Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #674529 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-10-17 09:11 +0200 |
| Last post | 2026-10-17 18:57 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 192 — 12 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 09:11 +0200
Re: Words have power Truman Babichev <avbb@bi.ru> - 2026-10-17 09:58 +0000
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 13:08 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 18:25 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 16:32 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 18:46 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 16:49 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 18:55 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:04 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 19:14 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:18 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 19:21 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:23 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 19:29 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:31 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 19:36 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:38 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 19:44 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:46 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 19:55 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 17:57 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 20:09 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 23:39 +0000
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-17 19:03 -0700
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 07:50 +0200
Re: Words have power The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-10-17 11:24 -0700
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 20:44 +0200
Re: Words have power The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-10-17 12:02 -0700
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 21:54 +0200
Re: Words have power The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-10-17 13:31 -0700
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 22:45 +0200
Re: Words have power The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-10-17 15:56 -0700
Re: Words have power Russell Bahmutoff <sm@temar.ru> - 2026-10-17 19:17 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 22:19 +0200
Re: Words have power Fermin Ribakov <ifrbn@iobf.ru> - 2026-10-17 21:03 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 07:46 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-17 23:37 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 07:47 +0200
Re: Words have power Kevvy Ruzaev <vvavv@vrzrz.ru> - 2026-10-18 07:51 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 10:16 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:00 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 13:54 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-18 11:57 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 14:10 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:13 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 14:20 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:23 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 14:28 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:36 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 14:39 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-18 12:42 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 14:44 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 10:43 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 13:05 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 11:15 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 13:21 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 11:42 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 13:53 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 12:07 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 14:19 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 12:31 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 14:44 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 12:59 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 15:16 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 13:38 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 15:49 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 13:58 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 16:02 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 14:06 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 16:26 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 14:28 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 16:39 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 15:37 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 18:37 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 16:42 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 18:51 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 16:53 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 19:02 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 17:03 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 19:11 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 17:23 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-19 19:37 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-19 21:55 +0000
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 15:10 -0700
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 15:27 -0700
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 07:23 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 08:00 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 10:26 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 08:34 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 10:54 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 09:25 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 12:10 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 10:18 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 12:32 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 10:39 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 12:44 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 10:55 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 13:09 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 11:11 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 13:22 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 11:37 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 13:44 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 11:48 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 13:55 +0200
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 14:03 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 15:29 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 17:57 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 16:03 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 18:13 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 16:15 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 18:27 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 16:51 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 19:12 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 17:17 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 19:33 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 20:25 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 23:07 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 21:15 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-20 23:34 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 21:39 +0000
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 21:52 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-21 06:40 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-21 14:51 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-21 17:03 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-21 15:04 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-21 17:16 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-21 17:45 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-21 20:07 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-21 23:20 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 07:05 +0200
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 07:21 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-22 11:27 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 14:28 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-22 12:31 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 14:38 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-22 13:46 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 15:53 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-22 14:02 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 16:29 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-22 15:23 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 18:35 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-22 16:46 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 18:55 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-22 17:11 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 19:18 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-22 17:21 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 19:31 +0200
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-22 21:08 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-22 22:04 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 06:53 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 09:01 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 12:22 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 10:27 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 12:32 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 10:33 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 12:40 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 10:41 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 12:45 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 10:49 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 12:51 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 10:56 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 13:06 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 11:11 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 13:19 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 11:33 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 13:36 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 11:43 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 13:50 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 11:51 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 13:53 +0200
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-23 11:55 +0000
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-23 13:56 +0200
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 15:28 -0700
Re: Words have power Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-10-20 22:32 +0000
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-20 07:11 -0700
Re: Words have power Salvado Bazarov <avvazv@vzbb.ru> - 2026-10-19 19:07 +0000
Re: Words have power "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 14:39 -0700
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-18 04:58 -0700
Re: Words have power Dawn Rujenkov <jrdj@een.ru> - 2026-10-18 16:55 +0000
Re: Words have power The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-10-17 13:34 -0700
Re: Words have power The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-10-17 22:19 -0700
Re: Words have power nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-10-17 22:37 +0200
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-17 22:47 +0200
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-17 19:00 -0700
Re: Words have power nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-10-18 12:30 +0200
Re: Words have power Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-10-18 12:42 +0200
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-18 04:56 -0700
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-18 07:07 -0700
Re: Words have power nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-10-18 21:39 +0200
Re: Words have power Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-19 00:56 -0700
Re: Words have power (perspective geomtry) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-17 09:15 -0700
Re: Words have power (perspective geometry) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-10-17 18:57 -0700
Page 6 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 10 Next page →
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 11:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <rsFRbmO5ry4WbW4kpsqyi1w4lUE@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674729 |
> the "rate difference" we correct is an error,
> the "rate difference" we accept would be
> your time dilation.
