of atomic clocks? > >> Of course it's not yours. Your idiot guru >> has forbidden synchronization of clocks >> as it was violating his moronic symmetry - >> and your SI idiocy has been invented >> to enforce his madness. >> > > Why do you pretend not to know? > > Even you must know that the SI-definition of second > is inbuilt in an atomic clock. > > Or do you think that all atomic clocks must be brought > to the museum at Greenwich to be calibrated to the old > definition of second ? :-D > What about that _length_ and _distance_ have different units, about the _metric_ and _norm_, about _distance_ being _length_ in _time_, that time (its elapsed duration) could be defined according to space-contraction instead of the other way around? According to "references", .... Otherwise those are going to vary under gravity, under acceleration, and so on. While there's often mentioned the GPS reference frequency, not so much the GPS station operator's and station-keeping guide, with that receivers >> stations. So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, in a museum in France".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-09 07:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <PTKdndjUXso-vLX3nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #671147 |
On 06/09/2026 07:10 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: > On 06/09/2026 01:32 AM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> Den 08.06.2026 19:42, skrev Maciej Woźniak: >>> On 6/8/2026 7:16 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> >>>> Which definition of second is used in the synchronisation >>>> of the rate of atomic clocks? >> >>> Of course it's not yours. Your idiot guru >>> has forbidden synchronization of clocks >>> as it was violating his moronic symmetry - >>> and your SI idiocy has been invented >>> to enforce his madness. >>> >> >> Why do you pretend not to know? >> >> Even you must know that the SI-definition of second >> is inbuilt in an atomic clock. >> >> Or do you think that all atomic clocks must be brought >> to the museum at Greenwich to be calibrated to the old >> definition of second ? :-D >> > > What about that _length_ and _distance_ have different units, > about the _metric_ and _norm_, about _distance_ being _length_ > in _time_, that time (its elapsed duration) could be defined > according to space-contraction instead of the other way around? > > > According to "references", .... > > > Otherwise those are going to vary under gravity, under acceleration, > and so on. > > > While there's often mentioned the GPS reference frequency, > not so much the GPS station operator's and station-keeping guide, > with that receivers >> stations. > > So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" > instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, > in a museum in France". > > The NIST Particle Data Group CODATA releases the measured values of fundamental physical constants every few years, the small ones get not only more precise, also _smaller_, helping also inform that the "running constants" of physics get involved. So, physics is according to NIST CODATA, with SI: Systeme Internationale, a reduced second, i.e. not first and quite reduced. Then most people are also unawares how things like Boltzmann and Planck constants as physical constants are much mathematical constants that reflect their placement in terms for algebraic reductions again, for example the roots of x^2 +-x +-1 like the molar gas constant in the Boltzmann constant, then as with regards to Planck constant about what mathematical reductionism is ongoing in the Planckian, why those aren't exactly "physical" constants. Anyways that "time" can be defined by "an average field of quasar measurements" is a thing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-09 07:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <-nGdnaezj6g3vrX3nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #671149 |
On 06/09/2026 07:22 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: > On 06/09/2026 07:10 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: >> On 06/09/2026 01:32 AM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>> Den 08.06.2026 19:42, skrev Maciej Woźniak: >>>> On 6/8/2026 7:16 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>> >>>>> Which definition of second is used in the synchronisation >>>>> of the rate of atomic clocks? >>> >>>> Of course it's not yours. Your idiot guru >>>> has forbidden synchronization of clocks >>>> as it was violating his moronic symmetry - >>>> and your SI idiocy has been invented >>>> to enforce his madness. >>>> >>> >>> Why do you pretend not to know? >>> >>> Even you must know that the SI-definition of second >>> is inbuilt in an atomic clock. >>> >>> Or do you think that all atomic clocks must be brought >>> to the museum at Greenwich to be calibrated to the old >>> definition of second ? :-D >>> >> >> What about that _length_ and _distance_ have different units, >> about the _metric_ and _norm_, about _distance_ being _length_ >> in _time_, that time (its elapsed duration) could be defined >> according to space-contraction instead of the other way around? >> >> >> According to "references", .... >> >> >> Otherwise