Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #380048 > unrolled thread
| Started by | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-03-24 15:11 +0000 |
| Last post | 2016-04-02 13:29 +0000 |
| Articles | 10 on this page of 30 — 9 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-03-24 15:11 +0000
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 13:14 -0700
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. HGW <hw@...> - 2016-03-25 08:59 +1100
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-24 15:52 -0700
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. HGW <hgw@...> - 2016-03-26 14:55 +1100
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-26 07:19 -0700
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-03-27 10:16 +1100
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-27 05:50 -0700
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-03-28 09:13 +1100
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-27 20:51 -0700
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-03-28 12:01 +0000
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-03-29 10:01 +1100
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-03-29 12:03 +0200
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-03-29 14:05 +0000
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-29 14:19 -0700
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-03-28 15:55 +0200
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-03-29 10:07 +1100
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-03-29 11:24 +0200
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-03-30 09:09 +1100
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-30 02:43 -0700
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. HGW <hw@...> - 2016-03-30 20:50 +1100
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-30 03:15 -0700
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-03-30 18:49 +0200
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. HGW <hw@...> - 2016-03-31 07:29 +1100
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-03-31 20:08 +0200
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-03-30 09:05 +1100
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-03-30 19:12 +0200
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-04-02 08:19 +1100
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-02 15:24 +0200
Re: The Einstein Conspiracy...Part 1. Bimpy <pimp@pimp.com> - 2016-04-02 13:29 +0000
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
| From | HGW <hw@...> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-30 20:50 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ndg7gr$nii$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #380469 |
On 30/03/16 20:43, David Waite wrote: > On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 3:09:09 PM UTC-7, HGW wrote: >>> >>> Quite. >>> Paul will even do the dirty trick of stating the facts! :-D >> >> From what I read NASA had very little direct interest. Rather it obtained the >> path details from some dingleberry in Spain. ..who also used c rather than c+v. > > So you're such a complete moron that you don't even know that dingleberry comes > from Herbert Dingle, anti-relativity crankdom. Damn you're slow. Where did the name 'dumb waiter' come from?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-30 03:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <92f1839b-5a0e-47e9-97b0-4d1c835f148d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #380471 |
On Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 2:50:25 AM UTC-7, HGW wrote: > On 30/03/16 20:43, David Waite wrote: > > On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 3:09:09 PM UTC-7, HGW wrote: > > >>> > >>> Quite. > >>> Paul will even do the dirty trick of stating the facts! :-D > >> > >> From what I read NASA had very little direct interest. Rather it obtained the > >> path details from some dingleberry in Spain. ..who also used c rather than c+v. > > > > So you're such a complete moron that you don't even know that dingleberry comes > > from Herbert Dingle, anti-relativity crankdom. Damn you're slow. > > Where did the name 'dumb waiter' come from? Waite comes from a warrior who would wait up at nights patrolling city walls to watch for invading enemies to answer your question, not that its relevant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-30 18:49 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ndh03m$hg$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #380443 |
