Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #393694 > unrolled thread
| Started by | HGW <hw@....> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-09-25 17:24 +1000 |
| Last post | 2016-10-13 19:32 +1100 |
| Articles | 17 on this page of 297 — 27 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-25 17:24 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 10:36 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-09-25 12:00 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-25 20:02 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 12:25 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-09-25 14:41 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-26 06:52 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Mike Fontenot <mlfasf@comcast.net> - 2016-09-25 08:46 -0600
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-09-25 20:21 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-26 06:55 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-09-26 00:18 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-25 23:16 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-26 20:01 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-10-01 21:13 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-26 06:53 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-26 03:18 +0000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-26 20:03 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-27 01:20 +0000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-09-27 13:22 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-27 20:11 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-09-27 20:18 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-28 14:25 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-09-28 14:49 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-29 08:49 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-27 03:33 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-25 05:36 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-26 06:58 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 17:12 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-25 16:27 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Virgil <VIRGIL@VIRGIL.com> - 2016-09-25 20:44 -0600
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 08:17 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-26 06:35 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-26 07:13 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 09:42 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-27 06:47 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 09:08 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-27 08:04 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 11:10 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-27 12:54 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 14:59 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-28 06:11 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 09:29 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-28 09:15 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 14:37 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 14:54 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-28 13:30 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 16:36 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-29 10:58 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-09-26 21:05 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-27 09:22 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-09-27 13:39 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-29 09:17 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-09-29 10:37 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-29 19:56 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 10:20 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-30 10:30 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-27 06:27 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Python <python@org.invalid> - 2016-09-27 15:45 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 09:05 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-27 07:54 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 10:05 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-27 12:51 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 14:58 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-28 06:00 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 09:27 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-28 23:33 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-09-28 15:14 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-28 09:05 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 14:37 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-28 14:09 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 16:48 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-29 14:24 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 10:08 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-29 05:48 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 10:26 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-30 07:08 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 09:29 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-10-01 07:57 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 15:52 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-10-03 06:04 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 10:04 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-10-03 06:36 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 10:07 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-04 07:19 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 15:25 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-05 09:24 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-30 06:23 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 09:17 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-10-01 07:10 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 18:34 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-02 18:41 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 09:41 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-04 06:47 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 15:14 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-05 09:25 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-10-02 07:33 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-03 09:01 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-10-03 07:22 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 09:51 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-04 06:52 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 15:15 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-05 01:18 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 08:24 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-10-03 06:46 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 12:25 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-10-04 04:36 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-04 09:55 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-04 15:02 +0000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-29 03:05 +0000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-29 14:26 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-29 15:42 +0000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-30 10:37 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-30 03:38 +0000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 07:15 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-07 23:22 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-08 21:01 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-08 19:25 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-09 20:22 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-09 14:33 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-13 05:35 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-13 18:42 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-14 21:08 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-15 