Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #380413 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-03-29 04:40 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-03-31 07:20 -0700 |
| Articles | 14 on this page of 114 — 13 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: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2016-03-29 04:40 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-03-29 14:54 +0200
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2016-04-03 15:13 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-04 01:03 +0000
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-03 20:57 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-04-03 22:14 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-04 10:53 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-04 11:24 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 23:44 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-05 02:05 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-05 02:51 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-05 02:58 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-05 04:08 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-05 04:25 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-05 04:41 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-05 05:14 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-05 05:46 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-05 06:46 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-05 20:54 +0200
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-05 12:45 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-05 23:17 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox alsor@interia.pl - 2016-04-06 06:41 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-06 07:56 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox alsor@interia.pl - 2016-04-06 09:00 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-06 09:54 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox alsor@interia.pl - 2016-04-06 11:51 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 11:29 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox alsor@interia.pl - 2016-04-06 12:01 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 14:33 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox alsor@interia.pl - 2016-04-09 10:17 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 15:45 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox alsor@interia.pl - 2016-04-10 12:08 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-03 23:48 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-04 20:22 +0200
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-03-29 06:45 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-29 08:18 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-29 11:17 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-29 11:54 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-29 21:50 +0200
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-29 22:09 +0200
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-29 13:11 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-29 22:43 +0200
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-29 14:24 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-29 15:58 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-03-29 23:15 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-30 00:07 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-03-30 00:51 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-30 01:45 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-03-30 02:06 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-30 02:35 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-03-30 03:00 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-30 03:11 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-03-30 03:21 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-30 03:43 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-03-30 03:53 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-30 04:34 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2016-03-30 04:43 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-03-30 05:31 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-30 06:08 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-30 12:21 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-03-30 14:48 -0500
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-03-30 23:39 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-30 22:34 +0200
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-30 14:36 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-03-30 23:17 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 00:04 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-03-31 00:15 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 00:30 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-03-30 05:29 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-30 12:13 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-30 22:30 +0200
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-30 13:35 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-30 22:53 +0200
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-30 14:39 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-03-30 23:23 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 00:06 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-03-31 00:23 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 00:42 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-03-31 00:56 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 11:11 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-31 22:10 +0200
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 13:50 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-31 23:03 +0200