On 30.03.2016 00:09, HGW wrote: > On Tue, 29 Mar 2016 11:24:37 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" wrote: >> On 29.03.2016 01:07, HGW wrote: >>> On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 15:55:14 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" wrote: >>>> >>>> Ralph Malcom Rabbidge must be a masochist since he >>>> voluntarily chooses to remind us of the gigantic fool >>>> he made of himself back in 2013. >>>> >>>> A couple of facts: >>>> >>>> The asteroid 2012 DA14 was discovered >>>> February 23. 2012 by the La Sagra Sky Survey. >>>> >>>> After a mere 11 days of observations, NASA was >>>> able to give this prediction for the orbit, >>>> published March 6, 2012 >>>> http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news174.html >>>> >>>> After another 11 months of continuous observations >>>> (>10 each day), the predictions had changed very little: >>>> >>>> Here is the prediction of the orbit published >>>> February 1, 2913 >>>> http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news177.html >>>> << >>>> Asteroid 2012 DA14 will be closest to Earth on February 15, >>>> 2013 at about 19:24 GMT (2:24 p.m. EST or 11:24 a.m. PST), >>>> when it will be at a distance of about 27,700 kilometers >>>> (17,200 miles) above the Earth's surface. >>>> >> >>>> >>>> February 15, 2013 2012 DA14 passed the Earth: >>>> http://arxiv.org/pdf/1303.0554v2 >>>> << >>>> February 15, 2013, at 19:26 UT. It passed at >>>> a distance of 27,700 km from the Earth’s surface >>>> >> >>>> >>>> The distance was almost exactly as predicted, and >>>> the time was only 2 minutes later than predicted. >>>> >>>> ---- >>>> >>>> In the morning February 15, 2013 a meteor hit Russia >>>> http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2013/26feb_russianmeteor/ >>>> << >>>> Comparing the orbit of the Russian meteor to that of 2012 DA14, >>>> Cooke has shown that there is no connection between the two. >>>> "These are independent objects," he says. "The fact that they >>>> reached Earth on the same day, one just a little closer than >>>> the other, appears to be a complete coincidence." >>>> >> >>>> >>>> --------------------------- >>>> >>>> On 2/8/2013, Henry Wilson wrote: >>>> | Asteroid 2012 DA14 is approaching Earth at about 0.00003c. >>>> | If NASA has based its trajectory forecasts on c instead of c+v, >>>> | they will have underestimated its current distance from Earth, >>>> | in which case gravity will bring it much closer to Earth than >>>> | expected. >>>> | >>>> | It might even hit the Earth. >>>> | >>>> | But don't panic folks....Einstein will save you. (: >>>> >>>> On 2/8/2013, Henry Wilson wrote: >>>> | They have only been watching it for a short time you clueless fool. >>>> | They have only seen a small part of its orbit and have calculated >>>> | the rest on the basis that its light comes to Earth at c and not c+v. >>>> | >>>> | I wouldn't be at all surprised if the thing hits Earth half a day >>>> | early....around about New York. >>>> | >>>> | Learn some basic physics please before you utter even more of >>>> | your crap here.. >>>> >>>> Since we now know that NASA's prediction was spot on, while >>>> according to Ralph Malcom Rabbidge it should have been wrong >>>> by half a day and 27,000 km if the ballistic theory was correct, >>>> we can only conclude that according to Ralph Malcom Rabbidge >>>> the ballistic theory is wrong; DA14 falsifies the ballistic theory. >>>> >>>> >>>> When the meteor hit Russia, Ralph Malcom Rabbidge got an orgasm: >>>> >>>> On 2/15/2013 2:35 PM, Henry Wilson DSc. wrote: >>>> | Meteor my arse! That was the main part of Asteroid D14 >>>> | that hit Russia. >>>> | Didn't I forecast something like this? >>>> | All NASA's predictions were wrong because they were based >>>> | on c rather than c+v. This is a huge victory for ballistic >>>> | light. >>>> | .....but we will never be allowed to know the truth. >>>> | They will tell us the rest of it passed harmfully overhead >>>> | and went on its way. No arrogant astronomer is going to >>>> | admit to being wrong all his life...There will be a >>>> | massive cover up and the Einstein conspiracy will no doubt continue... >>>> >>>> On 2/15/2013 5:29 PM, Henry Wilson DSc. wrote: >>>> | Idiotic?????? >>>> | An asteroid is 'predicted' by Einstein to pass near Earth on the 15th. >>>> | A few hours before, a massive object slams into Russia, causing >>>> | enormous damage and shockwaves. Coincidence, eh? >>>> | >>>> | Bath predicted that NASA's estimates were wrong because >>>> | they used c instead of c+v. Why didn't they see the huge >>>> | bit that hit Russia? >>>> | >>>> | They did!!!!!!! But they were six hours and 26000 kms out. >>>> | >>>> | Diaper, you challenged me to stake my reputation on my >>>> | BaTh prediction. A big part of DA14 DID hit Earth. >>>> | Was I right or not? >>>> | >>>> | How does my reputation