06:35 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-15 06:10 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-16 05:06 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-15 22:02 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-16 01:38 +0000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-16 09:43 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-09-29 10:44 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-15 12:13 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-16 06:22 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-26 06:12 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-26 20:05 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-27 06:24 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-27 20:18 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-27 21:30 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-28 11:24 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-29 22:12 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-30 10:28 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-30 06:59 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-01 05:24 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-01 06:31 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-01 20:09 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2016-10-01 13:27 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-01 17:44 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-02 08:54 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-02 03:33 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-02 18:27 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-02 22:11 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-03 09:11 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-03 07:04 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-05 09:22 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-05 05:22 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-06 07:41 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-06 06:54 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-07 10:10 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-07 06:18 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-06 23:46 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-07 22:59 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-08 21:07 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-08 19:33 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-09 05:26 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-10 06:39 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-08 09:25 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-08 19:26 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-10-04 14:48 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-04 13:27 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-05 20:41 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-05 23:48 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-16 09:40 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-10-16 11:33 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-16 18:25 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-17 00:02 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-17 21:18 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-17 23:36 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-26 09:11 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-26 01:56 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-26 22:39 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-10-29 12:18 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2016-09-25 11:38 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-25 05:54 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2016-09-25 16:39 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-09-25 21:53 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-26 07:02 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-09-26 10:17 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-26 01:46 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-26 20:14 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-09-26 20:59 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-27 09:24 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-02 08:45 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-03 08:57 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-03 18:18 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-04 06:56 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-04 05:14 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-04 16:31 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-04 15:19 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-05 05:40 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-06 10:05 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-12 04:55 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-13 09:02 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-13 04:27 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-13 19:32 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-17 21:07 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-18 07:40 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-18 06:32 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-19 07:23 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-18 17:21 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Jim Barthel <jimbart@portlanportal.info> - 2016-10-19 19:30 +0000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-19 04:59 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-20 04:05 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-19 21:06 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-21 04:12 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-20 10:59 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Jim Barthel <jimbart@portlanportal.info> - 2016-10-20 18:15 +0000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-21 05:37 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-21 20:35 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-21 22:12 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Jim Barthel <jimbart@portlanportal.info> - 2016-10-21 20:20 +0000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-21 22:56 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 14:07 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-10-04 04:52 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 17:04 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 13:13 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-27 09:27 +1000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 06:12 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 13:42 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 16:43 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 13:08 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-29 14:21 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 16:29 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-30 05:57 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 09:15 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-10-01 06:30 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 15:07 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-10-03 05:57 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 10:03 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Python <python@org.invalid> - 2016-09-30 16:17 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-10-01 06:44 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Python <python@python.invalid> - 2016-10-01 18:24 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-10-02 06:25 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 08:24 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-10-03 06:50 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 12:27 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-10-04 04:37 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-04 09:55 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-05 01:21 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-30 