Thank you. You have finally stated the trick explicitly.
For you, the distinction is NOT physical.
It is:
same measured rate difference
|
+-- engineers accept it -> "time dilation"
|
+-- engineers compensate -> "clock error"
So whether a physical effect is "time dilation" depends on an
ENGINEERING DECISION made afterwards.
That's priceless.
If tomorrow GPS engineers decided not to compensate it, your
+442.5 × 10^-12 would magically stop being a "clock error" and become
"time dilation".
Same clock.
Same orbit.
Same measured rate.
Different engineering policy.
And you call THAT physics.
Relativity has the considerably less mystical criterion of predicting
the rate from the physical trajectory and gravitational field.
Which, inconveniently for you, it did BEFORE anyone decided what to do
with it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 13:44 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18e03a3a2c8c5fe6$10756$1970418$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674730 |
On 10/20/2026 1:37 PM, Python wrote: >> the "rate difference" we correct is an error, >> the "rate difference" we accept would be >> your time dilation. > > Thank you. You have finally stated the trick explicitly. > > For you, the distinction is NOT physical. > > It is: > > same measured rate difference > | > +-- engineers accept it -> "time dilation" > | > +-- engineers compensate -> "clock error" > > So whether a physical effect is "time dilation" depends on an > ENGINEERING DECISION made afterwards. > > That's priceless. That's a fact. Your idiot guru has been babbling about clock indications, they definitely depend on how engineers make and adjust the clocks, sorry, poor piece of shit. > > If tomorrow GPS engineers decided not to compensate it, your > +442.5 × 10^-12 would magically stop being a "clock error" and become > "time dilation". Would be. Go convince them their clocks are not perfect enough and they have to stop compensating at once. If you succeed - I will admit: your mad Shit is ruling GPS. Go, poor piece of shit, be fearless, your cause is true and just. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 11:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <FUICFgEiZEHaCuQnt65EVp5Df3I@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674731 |
Maciej,
> That's a fact.
Excellent. You have now explicitly admitted that, in YOUR terminology,
the very same physical rate difference changes nature according to what
engineers decide to do with it.
And then this masterpiece:
> Go convince them [...] they have to stop compensating
Why would I?
Relativity predicts the effect.
Engineering compensates the effect.
GPS works.
There is no conflict whatsoever.
The conflict exists entirely in your head because you invented the rule:
real physical effect + compensation = clock error
real physical effect + no compensation = time dilation
Physics doesn't work that way.
If engineers compensate thermal expansion in a bridge, thermal
expansion doesn't cease to be physics.
The funniest part is that your proposed test for whether relativity
"rules GPS" is now whether engineers REFUSE to use relativity to make
GPS work properly.
That's quite possibly the most backwards argument you've produced yet.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 13:55 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18e03ad7a6e7cee4$13382$1958670$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674732 |
On 10/20/2026 1:48 PM, Python wrote: > Maciej, > >> That's a fact. > > Excellent. You have now explicitly admitted that, in YOUR terminology, > the very same physical rate difference changes nature according to what > engineers decide to do with it. > > And then this masterpiece: > >> Go convince them [...] they have to stop compensating > > Why would I? Because otherwise those mad prophecies of the idiot you're worshiping fail sadly and miserably. > > Relativity predicts the effect. Sure, the effect of - difference in clock indications. As long as sane people fuck your idiocies the effect doesn't exist, and even such a hopeless piece of lying shit has to admit: the REAL difference in clock indications is 0.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 14:03 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18e03b418621a5ae$12422$1964278$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674732 |
On 10/20/2026 1:48 PM, Python wrote: > If engineers compensate thermal expansion in a bridge, thermal > expansion doesn't cease to be physics. The inventor of "thermal expansion" was a mostly sane person, he didn't define his effect as "perfect bridges should collapse". The idiot was a different case, sorry.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 15:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <4evZ9ot8brQ9wRfYkSKwF57zMT0@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674734 |
Maciej,
> the REAL difference in clock indications is 0.