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 15:01 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-03-31 23:09 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 00:11 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-01 00:34 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-01 14:53 +0000
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-01 17:55 +0200
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-01 18:44 +0000
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-01 21:02 +0200
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-04 01:10 +0000
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 10:30 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox alsor@interia.pl - 2016-04-01 10:38 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 13:36 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox alsor@interia.pl - 2016-04-04 11:41 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 15:02 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-04 23:01 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 00:27 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-05 00:52 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-01 15:37 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-01 21:10 +0200
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Bimpy <pimp@pimp.com> - 2016-04-01 19:15 +0000
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 13:38 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-02 09:05 +0200
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-03-31 14:42 +0000
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-30 02:45 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-30 12:10 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-30 12:07 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-30 22:26 +0200
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-03-29 23:25 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-30 10:30 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-30 10:48 -0700
Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox alsor@interia.pl - 2016-03-31 07:20 -0700
Page 6 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6]
| From | Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-01 15:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <12e5c6f7-1c39-455b-9869-8b8d0591d12e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #380663 |
On Friday, April 1, 2016 at 11:38:27 AM UTC-6, al...@interia.pl wrote: > > The pseudoscience is eternal... because the imbeciles > exist due to the pure statistical reasons, > thus they dominate every population... usually, hehe! COngratulatons, you have described yourself very well. "the global village will have its village idiots, and they'll have a global range." -- Martin Rees
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-01 21:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ndmh3l$e9a$1@node1.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #380661 |
Użytkownik "JanPB" napisał w wiadomości grup dyskusyjnych:9065303c-6f62-4bbb-9c23-3b0e9f731658@googlegroups.com... > Jan, poor idiot, I'm not changing the subject, you > just don't know, what the subject is, as usual. > Your Shit is stupid. "Stupid" is not a scientific > cathegory. No scientific arguments. > > Of course, it is also inconsistent and falsified > by experiments. But these are things of lesser > importance; I could argument here, and you would > ignore these arguments, as always. Waste of time. > > > Of course, as "stupidity" is not scientific, > scientists, like you, don't have to care about > their stupidity. > But they are stupid, if they don't. > Like you. |More poetry. You still posted no arguments against relativity and physics. You're poor, fanatic moron. For those like you no arguments exist. |In order to be treated seriously you need to start by pointing out what's |specifically wrong with the following: http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2014-4/ http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html Nothing is wrong with these. But your Shit announced unsynchronized clocks as good and proper. What an idiocy...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bimpy <pimp@pimp.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-01 19:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ndmhbr$h9c$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #380669 |
Maciej Woźniak wrote: > http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2014-4/ > http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html > > Nothing is wrong with these. > But your Shit announced unsynchronized clocks as good and proper. What > an idiocy... aHhahahaa, correct alignment. Without clocks that are in synch Rrelativity is is not functioning.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-01 13:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c0ba394b-a7a8-4619-8979-bb18e935a24a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #380669 |
On Friday, April 1, 2016 at 12:10:48 PM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > Użytkownik "JanPB" napisał w wiadomości grup > dyskusyjnych:9065303c-6f62-4bbb-9c23-3b0e9f731658@googlegroups.com... > > > > Jan, poor idiot, I'm not changing the subject, you > > just don't know, what the subject is, as usual. > > Your Shit is stupid. "Stupid" is not a scientific > > cathegory. No scientific arguments. > > > > Of course, it is also inconsistent and falsified > > by experiments. But these are things of lesser > > importance; I could argument here, and you would > > ignore these arguments, as always. Waste of time. > > > > > > Of course, as "stupidity" is not scientific, > > scientists, like you, don't have to care about > > their stupidity. > > But they are stupid, if they don't. > > Like you. > > |More poetry. You still posted no arguments against relativity and physics. > > You're poor, fanatic moron. For those like you no > arguments exist. Still no argument. You can rant like this indefinitely if you'd like. > |In order to be treated seriously you need to start by pointing out what's > |specifically wrong with the following: > > http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2014-4/ > http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html > > Nothing is wrong with these. > But your Shit announced unsynchronized clocks as good and proper. > What an idiocy... If nothing is wrong with those then we're done. Thanks for playing. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-02 09:05 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ndnr0q$q5q$1@node2.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #380680 |