14:32 +0000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-09-30 18:28 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 11:03 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 15:00 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 02:53 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-02 05:43 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-04 13:21 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-04 18:01 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-05 13:39 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-06 08:05 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-06 10:59 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-06 19:09 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 14:13 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-07 20:25 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-09 09:35 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-09 10:36 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-10 13:42 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-10 15:35 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 14:01 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-16 10:16 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-10-02 06:55 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-02 13:26 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-10-03 05:40 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-03 10:27 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-10-04 04:39 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-04 05:53 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 09:49 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-11 07:47 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-30 03:49 +0000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-09-27 20:22 -0500
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 13:00 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2016-09-30 11:58 +0200
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-30 13:47 +0000
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2016-09-30 19:24 +0200
Clarification of Simultaneity. "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-29 19:27 -0700
Clarification of Simultaneity. "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-29 19:32 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-02 16:22 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-02 16:23 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-03 16:28 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-10-04 14:34 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-04 14:43 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-04 15:02 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-04 16:22 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-04 16:23 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-04 16:46 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-05 14:16 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-07 15:07 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-07 15:09 -0700
Clarification of Simultaneity. John Gogo <jfgogo22@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 19:36 -0700
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-10-13 14:54 +1100
Re: Clarification of Simultaneity. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-13 19:32 +1100
Page 15 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 … 13 14 [15]
| From | "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-29 19:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6078ddf0-baf1-4f51-a111-4fabe9d9c850@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #393694 |
Thomas Heger wrote: I start at the GR side and 'march' from there towards QM. So I try to build particles from spacetime. This term 'spacetime' is actually a place-holder for something not precisely specified, which behaves like Minkovskian spacetime. This is assumed to be composed from pointlike elements, which could be understood as 'points with features'. These points are connected in a certain way. This connection could be understood as if the points would twist each other. Such anti-symmetric rotation is causing 'timelike stable patterns' and those are, what we call 'matter'. the inverse to timelike is called 'spacelike'. If you combine both relations, you get a 45° cone around the axis of time, which is called 'light-cone'. The zero-point is called 'observer' and moves along his timeline. Around this axis of time you can construct a 45° cone, however you turn the axis of time. What is moving along this cone is called 'light' and the angle 45° is called 'c'. So light moves always with c. But light in one FoR is not necessarily light in another FoR. So a material object in one FoR can be light in an FoR in an angle of 45 ° TH I like Your idea of the temporal horizon simply being equivalent to the inverted spatial horizon. If combined with quantum entanglement of two non-local particles, it implies our entire universe is "Inside the event horizon of a blackhole making everything inside the horizon "Temporally Entangled" , not spatial entangled. The twin paradox is resolved by the twins always being temporally entangled & the seeming age difference is turned into a ( mass or velocity difference )
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-29 19:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5817cf6b-3ded-4ed4-a46d-707787c6764a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #394315 |
Thomas Heger wrote: I start at the GR side and 'march' from there towards QM. So I try to build particles from spacetime. This term 'spacetime' is actually a place-holder for something not precisely specified, which behaves like Minkovskian spacetime. This is assumed to be composed from pointlike elements, which could be understood as 'points with features'. These points are connected in a certain way. This connection could be understood as if the points would twist each other. Such anti-symmetric rotation is causing 'timelike stable patterns' and those are, what we call 'matter'. the inverse to timelike is called 'spacelike'. If you combine both relations, you get a 45° cone around the axis of time, which is called 'light-cone'. The zero-point is called 'observer' and moves along his timeline. Around this axis of time you can construct a 45° cone, however you turn the axis of time. What is moving along this cone is called 'light' and the angle 45° is called 'c'. So light moves always with c. But light in one FoR is not necessarily light in another FoR. So a material object in one FoR can be light in an FoR in an angle of 45 ° TH I like Your idea of the temporal horizon simply being equivalent to the inverted spatial horizon. If combined with quantum entanglement of two non-local particles, it implies our entire universe is "Inside the event horizon of a blackhole making everything inside the horizon "Temporally Entangled" , not spatial entangled. The twin paradox is resolved by the twins always being temporally entangled & the seeming age difference is turned into a ( mass or velocity difference ) http://vixra.org/pdf/1310.0191vC.pdf
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-02 16:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c7861e82-ee0a-47d3-97c1-8374afedb2ac@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #393694 |
Einstein simultaneity is used to justify the effects of Maxwell's electromagnetic light wave that is said to propagate at the velocity of light but Maxwell's electromagnetic theory of light is based on Faraday's induction effect that is not luminous; therefore, all of theoretical physics is incorrect and are a deceptive manipulation. In addition, it is not physically possible to measure the velocity of light that simultaneity is based on.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-02 16:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1a03ef41-45fe-4f08-ba95-c882f8d38637@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #393694 |