Yes. AFTER compensating the predicted rate difference.
You have now reduced your argument to:
effect predicted
effect measured
effect compensated
compensated result ≈ 0
therefore effect never existed
And this:
> "perfect bridges should collapse"
is precisely the same category error again.
Relativity does NOT say:
"perfect GPS clocks should desynchronize"
It says what ideal clocks following specified worldlines accumulate.
What engineers WANT their displayed/system times to do is a completely
different question.
A physical theory predicts behaviour.
It does not issue engineering commandments.
And your position has now become genuinely hilarious:
Relativity predicts the amount GPS must compensate.
GPS compensates it.
You then claim GPS refutes relativity because the compensation worked.
You aren't arguing against relativity anymore.
You're using its successful cancellation as evidence that there was
nothing to cancel.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 17:57 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18e0480b63ff15e2$15686$1964278$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674747 |
On 10/20/2026 5:29 PM, Python wrote: > Maciej, > >> the REAL difference in clock indications is 0. > > Yes. AFTER compensating the predicted rate difference. > > You have now reduced your argument to: > > effect predicted > effect measured I've told you, poor piece of shit: not any measured effect, just a clock error. > effect compensated > compensated result ≈ 0 > > therefore effect never existed Never existed. Exactly. Just a clock error. > > And this: > >> "perfect bridges should collapse" > > is precisely the same category error again. > > Relativity does NOT say: > > "perfect GPS clocks should desynchronize" You've admitted many, many times already - that's exactly what your mad shit is asserting. Even such a disgusting piece of lying shit can't lie non stop, but it can lie a lot, like above.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 16:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n9TonXNHF2BgE3a2eHcg_wjsG0o@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674748 |
Maciej,
> not any measured effect, just a clock
> error.
You keep saying "just a clock error" as though naming the measurement
explained it.
It doesn't.
The inconvenient facts remain:
predicted before launch: +446.5 × 10^-12
correction OFF
measured in orbit: +442.5 × 10^-12
Your explanation:
"clock error"
Why that magnitude?
Why that sign?
Why was essentially that number predicted before launch?
Nothing.
> Never existed. Exactly. Just a clock error.
Wonderful.
The measured effect never existed because you renamed the measured
effect "error".
This is your entire argument now.
Relativity provides a quantitative prediction.
You provide a noun.
And a remarkable quantity of "piece of shit".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 18:13 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18e048ec28f471ad$17017$1958670$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674749 |
On 10/20/2026 6:03 PM, Python wrote: > Maciej, > >> not any measured effect, just a clock >> error. > > You keep saying "just a clock error" as though naming the measurement > explained it. It did. Can't erroneous equipment "measure" effects that don't exist? What more to explain? > > It doesn't. > > The inconvenient facts remain: > > predicted before launch: +446.5 × 10^-12 > correction OFF > measured in orbit: +442.5 × 10^-12 > > Why that magnitude? > Why that sign? Who cares? We corrected, and the correct corrected clocks measure the effect no more. If someone treated seriously your mad screams "PROPER!!!! CORRECT!!!! PERFECT!!!!" things would be different. But The Shit really never had any chance. Common sense has been warning the idiot. > The measured effect never existed because you renamed the measured > effect "error". What's so surprising? Can't erroneous equipment "measure" effects that don't exist? > Relativity provides a quantitative prediction. And it's worthless, the really measured value is 0 with good accuracy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 16:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <4RQuXypxkmbgdDbJW8DO-hT4ssc@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674752 |
Maciej,
> Why that magnitude?
> Why that sign?
>
> Who cares?
And there, finally, is your entire scientific method.
Relativity, BEFORE launch:
+446.5 × 10^-12
NTS-2, correction OFF:
+442.5 × 10^-12
Maciej:
"Who cares?"