Użytkownik "JanPB" napisał w wiadomości grup dyskusyjnych:c0ba394b-a7a8-4619-8979-bb18e935a24a@googlegroups.com... > http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2014-4/ > http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html > > Nothing is wrong with these. > But your Shit announced unsynchronized clocks as good and proper. > What an idiocy... |If nothing is wrong with those then we're done. Thanks for playing. :) Feel free to feel you're done, poor idiot.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-31 14:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ndjd1j$g0o$7@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #380540 |
mlwozniak@wp.pl writes: >> > > > > |Honesty is the last thing on his mind. For the last ~3 years it's been >> > > > > |nothing but: >> > > > > |1. lies, >> > > > > |2. expletives, >> > > > > |3. screams, >> > > > > |4. non-sequiturs, >> > > > > |5. not a single justification for his (mostly idiotic) claims. >> > > > > >> > > > > When I'm talking to a bunch of idiots, >> > > > >> > > > |They are not idiots. >> > > > >> > > > In your dreams. >> > > >> > > Not in my dreams at all, one can simply look it up: >> > > >> > > http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html >> > >> > Now, tell me, which, precisely, of these experiments >> > confirms your immutable mathematical truth. >> >> No. I won't. >Of course you won't. There is no experiment confirming >the core of your moronic mumble, though they can give >some support to some details of little importance. >> Secondly, it is up >> to you to provide the refutations. You do the criticising, you backs it up. >Really? >Even according to your worthless "methodology" >you're wrong here. >> >> > Or that unsynchronized clocks are good and proper. >> > Or that observer on a street will observe and >> > claim buildings, trees and lanterns running >> > around him. >> >> Gobbledygook. >:) >Just some less known prophecies of your moronic Shit. A
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-30 02:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c56e5055-6ea6-4fcd-8e0e-3d43f0afa155@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #380466 |
On Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 2:06:29 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote: > W dniu środa, 30 marca 2016 10:45:39 UTC+2 użytkownik David Waite napisał: > > On Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 12:51:02 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote: > > > W dniu środa, 30 marca 2016 09:07:30 UTC+2 użytkownik JanPB napisał: > > > > On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 11:15:45 PM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote: > > > > > W dniu środa, 30 marca 2016 00:58:47 UTC+2 użytkownik JanPB napisał: > > > > > > On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 2:24:56 PM UTC-7, David Waite wrote: > > > > > > > On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 1:43:35 PM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ds²=(1+αx'/c²)²dct'²-dx'²-dy²-dz² > > > > > > > > > > > > where α is a function of t'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is a light sphere equation only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No its not crackpot. Its > > > > > > > > > > ds²=dct²-dx²-dy²-dz² > > > > > > > > > > under the transformation > > > > > > > > > > ct=∫γdct'+γβx' > > > > > > > > > > x=γx'+∫γβdct' > > > > > > > > > > where γ and β are to be expressed as functions of t'. > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > α=γ²(dβ/dt')c > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As we're talking about mathematics, let's remind that the oldest > > > > > > > > > and one of most trustful pieces of it was rejected by Great Guru, > > > > > > > > > because he found it's no fun anymore. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > |I know this is over your crackpot head, but I’ll suppose I’ll spell it out > > > > > > > > anyway. Lets say Al is an unaccelerated observer in the flat spacetime of > > > > > > > > special relativity. Coordinates appropriate for an inertial frame observer > > > > > > > > express the spacetime line element as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Too bad that relativistic tales of observers didn't match realiity even in > > > > > > > > Galileo's time. > > > > > > > > Now they are really, really pathetic. > > > > > > > > You'd better write a nice story of dragons. Nobody could ever check it out. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Learn to use the right reply button moron, and, that's not a rational argument. As such I have to admit that your anti-relativity crankdom must be motivated by something irrational like jealousy or racism. So which is it? > > > > > > > > > > > > It's likely a psychological problem affecting the ego. > > > > > > > > > > Have you already consulted your doctor > > > > > about your little "I'm a GURU!" problem? > > > > > > > > There is no need to: I know this stuff and you don't. > > > > > > Don't take it too hard, but your "immutable > > > mathematical truth" is obsolete for 150 years, > > > > You really should see a shrink about your disconnect from reality. > > As a fanatic, brainwashed moron you're taking for reality > your Shit. That's why sane people look as "disconnected > from reality" to you. They are not. You are. That's not a rational argument against relativity, As such I am left to the conclusion that your anti-relativity crankdom is based on something irrational like jealousy or racism. So which is it?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-30 12:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f941c9ce-5539-46b8-bea2-38d377f7f741@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #380466 |
On Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 2:06:29 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote: > W dniu środa, 30 marca 2016 10:45:39 UTC+2 użytkownik David Waite napisał: > > On Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 12:51:02 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote: > > > W dniu środa, 30 marca 2016 09:07:30 UTC+2 użytkownik JanPB napisał: > > > > On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 11:15:45 PM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote: > > > > > W dniu środa, 30 marca 2016 00:58:47 UTC+2 użytkownik JanPB napisał: > > > > > > On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 2:24:56 PM UTC-7, David Waite wrote: > > > > > > > On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 1:43:35 PM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ds²=(1+αx'/c²)²dct'²-dx'²-dy²-dz² > > > > > > > > > > > > where α is a function of t'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is a light sphere equation only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No its not crackpot. Its > > > > > > > > > > ds²=dct²-dx²-dy²-dz² > > > > > > > > > > under the transformation > > > > > > > > > > ct=∫γdct'+γβx' > > > > > > > > > > x=γx'+∫γβdct' > > > > > > > > > > where γ and β are to be expressed as functions of t'. > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > α=γ²(dβ/dt')c > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As we're talking about mathematics, let's remind that the oldest > > > > > > > > > and one of most trustful pieces of it was rejected by Great Guru, > > > > > > > > > because he found it's no fun anymore. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > |I know this is over your crackpot head, but I’ll suppose I’ll spell it out > > > > > > > > anyway. Lets say Al is an unaccelerated observer in the flat spacetime of > > > > > > > > special relativity. Coordinates appropriate for an inertial frame observer > > > > > > > > express the spacetime line element as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Too bad that relativistic tales of observers didn't match realiity even in > > > > > > > > Galileo's time. > > > > > > > > Now they are really, really pathetic. > > > > > > > > You'd better write a nice story of dragons. Nobody could ever check it out. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Learn to use the right reply button moron, and, that's not a rational argument. As such I have to admit that your anti-relativity crankdom must be motivated by something irrational like jealousy or racism. So which is it? > > > > > > > > > > > > It's likely a psychological problem affecting the ego. > > > > > > > > > > Have you already consulted your doctor > > > > > about your little "I'm a GURU!" problem? > > > > > > > > There is no need to: I know this stuff and you don't. > > > > > > Don't take it too hard, but your "immutable > > > mathematical truth" is obsolete for 150 years, > > > > You really should see a shrink about your disconnect from reality. > > As a fanatic, brainwashed moron you're taking for reality > your Shit. That's why sane people look as "disconnected > from reality" to you. They are not. You are. You really ought to see a doctor. Your reactions are not normal. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-30 12:07 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c8a92ef0-58ec-4be4-9498-7f030d4e2c7d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #380460 |
On Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 12:51:02 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote: > W dniu środa, 30 marca 2016 09:07:30 UTC+2 użytkownik JanPB napisał: > > On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 11:15:45 PM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote: > > > W dniu środa, 30 marca 2016 00:58:47 UTC+2 użytkownik JanPB napisał: > > > > On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 2:24:56 PM UTC-7, David Waite wrote: > > > > > On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 1:43:35 PM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ds²=(1+αx'/c²)²dct'²-dx'²-dy²-dz² > > > > > > > > > > where α is a function of t'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is a light sphere equation only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No its not crackpot. Its > > > > > > > > ds²=dct²-dx²-dy²-dz² > > > > > > > > under the transformation > > > > > > > > ct=∫γdct'+γβx' > > > > > > > > x=γx'+∫γβdct' > > > > > > > > where γ and β are to be expressed as functions of t'. > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > α=γ²(dβ/dt')c > > > > > > > > > > > > > As we're talking about mathematics, let's remind that the oldest > > > > > > > and one of most trustful pieces of it was rejected by Great Guru, > > > > > > > because he found it's no fun anymore. > > > > > > > > > > > > |I know this is over your crackpot head, but I’ll suppose I’ll spell it out > > > > > > anyway. Lets say Al is an unaccelerated observer in the flat spacetime of > > > > > > special relativity. Coordinates appropriate for an inertial frame observer > > > > > > express the spacetime line element as > > > > > > > > > > > > Too bad that relativistic tales of observers didn't match realiity even in > > > > > > Galileo's time. > > > > > > Now they are really, really pathetic. > > > > > > You'd better write a nice story of dragons. Nobody could ever check it out. > > > > > > > > > > Learn to use the right reply button moron, and, that's not a rational argument. As such I have to