those are going to vary under gravity, under acceleration, >> and so on. >> >> >> While there's often mentioned the GPS reference frequency, >> not so much the GPS station operator's and station-keeping guide, >> with that receivers >> stations. >> >> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" >> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, >> in a museum in France". >> >> > > The NIST Particle Data Group CODATA releases the measured values > of fundamental physical constants every few years, the small ones > get not only more precise, also _smaller_, helping also inform that > the "running constants" of physics get involved. > > So, physics is according to NIST CODATA, with SI: Systeme > Internationale, a reduced second, i.e. not first and quite reduced. > > > Then most people are also unawares how things like Boltzmann and > Planck constants as physical constants are much mathematical constants > that reflect their placement in terms for algebraic reductions again, > for example the roots of x^2 +-x +-1 like the molar gas constant in > the Boltzmann constant, then as with regards to Planck constant about > what mathematical reductionism is ongoing in the Planckian, why > those aren't exactly "physical" constants. > > > Anyways that "time" can be defined by "an average field of quasar > measurements" is a thing. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchrotron
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-09 07:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <bIycnWjd8J1CuLX3nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #671150 |
On 06/09/2026 07:31 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: > On 06/09/2026 07:22 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: >> On 06/09/2026 07:10 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: >>> On 06/09/2026 01:32 AM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>>> Den 08.06.2026 19:42, skrev Maciej Woźniak: >>>>> On 6/8/2026 7:16 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>>> >>>>>> Which definition of second is used in the synchronisation >>>>>> of the rate of atomic clocks? >>>> >>>>> Of course it's not yours. Your idiot guru >>>>> has forbidden synchronization of clocks >>>>> as it was violating his moronic symmetry - >>>>> and your SI idiocy has been invented >>>>> to enforce his madness. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Why do you pretend not to know? >>>> >>>> Even you must know that the SI-definition of second >>>> is inbuilt in an atomic clock. >>>> >>>> Or do you think that all atomic clocks must be brought >>>> to the museum at Greenwich to be calibrated to the old >>>> definition of second ? :-D >>>> >>> >>> What about that _length_ and _distance_ have different units, >>> about the _metric_ and _norm_, about _distance_ being _length_ >>> in _time_, that time (its elapsed duration) could be defined >>> according to space-contraction instead of the other way around? >>> >>> >>> According to "references", .... >>> >>> >>> Otherwise those are going to vary under gravity, under acceleration, >>> and so on. >>> >>> >>> While there's often mentioned the GPS reference frequency, >>> not so much the GPS station operator's and station-keeping guide, >>> with that receivers >> stations. >>> >>> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" >>> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, >>> in a museum in France". >>> >>> >> >> The NIST Particle Data Group CODATA releases the measured values >> of fundamental physical constants every few years, the small ones >> get not only more precise, also _smaller_, helping also inform that >> the "running constants" of physics get involved. >> >> So, physics is according to NIST CODATA, with SI: Systeme >> Internationale, a reduced second, i.e. not first and quite reduced. >> >> >> Then most people are also unawares how things like Boltzmann and >> Planck constants as physical constants are much mathematical constants >> that reflect their placement in terms for algebraic reductions again, >> for example the roots of x^2 +-x +-1 like the molar gas constant in >> the Boltzmann constant, then as with regards to Planck constant about >> what mathematical reductionism is ongoing in the Planckian, why >> those aren't exactly "physical" constants. >> >> >> Anyways that "time" can be defined by "an average field of quasar >> measurements" is a thing. >> >> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchrotron > > So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of time", in the micro, meso, and macro. Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time. About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis, measuring time. So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time, and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space. Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that, it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that. Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-09 21:05 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1109npe$76mb$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #671147 |
Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson: > > So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" > instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, > in a museum in France". > > :-D -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-10 08:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <J6KcnZPfV6_dGLT3nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #671156 |
On 06/09/2026 12:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson: >> >> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" >> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, >> in a museum in France". >> >> > > :-D > Thanks for writing. I'm curious how to interpret the smiley, usually enough it's a reaction of spontaneous happiness, yet in some regards it's as like the monkey's grimace that's usually aggression or fear. Then, the idea that there are "collective clocks" and that for time there are independent metrologies of time as about the atomic clock, the synchroton clock, and the quasar clock, that would advise a lot of the context about "the clock hypothesis", and also the role of clocks with rigid measuring rods of length, for the metrology (the science of measurement) of space, the metrologies, a metrology.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-10 14:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6A29DCBE.3B20@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #671165 |
Ross Finlayson wrote: > > On 06/09/2026 12:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > > Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson: > >> > >> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" > >> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, > >> in a museum in France". > >> > >> > > > > :-D > > > > Thanks for writing. > > I'm curious how to interpret the smiley, usually enough it's > a reaction of spontaneous happiness, yet in some regards it's > as like the monkey's grimace that's usually aggression or fear. > > Then, the idea that there are "collective clocks" and that for > time there are independent metrologies of time as about > > the atomic clock, > the synchroton clock, > and the quasar clock, and the biological clock...It's LOGICAL!!! bio wise. it's ticks. it's tocks. a pretty girl on a hot stove ..is relativity. > > that would advise a lot of the context about "the clock hypothesis", > and also the role of clocks with rigid measuring rods of length, > for the metrology (the science of measurement) of space, > the metrologies, a metrology. -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-10 18:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <C5mcnTjTDYfLkLf3nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #671172 |
On 06/10/2026 02:53 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > Ross Finlayson wrote: >> >> On 06/09/2026 12:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>> Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson: >>>> >>>> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" >>>> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, >>>> in a museum in France". >>>> >>>> >>> >>> :-D >>> >> >> Thanks for writing. >> >> I'm curious how to interpret the smiley, usually enough it's >> a reaction of spontaneous happiness, yet in some regards it's >> as like the monkey's grimace that's usually aggression or fear. >> >> Then, the idea that there are "collective clocks" and that for >> time there are independent metrologies of time as about >> >> the atomic clock, >> the synchroton clock, >> and the quasar clock, > > and the biological clock...It's LOGICAL!!! bio wise. > > it's ticks. > it's tocks. > > a pretty girl on a hot stove ..is relativity. > > > >> >> that would advise a lot of the context about "the clock hypothesis", >> and also the role of clocks with rigid measuring rods of length, >> for the metrology (the science of measurement) of space, >> the metrologies, a metrology. > Shut up StarMaker, you never said any decent damn thing about science. Trite trollop, ....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-10 20:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6A2A2FF9.6313@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #671173 |
Ross Finlayson wrote: > > On 06/10/2026 02:53 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > > Ross Finlayson wrote: > >> > >> On 06/09/2026 12:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > >>> Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson: > >>>> > >>>> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" > >>>> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, > >>>> in a museum in France". > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> :-D > >>> > >> > >> Thanks for writing. > >> > >> I'm curious how to interpret the smiley, usually enough it's > >> a reaction of spontaneous happiness, yet in some regards it's > >> as like the monkey's grimace that's usually aggression or fear. > >> > >> Then, the idea that there are "collective clocks" and that for > >> time there are independent metrologies of time as about > >> > >> the atomic clock, > >> the synchroton clock, > >> and the quasar clock, > > > > and the biological clock...It's LOGICAL!!! bio wise. > > > > it's ticks. > > it's tocks. > > > > a pretty girl on a hot stove ..is