Then:
> Can't erroneous equipment "measure" effects
> that don't exist?
Of course it can.
But when an alleged "error" has the magnitude and sign quantitatively
predicted BEFORE the equipment is even put into orbit, a physicist asks
why.
Your answer is literally that you don't care.
> the really measured value is 0
AFTER correcting by approximately the amount predicted.
So your "really measured value" is:
measured effect - compensation for measured effect ≈ 0
and you conclude:
measured effect = 0.
This isn't common sense.
It's subtraction followed by amnesia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 18:27 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18e049a9a58e514c$15044$1970418$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674754 |
On 10/20/2026 6:15 PM, Python wrote: > Maciej, > >> Why that magnitude? >> Why that sign? >> >> Who cares? > > And there, finally, is your entire scientific method. Fuck your so called "scietific method" crap. > Relativity, BEFORE launch: > > +446.5 × 10^-12 Really measured value - 0. Even such a disgusting piece of lying shit as you are sometimes is admitting that. Relativistic idiot: "THE CLOCKS WERE CALIBRATED!!!! DOESN'T COUNT!!!" But yes, poor piece of shit, it does. >> Can't erroneous equipment "measure" effects >> that don't exist? > > Of course it can. > > But when an alleged "error" has the magnitude and sign quantitatively > predicted BEFORE the equipment is even put into orbit, a physicist asks > why. He can, but fuck the idiot. >> the really measured value is 0 > > AFTER correcting by approximately the amount predicted. Lie. Your mad shit has predicted 0 of clock error to compensate. > > So your "really measured value" is: > > measured effect - compensation for measured effect ≈ 0 Nope. My really measured value is the REAL value of the difference in clock indications. And even such a disgusting piece of lying shit as you are sometimes is admitting that this is the REAL value of the difference in clock indications. 0. And that clocks were calibrated? Sure. In the real world, unlike in your moronic gedankenwelt - it's ordinary.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 16:51 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <c4criFt-EzglnoCf2netUbiLDHQ@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674755 |
Maciej,
> Fuck your so called "scientific method" crap.
Yes, that was already becoming clear.
> My really measured value is the REAL
> value of the difference in clock indications.
> [...] 0.
You keep measuring the result AFTER compensation and pretending it is
the measurement BEFORE compensation.
The chronology you declared "insignificant" is precisely what exposes
the trick:
correction OFF: +442.5 × 10^-12 measured
correction ON: approximately 0 residual
You call only the second one "REAL" because the first one is
catastrophically inconvenient.
> Your mad shit has predicted 0 of clock error
> to compensate.
Relativity doesn't predict a malfunction called "clock error".
It predicts how the clock rate changes with its physical conditions.
GPS engineers then decide that this perfectly predicted behaviour is
inconvenient for maintaining GPS system time, so they compensate it.
And the required compensation has essentially the magnitude relativity
predicted.
Your alternative theory has now reached admirable simplicity:
Why 442.5? Who cares?
Why that sign? Who cares?
Why predicted beforehand? Fuck the physicist who asks.
After cancelling it, I get zero.
QED.
At least you've finally made clear why your "common sense" has no need
for a scientific method.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 19:12 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18e04c225818e6ac$15690$1964278$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674756 |
On 10/20/2026 6:51 PM, Python wrote: > Maciej, > >> Fuck your so called "scientific method" crap. > > Yes, that was already becoming clear. You're too dumb to comprehend, but poor idiot Popper has invented it especially to excuse the madness of your idiot guru. Thinkers more advanced - Poincare, Kuhn - knew better. > >> My really measured value is the REAL >> value of the difference in clock indications. >> [...] 0. > > You keep measuring the result AFTER compensation and pretending it is > the measurement BEFORE compensation. Right. I keep measuring with calibrated clocks. And you keep pretending there is something strange and exceptional in that. Nope. That's the reality. The result of a measurement is depending on how we make and adjust the equipment. Your mad, brainwashing religion is not going to ever admit that, it will keep pretending that the measurement is God Himself speaking (of course, only the measurement fitting it), but it's just a mad, brainwashing religion. > The chronology you declared "insignificant" is precisely what exposes > the trick: > > correction OFF: +442.5 × 10^-12 measured > correction ON: approximately 0 residual > > You call only the second one "REAL" because the first one is > catastrophically inconvenient. Lie, of course. I call the second one real because 1)the first was for 20 days (about), the other for 50 years 2)More important - we corrected the clocks giving 1, so they were erroneous. You, on the other hand - keep pretending 1 to be the only real result because the 2 is catastrophically inconvenient. >> Your mad shit has predicted 0 of clock error >> to compensate. > > Relativity doesn't predict a malfunction called "clock error". Sometimes even such a disgusting piece of shit is telling the truth. Yes, your mad Shit is predicting nothing to compensate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 17:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lz8oJQ0bNYCHvwt6xiSuCBkkuNE@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674758 |
Maciej,
> I call the second one real because
> 1)the first was for 20 days (about), the
> other for 50 years
This is priceless.