look now, eh? >>>> >>>> How indeed! >>>> >>>> When it finally dawned to Ralph that the asteroid that hit Russia >>>> came from a quite different direction than DA14, he found >>>> it necessary to explain how it could change direction: >>>> >>>> On 21.02.2013 11:12, Henry Wilson DSc. wrote: >>>> | >>>> | Paul, let me explain. >>>> | >>>> | Maybe you have never been a sportsman but you still should be aware that if >>>> | a ball is thrown with lots of spin, it will curve quite dramatically through >>>> | the air. A sliced golf ball, for instance, might change direction by 30 >>>> | degrees in a few seconds over 100 metres. Similarly, a parachutist can >>>> | easily alter his direction of movement by manipulating the angle of his >>>> | chute. A glider is very manoeuverable through the air by nature of its wings >>>> | and tail deflectors. >>>> | >>>> | Imagine what might happen when a rapidly spinning, irregularly shaped, 20000 >>>> | tonne lump of rock enters the Earth's atmosphere at mach 10 !!!! Air has a >>>> | density of 1.3 kilogram/m3 at sea level. Even in the upper atmosphere, it is >>>> | dense enough to exert huge forces on any intruding object. The creation of >>>> | intense shockwaves will naturally be accompanied by intense reactive forces >>>> | between the air and the creator. While falling 100 kms at a low angle, any >>>> | object will likely follow a very erratic path. >>>> | >>>> | It is highly improbable, therefore, that any Asteroid in our solar system >>>> | is perfectly spherical and devoid of an amount of angular velocity. On >>>> | entering Earth's atmosphere, as well as making a very loud noise, a typical >>>> | asteroid will undoubtedly change course many times...possibly even going >>>> | around in circles.... before it crashes into a frozen lake from a direction >>>> | very different from its riginal one outside the earth's atmosphere. >>>> | >>>> | Have you now got the picture?.... or would you like me to go on? >>>> >>>> Sure, I have got the picture. >>>> Ralph Malcom Rabbidge would rather insist that a 10 000 ton >>>> asteroid going at 50+ MACH is moving in circles in the atmosphere, >>>> than admit what the rest of the world know: >>>> The meteor that hit Russia and the asteroid 2012 DA14 >>>> are not related. Their orbits were very different. > > > HAAHAHAHHAHA! Yes Paul, we have heard all that before. Indeed we have heard your unbelievable stupid claim that 2012 DA14 moved in circles in the atmosphere before it hit Russia before. Does that make your claim any less stupid? :-D >> But down under in Wonderland the 10 000 ton asteroid >> keep moving in circles in the atmosphere to fulfil >> the predictions of Ralph Malcom Rabbidge. >> >>> Note, Paul B. will do anything to avoid having to admit that my forecast of an >>> unexpected event that day was right...and it happened because the observers >>> used c instead of c+v. >>> >> >> Quite. >> Paul will even do the dirty trick of stating the facts! :-D > > From what I read NASA had very little direct interest. Rather it obtained the > path details from some dingleberry in Spain. ..who also used c rather than c+v. You are mumbling.. Were you trying to say something, Ralph? :-) -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <hw@...> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-31 07:29 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ndhcuo$pt7$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #380505 |
On 31/03/16 03:49, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > On 30.03.2016 00:09, HGW wrote: >>> But down under in Wonderland the 10 000 ton asteroid >>> keep moving in circles in the atmosphere to fulfil >>> the predictions of Henry George Wilson. >>> >>>> Note, Paul B. will do anything to avoid having to admit that my >>>> forecast of an >>>> unexpected event that day was right...and it happened because the >>>> observers >>>> used c instead of c+v. >>>> >>> >>> Quite. >>> Paul will even do the dirty trick of stating the facts! :-D >> >> From what I read NASA had very little direct interest. Rather it >> obtained the >> path details from some dingleberry in Spain. ..who also used c rather >> than c+v. > > You are mumbling.. > Were you trying to say something, Henry? :-) The only thing I need to say is that I predicted something unexpected would happen on that fatal day. WAS I RIGHT PAUL?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-31 20:08 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ndjp2a$80r$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #380522 |
On 30.03.2016 22:29, HGW wrote:
>
> The only thing I need to say is that I predicted something unexpected
> would happen on that fatal day. WAS I RIGHT PAUL?