Maxwell assumes that since radio waves and light propagate at the same velocity that light has an electromagnetic field structure but Maxwell's electromagnetic theory of light is based on Faraday's induction effect that is not luminous and cannot be used to represent an electromagnetic field structure of light. In addition, it is not physically possible to determine the velocity of light. Roemer (1676) did not calculate the velocity of light. Huygens (1690) measures the velocity of light using the earth's orbital diameter KL (fig 23) and a 22 minute time delay (Huygens, p. 9) but.......................which proves Huygens measurement of the velocity of light is physically invalid and cannot be used to justify Maxwell's theory. Fizeau (1849) uses a rotating cogwheel to form a series of light pulses to generated an intensity that is used to measure the velocity of light but to measure the velocity of light requires the time a single light pulse propagates a specific distance which proves Fizeau's experiment is invalid since the rotating cogwheel cannot produce a single light pulse; consequently, Fabry-Perot (1989) interferometer is employed to measure the velocity of light using the interferometer's diffraction pattern to obtain a wavelength that is used in the wave equation (λf = c) to determine the velocity of light but the optical ether, composed of matter, that forms the light wave represented with the wave equation does not physically exist (vacuum); consequently, the wave equation (λf = c) cannot be used to determine the velocity of light. Furthermore, a Kerr shutter is used to measure the velocity of light but Kerr's nanosecond shutter speed cannot form a measurable intensity after a single light pulse propagates a distance of 8 km which is experimental proof the velocity of light has not been measured. One should look at the flip (sudden and complete chance in the method to determining the velocity of light) that is occurring since Fabry-Perot interferometer is completely different from Fizeau cogwheel and Huygens Io methods of measuring the velocity of light. We have to ask why are physicists using completely different methods and why physicists do not use the Hubble to verify Huygens' method or use the MIT lunar reflector experiment to measure the velocity of light. It is not physically possible to measure the velocity of light using the current state of physics. The last revolution is physics occurred in the 1400's when the theory that the earth was the center of the solar system was reversed.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-03 16:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8d27c73e-d424-459d-b050-0f402035a98f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #393694 |
In Einstein's simultaneity, Einstein calculates the velocity of light using light that propagates from points A to B then reflected back in a time t but it is not physically possible for a single light pulse to form an intensity using a Fizeau cogwheel after the light pulse propagates a distance of 8 km. Furthermore, A Kerr shutter is used to measure the velocity of light but Kerr's nanosecond shutter speed cannot form a measurable intensity after a single light pulse propagates a distance of 8 km which is experimental proof the velocity of light has not been measured and cannot be used to justify Maxwell's electromagnetic theory of light. "Let a ray of light start at the “A time” t A towards B, let it at the “B time” t' be reflected at B in the direction of A, and arrive again at A at the “A time” t." (Einstein, S 1).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-04 14:34 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <e5gmamFdc28U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #393694 |
On 25/09/2016 5:24 PM, HGW wrote: > Two events that are absolutely simultaneous will not, in general, appear > to be simultaneous. That is a consequence of the finite speed of light > and is not an indication that simultaneity is relative. > > Einstein and his followers were always too stupid to realize this. > > Without the RoS, the whole of Einstein's theory becomes nonsensical. > However, if you try to account for the differences in the appearance of moving clocks by reference only to the fixed speed of light, you'll find that it doesn't work. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-04 14:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c39a0b9a-bef3-45f6-899f-c17cce651807@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #393694 |
The electromagnetic gravity wave have a frequency range of 10^-7 to 10^4 Hz but an electromagnetic gravity wave with a frequency of 10^-7 Hz forms a wavelength of 10^15 meters that is more than a light year in length!! A gravity wave with a frequency of 10^4 Hz represents sound but sound cannot propagate in the vacuum of stellar space nor can sound propagate at the velocity of light. Furthermore, the LIGO gravitational wave experiment detected electromagnetic gravity waves, that originated from the merging of two black holes more than 1.3 billion light years from the earth. The LIGO gravity waves have a frequency of 35 to 250 Hz that produce an acoustical vibration of the armature of Michelson-Morley interferometer forming a signal that is used to justify the existence of gravity waves but the LIGO gravity waves represent the frequency of sound that are propagating in the vacuum of celestial space at the velocity of light. -------------------------------------------------------- "Frequency of sound is not sound. Sound is not gravity waves. Sound is a compression wave in some material. Nor are electromagnetic waves with the frequency of sound sound. For example, they communicate with submarines with electromagnetic waves with the frequency of sound. It is not sound, it is electromagnetic frequency. They do this because that frequency can be received by the submarine anywhere in the world. (and the transmitter was usually located in a place like Minnesota, far from the ocean) Similarly for gravitational waves. Gravitational waves with the frequency of sound (or any other frequency) can travel through the vacuum of space even if actual sound can't." Moroney
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-04 15:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a69c938d-e676-4a3d-aae8-a93303f585b3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #393694 |
Michelson is testing for Fresnel's stationary optical ether, composed of matter, that exist in all of the celestial universe. At a point on the surface of the earth, the earth's daily motion forms an ether drift by propagating through the stationary optical ether, composed of matter; consequently, Michelson's experiment is based on the directions of the light rays respect to the ether drift; henceforth, the alteration of the light rays directions would produce a change in the interferometer diffraction pattern. In Michelson's experiment, the incident light beam is split into two light rays. One light ray propagates parallel to the direction of the ether wind (drift) and is affected by the ether drift. The second light ray propagates perpendicular to the ether drift and is unaffected by the ether drift. Both light rays propagate towards two separate mirrors then are reflected back and recombined to form an interference effect viewed using a telescope. Rotating Michelson's experimental apparatus, at certain angles, both light rays would be affected by the ether drift which would alter the interference effect but rotating the interferometer, at various angles, does not change the diffraction pattern which represents the negative result of Michelson's experiment. In addition, Michelson-Morley experiment (1887) is also testing for Fresnel's optical ether, composed of matter, using multiple reflections (Michelson-Morley, p. 334) but both Michelson and Michelson-Morley experiments are unnecessary since light propagating in vacuum is definitive and irreversible experimental proof Fresnel's ether, composed of matter, does not physically exist. Also, both light rays propagate towards two separate mirrors and are reflected back and propagate in the opposite directions which eliminates the test of the ether drift since each light ray is propagating on it's initial path then is return, by the reflection, on the same initial path which cancels the test of the ether drift. Michelson-Morley luminiferous ether experiment attempts to conceal the cancelation problem using multiple reflections. ___________________________________________________________ > The result of Michelson's ether experiment was negative. Sorry, nut the reported result v = 8.5 km/s is rather quite positive. > "The interpretation of these results is that there is no displacement of the interference bands. The result of the hypothesis of a stationary ether is thus shown to be incorrect, and the necessary conclusion follows that the hypothesis is erroneous." (Michelson, p. 128). Sorry, but I don't use, nor care, about the: 'interpretational science'. This is just another name of the: 'stupidity'. al...@interia.pl