An experiment becomes less real because it lasted 20 days, while the
50 years spent COMPENSATING the effect supposedly prove the effect
wasn't there.
By that logic, taking an umbrella for 50 years disproves the rain you
measured before opening it.
> we corrected the clocks giving 1, so they were erroneous.
No. You keep using your conclusion as your premise:
it was corrected
therefore it was an error
therefore it wasn't time dilation
therefore relativity was wrong
That isn't reasoning. It's a carousel.
And the historical sequence remains brutally immune to your vocabulary:
BEFORE launch:
relativity calculates +446.5 × 10^-12
IN orbit, correction OFF:
clock measures +442.5 × 10^-12
AFTER measurement:
correction switched ON
You can call 442.5 a "clock error", a sheep, a shark, or the Archbishop
of Canterbury.
You still haven't explained why your "erroneous" clock made almost
exactly the error relativity calculated BEFORE IT FLEW.
Your answer was:
"Who cares?"
"Fuck the physicist."
Which is admirably concise.
> your mad Shit is predicting nothing to compensate.
It predicted the physical rate shift that engineers compensate.
Your insistence that a theory must additionally call that shift an
"ERROR" before engineers are permitted to cancel it is entirely your
invention.
Physics predicts what happens.
Engineers decide what they want instead.
After hundreds of lines of abuse, your rebuttal to +446.5 predicted
versus +442.5 measured is still just:
WRONG WORD!
That's not shutting physics down, Maciej.
That's losing an argument to a dictionary.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 19:33 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18e04d3fe631f9b6$17570$1958670$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674759 |
On 10/20/2026 7:17 PM, Python wrote: > Maciej, > >> I call the second one real because >> 1)the first was for 20 days (about), the >> other for 50 years > > This is priceless. > > An experiment becomes less real because it lasted 20 days Rather - 20 days compared to 50 years makes an exception of no significance. >> we corrected the clocks giving 1, so they were erroneous. > > No. You keep using your conclusion as your premise: Yes. You keep denying the reality. > And the historical sequence remains brutally immune to your vocabulary: > > BEFORE launch: > relativity calculates +446.5 × 10^-12 > > IN orbit, correction OFF: > clock measures +442.5 × 10^-12 > > AFTER measurement: > correction switched ON And the correct corrected clocks measure your delusion no more. It was just a clock error. > You can call 442.5 a "clock error", a sheep, a shark, or the Archbishop > of Canterbury. > > You still haven't explained why your "erroneous" clock made almost > exactly the error relativity calculated BEFORE IT FLEW. A lie, you were admitting many times - your mad Shit has predicted no error. >> your mad Shit is predicting nothing to compensate. > > It predicted the physical rate shift that engineers compensate. Unfortunately - it's also predicted some difference in clock indications, which doesn't exist. And it has asserted that perfect clocks are desynchronizing clocks. But as the assertion is as baseless as it is idiotic, nobody is treating it seriously. > Your insistence that a theory must additionally call that shift an > "ERROR" before engineers are permitted to cancel it is entirely your > invention. I'm not insisting on anything like that. Your theory definitely can be stupid, and it is. And engineers are NOT permitted to cancel it. Your theory is forbidding that in the name of prophecies of a mumbling madman, it's just that nobody cares. > > Physics predicts what happens. And then it doesn't happen, even such a hopeless piece of lying shit is sometimes admitting that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 20:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <aTIJarjcumSA2s4AsgzPQIo4hiw@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674760 |
Maciej,
> 20 days compared to 50 years makes
> an exception of no significance.