relativity. > > > > > > > >> > >> that would advise a lot of the context about "the clock hypothesis", > >> and also the role of clocks with rigid measuring rods of length, > >> for the metrology (the science of measurement) of space, > >> the metrologies, a metrology. > > > > Shut up StarMaker, you never said any decent damn thing about science. > > Trite trollop, .... "decent"???? I don't belong to the majority of yous groups of lemmings. I would not want to be a member of a club that would have me... i take the road less ...traveled. "trollop"???? https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=define+trollop historically used to describe a woman perceived as sexually promiscuous like YOUR MOTHER. yo mamma. hoe your mother sucks elephant cocks. So, your father sends your mother out to the streets to make some money... she comes back and sez I made twenty dollars and ten cents! Your father ask her "Who gave you ten cents?" Your mother said..."EVERYBODY!" -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-12 08:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <RpudnWu8G_63v7H3nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #671174 |
On 06/10/2026 08:48 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > Ross Finlayson wrote: >> >> On 06/10/2026 02:53 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >>> Ross Finlayson wrote: >>>> >>>> On 06/09/2026 12:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>>>> Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson: >>>>>> >>>>>> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" >>>>>> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, >>>>>> in a museum in France". >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> :-D >>>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks for writing. >>>> >>>> I'm curious how to interpret the smiley, usually enough it's >>>> a reaction of spontaneous happiness, yet in some regards it's >>>> as like the monkey's grimace that's usually aggression or fear. >>>> >>>> Then, the idea that there are "collective clocks" and that for >>>> time there are independent metrologies of time as about >>>> >>>> the atomic clock, >>>> the synchroton clock, >>>> and the quasar clock, >>> >>> and the biological clock...It's LOGICAL!!! bio wise. >>> >>> it's ticks. >>> it's tocks. >>> >>> a pretty girl on a hot stove ..is relativity. >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> that would advise a lot of the context about "the clock hypothesis", >>>> and also the role of clocks with rigid measuring rods of length, >>>> for the metrology (the science of measurement) of space, >>>> the metrologies, a metrology. >>> >> >> Shut up StarMaker, you never said any decent damn thing about science. >> >> Trite trollop, .... > > "decent"???? I don't belong to the majority of yous groups of lemmings. > > > I would not want to be a member of a club that would have me... > > > i take the road less ...traveled. > > > "trollop"???? > > https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=define+trollop > > historically used to describe a woman perceived as sexually promiscuous > > like YOUR MOTHER. > > yo mamma. > > > hoe > > your mother sucks elephant cocks. > > So, your father sends your mother out to the streets to make some money... > she comes back and sez I made twenty dollars and ten cents! > > Your father ask her "Who gave you ten cents?" > > Your mother said..."EVERYBODY!" > > > Rude. And old.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-12 08:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <OMKdnX_1uplKtbH3nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #671186 |
On 06/12/2026 08:13 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: > On 06/10/2026 08:48 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >> Ross Finlayson wrote: >>> >>> On 06/10/2026 02:53 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>> Ross Finlayson wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 06/09/2026 12:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>>>>> Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" >>>>>>> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, >>>>>>> in a museum in France". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> :-D >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for writing. >>>>> >>>>> I'm curious how to interpret the smiley, usually enough it's >>>>> a reaction of spontaneous happiness, yet in some regards it's >>>>> as like the monkey's grimace that's usually aggression or fear. >>>>> >>>>> Then, the idea that there are "collective clocks" and that for >>>>> time there are independent metrologies of time as about >>>>> >>>>> the atomic clock, >>>>> the synchroton clock, >>>>> and the quasar clock, >>>> >>>> and the biological clock...It's LOGICAL!!! bio wise. >>>> >>>> it's ticks. >>>> it's tocks. >>>> >>>> a pretty girl on a hot stove ..is relativity. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> that would advise a lot of the context about "the clock hypothesis", >>>>> and also the role of clocks with rigid measuring rods of length, >>>>> for the metrology (the science of measurement) of space, >>>>> the metrologies, a metrology. >>>> >>> >>> Shut up StarMaker, you never said any decent damn thing about science. >>> >>> Trite trollop, .... >> >> "decent"???? I don't belong to the majority of yous groups of lemmings. >> >> >> I would not want to be a member of a club that would have me... >> >> >> i take the road less ...traveled. >> >> >> "trollop"???? >> >> https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=define+trollop >> >> historically used to describe a woman perceived as sexually promiscuous >> >> like YOUR MOTHER. >> >> yo mamma. >> >> >> hoe >> >> your mother sucks elephant cocks. >> >> So, your father sends your mother out to the streets to make some >> money... >> she comes back and sez I made twenty dollars and ten cents! >> >> Your father ask her "Who gave you ten cents?" >> >> Your mother said..."EVERYBODY!" >> >> >> > > Rude. And old. > > The other day somewhere we were having a conversation about "trash-talk", or variously "the burn". I came up with this. "You're going to lose so bad, you're going to wish you had won." "That trash-talk is weak." "Worked on you."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-10 22:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6A2A4DA9.4034@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #671173 |
Ross Finlayson wrote: > > On 06/10/2026 02:53 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > > Ross Finlayson wrote: > >> > >> On 06/09/2026 12:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > >>> Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson: > >>>> > >>>> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" > >>>> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, > >>>> in a museum in France". > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> :-D > >>> > >> > >> Thanks for writing. > >> > >> I'm curious how to interpret the smiley, usually enough it's > >> a reaction of spontaneous happiness, yet in some regards it's > >> as like the monkey's grimace that's usually aggression or fear. > >> > >> Then, the idea that there are "collective clocks" and that for > >> time there are independent metrologies of time as about > >> > >> the atomic clock, > >> the synchroton clock, > >> and the quasar clock, > > > > and the biological clock...It's LOGICAL!!! bio wise. > > > > it's ticks. > > it's tocks. > > > > a pretty girl on a hot stove ..is relativity. > > > > > > > >> > >> that would advise a lot of the context about "the clock hypothesis", > >> and also the role of clocks with rigid measuring rods of length, > >> for the metrology (the science of measurement) of space, > >> the metrologies, a metrology. > > > > Shut up StarMaker, you never said any decent damn thing about science. > > Trite trollop, .... Here's mt ten cents... you put 3 atomic clocks in a room and calibrate them to the same time..that isn't independent metrologies of time, it's dependent. best ten cents i ever spent. -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-12 13:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6A2C6E91.4D7@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #671172 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > Ross Finlayson wrote: > > > > On 06/09/2026 12:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > > > Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson: > > >> > > >> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" > > >> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, > > >> in a museum in France". > > >> > > >> > > > > > > :-D > > > > > > > Thanks for writing. > > > > I'm curious how to interpret the smiley, usually enough it's > > a reaction of spontaneous happiness, yet in some regards it's > > as like the monkey's grimace that's usually aggression or fear. > > > > Then, the idea that there are "collective clocks" and that for > > time there are independent metrologies of time as about > > > > the atomic clock, > > the synchroton clock, > > and the quasar clock, > > and the biological clock...It's LOGICAL!!! bio wise. > > it's ticks. > it's tocks. > > a pretty girl on a hot stove ..is relativity. > furthermore... Einstein used a bilogical clock when he measured Time with...feelings. "If you sit on a pretty girl's lap for an hour, it seems like a minute. If you sit on a hot stove for a minute, it seems like an hour. That's Relativity" -Albert Einstein The operative word is "seems". There is no clock that exist which reads a minute as an hour, or an hour as a minute. So, Albert Einstein must be using a different type of clock... a body clock. a biologial clock a clock that exist only in his mind. dummy. Here's my ten cents i forgot to give to your mother. -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-14 09:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <lRqdnQ5JSbeCTLP3nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #671190 |