admit that your anti-relativity crankdom must be motivated by something irrational like jealousy or racism. So which is it? > > > > > > > > It's likely a psychological problem affecting the ego. > > > > > > Have you already consulted your doctor > > > about your little "I'm a GURU!" problem? > > > > There is no need to: I know this stuff and you don't. > > Don't take it too hard, but your "immutable > mathematical truth" is obsolete for 150 years, > poor want-to-be-guru. Unfortunately, this is both off-topic and false. > > I'm sure there are things you know that I don't. > > That's right. But I'm not yelling "I'm a GURU!!!" > somehow. Again, I have to spell everything for you explicitly, Mr. Spock. So one more time: the "guru" part pertains to physics only. > > Physics just happens not to be one of them, hence saying I could > > be your guru in that domain is just a rather pedestrian statement of fact. > > As I've said, your knowledge of 2-dimensional ants > from your imagination doesn't impress me. Cut out the schizophrenic talk, it's nonsense. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-30 22:26 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ndhcpm$uqp$1@node1.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #380515 |
Użytkownik "JanPB" napisał w wiadomości grup dyskusyjnych:c8a92ef0-58ec-4be4-9498-7f030d4e2c7d@googlegroups.com... > > > Have you already consulted your doctor > > > about your little "I'm a GURU!" problem? > > > > There is no need to: I know this stuff and you don't. > > Don't take it too hard, but your "immutable > mathematical truth" is obsolete for 150 years, > poor want-to-be-guru. |Unfortunately, this is both off-topic and false. Unfortunately, it's true and you don't understand very, very basics of your "stuff". Exactly as expected from a puffed relativistic trash.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-29 23:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <441f2bc2-5738-4714-a879-4cebc035beec@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #380441 |
W dniu wtorek, 29 marca 2016 23:24:56 UTC+2 użytkownik David Waite napisał: > > |I know this is over your crackpot head, but I’ll suppose I’ll spell it out > > anyway. Lets say Al is an unaccelerated observer in the flat spacetime of > > special relativity. Coordinates appropriate for an inertial frame observer > > express the spacetime line element as > > > > Too bad that relativistic tales of observers didn't match realiity even in > > Galileo's time. > > Now they are really, really pathetic. > > You'd better write a nice story of dragons. Nobody could ever check it out. > > Learn to use the right reply button moron, and, that's not a rational argument. Well, I don't care it isn't. Your mumble has NOTHING in common with real world. Real observers are not following your primitive, naive visions, they never did and they never will. Your emperor is naked.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | alsor@interia.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-30 10:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4a79d9af-9c65-42fa-9b46-e89db03ef3ff@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #380429 |
W dniu wtorek, 29 marca 2016 20:54:38 UTC+2 użytkownik David Waite napisał: > On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 11:17:42 AM UTC-7, al...@interia.pl wrote: > > W dniu wtorek, 29 marca 2016 17:18:46 UTC+2 użytkownik David Waite napisał: > > > > > ds²=(1+αx'/c²)²dct'²-dx'²-dy²-dz² > > > where α is a function of t'. > > > > This is a light sphere equation only, idiot. > > > > No its not crackpot. Its > ds²=dct²-dx²-dy²-dz² That is a light sphere in the ether frame. > under the transformation > ct=∫γdct'+γβx' for any light sphere: r = ct, therefore you transform the light sphere. > x=γx'+∫γβdct' > where γ and β are to be expressed as functions of t'. > and > α=γ²(dβ/dt')c > So we see that you also don't know what your talking about concerning the subject. So once again we find that the anti-relativity crank doesn't actually have sufficient knowledge about the subject to form a rational stance against it. As such I am left to believe that just like the other anti-relativity cranks, your anti-relativity crankdom must be motivated by something irrational like jealousy or racism. So which is it? I don't know what is an antirelativistic math, babe. You should go to school finally - a real one, not a relative. :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Waite <waitedavid1618@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-30 10:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <583d164a-23d7-4886-98ad-91bf0dd7d99a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #380508 |
On Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 10:30:46 AM UTC-7, al...@interia.pl wrote: > W dniu wtorek, 29 marca 2016 20:54:38 UTC+2 użytkownik David Waite napisał: > > On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 11:17:42 AM UTC-7, al...@interia.pl wrote: > > > W dniu wtorek, 29 marca 2016 17:18:46 UTC+2 użytkownik David Waite napisał: > > > > > > > ds²=(1+αx'/c²)²dct'²-dx'²-dy²-dz² > > > > where α is a function of t'. > > > > > > This is a light sphere equation only, idiot. > > > > > > > No its not crackpot. Its > > ds²=dct²-dx²-dy²-dz² > > That is a light sphere in the ether frame. > > > under the transformation > > ct=∫γdct'+γβx' > > for any light sphere: r = ct, > therefore you transform the light sphere. > Take your meds lunatic.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | alsor@interia.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-31 07:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4f17fb88-78c7-4759-a938-96f43c5347b4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #380509 |
W dniu środa, 30 marca 2016 19:48:40 UTC+2 użytkownik David Waite napisał: Write an equation of the light sphere in the SR, banana bambus. :)
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web