This may be your best one yet.
The 20 days are precisely when the predicted correction was OFF.
The following 50 years are precisely when GPS has been designed to
COMPENSATE relativistic effects.
So your argument is now:
The uncontaminated test doesn't count because it lasted only 20 days.
The following 50 years of cancelling the effect prove that the
effect being cancelled doesn't exist.
Magnificent.
> engineers are NOT permitted to cancel it.
> Your theory is forbidding that
This is simply something you invented.
Please provide the equation of relativity containing the operator
ENGINEERS_ARE_FORBIDDEN_TO_COMPENSATE()
There isn't one.
Relativity says what ideal clocks do along specified worldlines.
It does not dictate what frequency engineers must make an oscillator
output for a navigation system.
Engineers are perfectly free to compensate the predicted effect.
They did.
> And then it doesn't happen
It DID happen.
That's the part you cannot make disappear:
predicted: +446.5 × 10^-12
measured: +442.5 × 10^-12
Then they compensated it.
Your entire argument is now that once humans deliberately prevent a
predicted effect from appearing in the final system output, the
prediction has failed.
By that standard, brakes falsify Newton.
And after all the sharks, sheep, "perfect clocks", "clock errors",
"common sense", Popper, Poincaré, Kuhn and several metric tons of
"piece of shit", you still have no answer to the only question that
matters:
Why did the uncorrected NTS-2 clock produce +442.5 × 10^-12
when relativity had predicted +446.5 × 10^-12 before launch?
Your answer remains:
"Who cares?"
Everyone who understands what a quantitative prediction is, Maciej.
That's rather the point.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 23:07 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18e058f305f99747$29421$1964278$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674764 |
On 10/20/2026 10:25 PM, Python wrote: > Maciej, > >> 20 days compared to 50 years makes >> an exception of no significance. > > This may be your best one yet. > > The 20 days are precisely when the predicted correction was OFF. > > The following 50 years are precisely when GPS has been designed to > COMPENSATE relativistic effects. Lie, there are no relativistic effects to compensate. > > So your argument is now: > > The uncontaminated test doesn't count because it lasted only 20 days. > > The following 50 years of cancelling the effect prove that the > effect being cancelled doesn't exist. Correct corrected clocks measure no delusion of yours, it was just a clock error, sorry, poor piece of shit. > > Magnificent. > >> engineers are NOT permitted to cancel it. >> Your theory is forbidding that > > This is simply something you invented. > > Please provide the equation of relativity containing the operator > > ENGINEERS_ARE_FORBIDDEN_TO_COMPENSATE() > > There isn't one. > > Relativity says what ideal clocks do along specified worldlines. Right, your mad religion is persuading people that if the clocks don't fit mad delusions of your mumbling guru they're wrong. Fortunately, since your mad assertion is as baseless as it is idiotic - nobody sane cares, and the clocks keep measuring t'=t, just like they always were. > It does not dictate what frequency engineers must make an oscillator > output for a navigation system. Yes, poor piece of shit, it does. And brainwashed SI idiots announcing their wannabe standard are trying to help. Waste of efforts. No chance. The clocks are not indicating and are not going to indicate what the idiot imagined and announced perfect. > > Engineers are perfectly free to compensate the predicted effect. Even such a pathetic piece of lying shit as you are can't lie non stop, however, so sometimes you're admitting there is no predicted to compensate effect. But, basically, you're right, engineers are perfectly free to piss at your mad screams "PERFECT!!! CORRECT!!! PROPER!!!", piss at your wannabe standard, piss at your Holiest Postulate and the whole rest of your idiocies and keep the clocks measuring t'=t, just like they always were. >> And then it doesn't happen > > It DID happen. THE KNIGHT WAS ON A3!!!! AND IF IT WAS PERFECT IT WOULD STILL BE THERE!!! CHECK!!!! > > That's the part you cannot make disappear: > > predicted: +446.5 × 10^-12 > measured: +442.5 × 10^-12 Nope. Measured - 0. Even such a pathetic piece of lying shit can't lie non stop, so sometimes you admit. > Then they compensated it. And started the real measurements. > Your