On 06/12/2026 01:39 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > The Starmaker wrote: >> >> Ross Finlayson wrote: >>> >>> On 06/09/2026 12:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>>> Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson: >>>>> >>>>> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" >>>>> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, >>>>> in a museum in France". >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> :-D >>>> >>> >>> Thanks for writing. >>> >>> I'm curious how to interpret the smiley, usually enough it's >>> a reaction of spontaneous happiness, yet in some regards it's >>> as like the monkey's grimace that's usually aggression or fear. >>> >>> Then, the idea that there are "collective clocks" and that for >>> time there are independent metrologies of time as about >>> >>> the atomic clock, >>> the synchroton clock, >>> and the quasar clock, >> >> and the biological clock...It's LOGICAL!!! bio wise. >> >> it's ticks. >> it's tocks. >> >> a pretty girl on a hot stove ..is relativity. >> > > furthermore... > > Einstein used a bilogical clock when he measured Time with...feelings. > > "If you sit on a pretty girl's lap for an hour, it seems like a minute. > If you sit on a hot stove for a minute, it seems like an hour. That's > Relativity" -Albert Einstein > > > The operative word is "seems". > > > There is no clock that exist > which reads a minute as an hour, or > an hour as a minute. > > So, Albert Einstein must be > using a different type of clock... > > a body clock. > a biologial clock > a clock that exist only in his mind. > > dummy. > > Here's my ten cents i forgot to give to your mother. > > > > > > "Relativity Theory" has been around since the Galilean and before that the Mertonian School, or about six hundred years ago. Low-class doesn't make up for low-talent, in fact sort of the opposite. Lots of people understand relativity theory, for example Einstein's with "no absolute, ..., motion". Lots of people don't and their opinions are worth less than your two cents.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-06 21:24 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18b69465262e963a$1$2127$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #671090 |
On 6/6/2026 8:19 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > ..are horribly wrong! > > They can only be stated by a person who hasn't understood > this obvious fact: > > The state of motion of an observer cannot affect the observed > object in any way, but it can affect the observer's observations > of the observed object. > > An observer who is moving relative to an object will > measure the object to be shorter that its proper length. IQ-test: An observer is measuring something that is not really happening. The measurement is: a)correct b)invalid a or b, poor brainless religious maniac?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-07 13:45 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1103l82$2fj1p$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #671092 |
Den 06.06.2026 21:24, skrev Maciej Woźniak: > On 6/6/2026 8:19 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> >> The state of motion of an observer cannot affect the observed >> object in any way, but it can affect the observer's observations >> of the observed object. >> This is what Maciej Woźniak thinks is a sensible response to the above: > > IQ-test: > An observer is measuring something that is > not really happening. > The measurement is: > a)correct > b)invalid > > a or b, poor brainless religious maniac? > I think the poor brainless religious maniac has an IQ < 80. :-D -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-07 15:14 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18b6cecbcb86ad44$1$2346$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #671102 |
On 6/7/2026 1:45 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > Den 06.06.2026 21:24, skrev Maciej Woźniak: >> On 6/6/2026 8:19 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>> >>> The state of motion of an observer cannot affect the observed >>> object in any way, but it can affect the observer's observations >>> of the observed object. >>> > > This is what Maciej Woźniak thinks is > a sensible response to the above: > >> >> IQ-test: >> An observer is measuring something that is >> not really happening. >> The measurement is: >> a)correct >> b)invalid >> >> a or b, poor brainless religious maniac? >> > > I think the poor brainless religious maniac has an IQ < 80. I totally agree. So, a or b, poor brainless religious maniac?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Auburn Morandi <bia@auuur.it> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-07 15:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <11043bb$2jp4r$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #671105 |
Maciej Woźniak wrote: > On 6/7/2026 1:45 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> I think the poor brainless religious maniac has an IQ < 80. > > I totally agree. > So, a or b, poor brainless religious maniac? forget that; the west europe always thinks that you guys from east are about an IQ of 80. It's a fact written in west statistics. Take a look at those 4 to 6 millions ukrans fools, dead for the nato west. No difference. The polaks and the ukrans are the same. You may cry uncle all the way to the bank, you cant change facts it was a good period with a country and communism, and Jaruzelsky there, a wonderful human being. That period is over. Now you are braindead 80 IQ slaves, dying for the nato west do i have to say more?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web