No, you didn't predict that 'something unexpected' like
'a meteor will hit Russia', would happen.
You quite specifically predicted that 2012 DA14 would hit
the Earth around New York half a day earlier than predicted
by NASA, and no matter of much you repeat the claim to have
predicted 'something unexpected', you never predicted anything
else than that 2012 DA14 would hit the Earth.
On 2/8/2013, Henry Wilson wrote:
| Asteroid 2012 DA14 is approaching Earth at about 0.00003c.
| If NASA has based its trajectory forecasts on c instead of c+v,
| they will have underestimated its current distance from Earth,
| in which case gravity will bring it much closer to Earth than
| expected.
|
| It might even hit the Earth.
|
| But don't panic folks....Einstein will save you. (:
On 2/8/2013, Henry Wilson wrote:
| They have only been watching it for a short time you clueless fool.
| They have only seen a small part of its orbit and have calculated
| the rest on the basis that its light comes to Earth at c and not c+v.
|
| I wouldn't be at all surprised if the thing hits Earth half a day
| early....around about New York.
|
| Learn some basic physics please before you utter even more of
| your crap here..
Here is the prediction of the orbit published by NASA
February 1, 2913
http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news177.html
<<
Asteroid 2012 DA14 will be closest to Earth on February 15,
2013 at about 19:24 GMT (2:24 p.m. EST or 11:24 a.m. PST),
when it will be at a distance of about 27,700 kilometers
(17,200 miles) above the Earth's surface.
>>
February 15, 2013 2012 DA14 passed the Earth:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1303.0554v2
<<
February 15, 2013, at 19:26 UT. It passed at
a distance of 27,700 km from the Earth’s surface
>>
Since we now know that NASA's prediction was spot on, while
according to Ralph Malcom Rabbidge it should have been wrong
by half a day and 27,000 km if the ballistic theory was correct,
we can only conclude that according to Ralph Malcom Rabbidge
the ballistic theory is wrong; DA14 falsifies the ballistic theory.
--------------------
BTW, Ralph.
Is there any particular reason why you have failed
to answer this question?
Do you still claim that NASA had the power to fake all
the observations of the passing of 2012 DA14 made by
all the observatories that observed it?
--
Paul
https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <xxx@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-30 09:05 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <isulfb9shcf3ralvnlt8d8250oed8htqq7@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #380323 |
On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 15:55:14 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> wrote: >On 28.03.2016 00:13, HGW wrote: >> >> By the way, a similar argument applies to that asteroid that crashed into >> Russia about 12 hours before predicted.... Because they used c instead of c+v, >> they always underestimated its proximity. >> >> I was the only person in the world who predicted an unexpected event that day. >> Was I right? I even wagered the reputation of BaTh on it with Paul B. He still >> hasn't paid me for it. HAHAHHHAHHAHHAHHHA!!!!! Just listen to the ratpack howling!!!!! The fact that I predicted an unusual eventn the same day wont go away no matter how much you lot scream and yell. It happened just as I said it would. BaTh is victorious yet again.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-30 19:12 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ndh1ec$3dr$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #380442 |
On 30.03.2016 00:05, HGW wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 15:55:14 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no>
> wrote:
>
>> On 28.03.2016 00:13, HGW wrote:
>>>
>>> By the way, a similar argument applies to that asteroid that crashed into
>>> Russia about 12 hours before predicted.... Because they used c instead of c+v,
>>> they always underestimated its proximity.
>>>
>>> I was the only person in the world who predicted an unexpected event that day.
>>> Was I right? I even wagered the reputation of BaTh on it with Paul B. He still
>>> hasn't paid me for it.
>
> HAHAHHHAHHAHHAHHHA!!!!! Just listen to the ratpack howling!!!!!