entire argument is now that once humans deliberately prevent a > predicted effect from appearing in the final system output, the > prediction has failed. And your entire argument is now (and always) that since humans calibrated clocks they're corrupted and polluted and dirty and the result doesn't count. You're such an idiot. > By that standard, brakes falsify Newton. In your sick, fanatic half-brain everything falsify Newton. You're such an idiot. > > Why did the uncorrected NTS-2 clock produce +442.5 × 10^-12 > when relativity had predicted +446.5 × 10^-12 before launch? I've told you, but of course you couldn't comprehend. If the atomic clocks didn't fit your madness you wouldn't announce them perfect and they wouldn't care about them. I can (and I did) point you many types of clocks not fitting your prophecies corrected or uncorrected. You simply ignore them. As expected from a brainwashed religious maniac. > Your answer remains: > > "Who cares?" > > Everyone who understands what a quantitative prediction is, Maciej. Sure, "2kg of grass eaten!!! Exactly as our ingenious theory of sharks eating grass predicted!!! CONFIRMED!!! CONFIRMED!!!!" > > That's rather the point.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 21:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <a2IW4-K3lLbqHuJU9-9EIkIRKmQ@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674765 |
Maciej,
> Measured - 0.
No.
correction OFF: +442.5 × 10^-12
correction ON: approximately 0
You have now spent dozens of posts arguing that the first measurement
doesn't count because engineers subsequently cancelled what it measured.
> And started the real measurements.
Wonderful.
So measurements become "real" only after engineers modify the clocks
to cancel the inconvenient measured effect.
And still, after all the shouting:
predicted before launch: +446.5
measured correction OFF: +442.5
Your explanation for this agreement remains:
"clock error"
"who cares?"
"piece of shit"
sharks eating grass
Relativity supplied the number.
You supplied the zoology.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 23:34 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <18e05a68a646cb13$29423$1964278$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> |
| In reply to | #674766 |
On 10/20/2026 11:15 PM, Python wrote: > Maciej, > >> Measured - 0. > > No. Yes. > You have now spent dozens of posts arguing that the first measurement > doesn't count because engineers subsequently cancelled what it measured. Lie. Like always. You have now spent dozens of posts arguing that The Shit is confirmed because there existed some clocks fitting it. SOME clocks may fit any nonsense. >> And started the real measurements. > > Wonderful. > > So measurements become "real" only after engineers modify the clocks To start what GPS was designed for. And it happens that GPS is designed for - MEASUREMENTS. Your "perfect" junk is - very simply - unusable for that, face it, trash. > And still, after all the shouting: > > predicted before launch: +446.5 > measured correction OFF: +442.5 Yeah. "Measured" with clocks which later (almost immediately) showed they're unusable for measurements. Great. > Relativity supplied the number. And it was worthless, the measured REALLY value is 0.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-20 21:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2HS75HDcN5VcfTdTntLCzLpRzSc@jntp> |
| In reply to | #674767 |
Maciej,
> SOME clocks may fit any nonsense.
"SOME" clocks. Excellent.
Cesium clocks in NTS-2.
Cesium and rubidium clocks throughout GPS.
Atomic clocks in gravitational redshift experiments.
Hafele-Keating.
Gravity Probe A.
Modern optical-clock height comparisons.
Quite an epidemic of clocks accidentally "fitting the nonsense".
And NTS-2 was particularly unlucky: its "error" accidentally had the
right sign and matched a prediction made BEFORE launch to about 1%.
> clocks which later (almost immediately) showed they're
> unusable for measurements.
This is magnificent too.
How did they discover the clocks needed adjustment?
BY MEASURING THEIR RATE.
Apparently a clock is "unusable for measurements" immediately after
being used to make the measurement you desperately need to disappear.
> the measured REALLY value is 0.
Yes, Maciej:
observe offset
compensate offset
observe residual ≈ 0
conclude original offset never existed
At this point you're not refuting relativity.
You're refuting the concept of subtraction.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web