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-04 16:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4fb80b35-30c2-46cc-b8ec-6898346fd66f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #393694 |
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=911+twin+towers&&view=detail&mid=FA3724731DFFAB34E1DDFA3724731DFFAB34E1DD&rvsmid=FA3724731DFFAB34E1DDFA3724731DFFAB34E1DD&fsscr=0&FORM=VDFSRV
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-04 16:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <73d1f0f8-304c-4791-bce9-281cda43aa41@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #393694 |
THEelectromagnetic gravity wave have a frequency range of 10^-7 to 10^4 Hz but an electromagnetic gravity wave with a frequency of 10^-7 Hz forms a wavelength of 10^15 meters that is more than a light year in length!! A gravity wave with a frequency of 10^4 Hz represents sound but sound cannot propagate in the vacuum of stellar space nor can sound propagate at the velocity of light. Furthermore, the LIGO gravitational wave experiment detected electromagnetic gravity waves, that originated from the merging of two black holes more than 1.3 billion light years from the earth. The LIGO gravity waves have a frequency of 35 to 250 Hz that produce an acoustical vibration of the armature of Michelson-Morley interferometer forming a signal that is used to justify the existence of gravity waves but the LIGO gravity waves represent the frequency of sound that are propagating in the vacuum of celestial space at the velocity of light.. -------------------------------------------------------- "Frequency of sound is not sound. Sound is not gravity waves. Sound is a compression wave in some material. Nor are electromagnetic waves with the frequency of sound sound. For example, they communicate with submarines with electromagnetic waves with the frequency of sound. It is not sound, it is electromagnetic frequency. They do this because that frequency can be received by the submarine anywhere in the world. (and the transmitter was usually located in a place like Minnesota, far from the ocean) Similarly for gravitational waves. Gravitational waves with the frequency of sound (or any other frequency) can travel through the vacuum of space even if actual sound can't." Moroney the man
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-04 16:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9cb9b541-c885-41d7-8b23-09e75bbe93af@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #393694 |
The velocity of light derived using simultaneity does not change the fact that Maxwell's electromagnetic theory of light is based on Faraday's induction effect that is not luminous.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-05 14:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8f30f31c-f9dd-409b-a1fc-d546c931b097@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #393694 |
Admit it you people do not know what you are talking about and a person that does really bugs you. Right? That sinking feeling of total Wazniakism.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-07 15:07 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a6d9ece7-f40a-451b-b1b4-ef2dbb878a7d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #393694 |
Gary Harnagel Sep 26 On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 12:13:51 PM UTC-6, numbernu...@gmail.com wrote: > > To use the lunar reflector to measure the distance to the moon requires > being able to determine where the photon originated. We KNOW where it originated, ignorant one. It originated at the reflector they pointed the beam at. > Since the Hubble requires a illuminated object that is more than 200 > meters in diameter at the surface of the moon to detect a point, The Hubble is NOT used for LLR experiments, dunce brain. > based on your single photon assumption, it is not physically possible to > determine where the photons near the lunar lander originated from. COmplete baloney. Only the corner reflector returns an significant light. Apparently, you are too ignorant to know what a corner reflector does. > The photons that originate within the 200 meter diameter around the lunar > lander that is represented with your ostensible illuminated point could > have originated from the lunar lander or the MIT Lunar reflector; And what difference would it make if they did, brainless one. All the area around the reflector is the SAME distance from the earth. > this ambiguity proves that the MIT lunar lander experiment is a scientific > hoax. Nope. It proves that you are stupider than lunar dirt. > Furthermore, to determine the distance to the moon requires the precise > time the photon was emitted by the source (laser) but in your explanation > you stated that the photons were being emitted by the source for an > extended period of time which would not fulfill the time measurement > requirement in the determination of the distance to the moon. The pulse length is 100 picoseconds. Do you even have a clue as to what that means? No, I didn't think so. It's just over an inch. Do you even have the wisp of an idea how they can determine distances to even less than an inch with a 100 picosecond pulse? No, I didn't think you did. You are an ignorant crank and an arrogant troll, and you make a fool of yourself every time you make a post.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-07 15:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7fe47691-ba67-409b-93db-a2cbd4f90cfd@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #393694 |
Why don't they use the Lunar reflector to measure the velocity of light?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Gogo <jfgogo22@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 19:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <27d68a62-da8f-4314-a160-04a3179f0f0e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #393694 |
Two events are absolutely simultaneous if two or more observing points fall within their range of cooperative maximum visual acuity.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-13 14:54 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <e68eqpF3eigU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #395537 |
On 13/10/2016 1:36 PM, John Gogo wrote: > Two events are absolutely simultaneous if two or more observing points fall within their range of cooperative maximum visual acuity. > Gibberish again, John. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <hw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-13 19:32 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ntngpv$1j9o$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #395537 |
On 13/10/16 13:36, John Gogo wrote: > Two events are absolutely simultaneous if two or more observing points fall within their range of cooperative maximum visual acuity. Bullshit! Simultaneity has nothing at all to do with human vision. --
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 15 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 … 13 14 [15]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web