>
So why did you have to snip 'the howling of the ratpack'?
Didn't you like the facts the ratpack howled?
>
> The fact that I predicted an unusual eventn the same day wont go away no matter
> how much you lot scream and yell.
> It happened just as I said it would.
The fact is that Ralph Malcom Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson
predicted that 2012 DA14 would hit the Earth around New York
half a day earlier than predicted by NASA, and no matter
of much he repeats the claim to have predicted 'an unusual event'
he never predicted anything else than that 2012 DA14 would
hit the Earth.
On 2/8/2013, Henry Wilson wrote:
| Asteroid 2012 DA14 is approaching Earth at about 0.00003c.
| If NASA has based its trajectory forecasts on c instead of c+v,
| they will have underestimated its current distance from Earth,
| in which case gravity will bring it much closer to Earth than
| expected.
|
| It might even hit the Earth.
|
| But don't panic folks....Einstein will save you. (:
On 2/8/2013, Henry Wilson wrote:
| They have only been watching it for a short time you clueless fool.
| They have only seen a small part of its orbit and have calculated
| the rest on the basis that its light comes to Earth at c and not c+v.
|
| I wouldn't be at all surprised if the thing hits Earth half a day
| early....around about New York.
|
| Learn some basic physics please before you utter even more of
| your crap here..
The fact is:
Here is the prediction of the orbit published
February 1, 2913
http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news177.html
<<
Asteroid 2012 DA14 will be closest to Earth on February 15,
2013 at about 19:24 GMT (2:24 p.m. EST or 11:24 a.m. PST),
when it will be at a distance of about 27,700 kilometers
(17,200 miles) above the Earth's surface.
>>
February 15, 2013 2012 DA14 passed the Earth:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1303.0554v2
<<
February 15, 2013, at 19:26 UT. It passed at
a distance of 27,700 km from the Earth’s surface
>>
The distance was almost exactly as predicted, and
the time was only 2 minutes later than predicted.
Since we now know that NASA's prediction was spot on, while
according to Ralph Malcom Rabbidge it should have been wrong
by half a day and 27,000 km if the ballistic theory was correct,
we can only conclude that according to Ralph Malcom Rabbidge
the ballistic theory is wrong; DA14 falsifies the ballistic theory.
So:
>
> BaTh is victorious yet again.
>
:-D
--
Paul
https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <xxx@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-02 08:19 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <96ptfbp0dl99pineeahd7t136ltnsll5ge@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #380507 |
On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 19:12:41 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> wrote: >February 15, 2013 2012 DA14 passed the Earth: >http://arxiv.org/pdf/1303.0554v2 > << > February 15, 2013, at 19:26 UT. It passed at > a distance of 27,700 km from the Earth’s surface > >> > >The distance was almost exactly as predicted, and >the time was only 2 minutes later than predicted. > >Since we now know that NASA's prediction was spot on, while >according to Ralph Malcom Rabbidge it should have been wrong >by half a day and 27,000 km if the ballistic theory was correct, >we can only conclude that according to Ralph Malcom Rabbidge >the ballistic theory is wrong; DA14 falsifies the ballistic theory. > >So: Wrigle, wriggle, scream and niggle... Wilson loves to watch and giggle....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-02 15:24 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ndoh63$5nb$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #380687 |
On 01.04.2016 23:19, HGW wrote: > > Wrigle, wriggle, scream and niggle... > Wilson loves to watch and giggle.... This is not posted by Ralph Malcom Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson. To whoever posted this: This is fraud! Don't do it! -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bimpy <pimp@pimp.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-02 13:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ndohge$1ckb$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #380746 |
Paul B. Andersen wrote: > On 01.04.2016 23:19, HGW wrote: >> >> Wrigle, wriggle, scream and niggle... >> Wilson loves to watch and giggle.... > > This is not posted by Ralph Malcom Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson. > To whoever posted this: This is fraud! Don't do it! Learn physics, my friend. Before attacking Wilson and everybody else. Let's see whether you are able to write down the correct wave equation.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web