Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #401253 > unrolled thread
| Started by | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-12-09 19:44 -0800 |
| Last post | 2017-01-10 23:34 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 742 — 40 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-09 19:44 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-09 19:48 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-12-10 06:21 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-09 21:26 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-10 08:58 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-10 07:45 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-10 08:09 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-10 08:12 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-10 08:20 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-10 08:46 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-10 08:48 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-10 09:31 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Estrella Batey <yeaetl@sryeaet.org> - 2016-12-10 19:58 +0000
Re: Michelson's experiment Helmut Wabnig <hwabnig@.- --- -.dotat> - 2016-12-10 22:38 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-10 18:29 -0500
Re: Michelson's experiment Lauretta Nagle <uattea@aeuatte.au> - 2016-12-16 18:26 +0000
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-10 13:44 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-10 18:30 -0500
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-10 16:24 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-11 09:50 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-12 05:15 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 14:49 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-12 08:08 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 17:42 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-12 10:47 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 21:50 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-12 23:17 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-12-13 08:37 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-12-13 08:48 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-13 00:17 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-13 00:30 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-12-13 10:39 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-13 01:49 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-12-13 11:26 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-13 03:03 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-13 10:21 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-13 10:33 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 08:14 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 11:14 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Odilia Blatt <ttaliol@itrh3gdit.org> - 2016-12-14 17:59 +0000
Re: Michelson's experiment Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 19:22 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-14 06:11 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 15:44 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-14 06:49 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-14 07:23 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 07:48 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-14 12:58 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 13:09 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-14 17:18 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-15 00:19 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-15 02:17 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 13:10 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-15 00:08 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-12-15 03:40 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-15 10:41 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 16:49 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-14 08:19 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-13 04:51 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment eckard.blumschein@arcor.de - 2017-01-02 12:42 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment alsor@interia.pl - 2017-01-02 12:53 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-01-02 21:58 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Demetrice Barren <teercere@tmerunin.tme> - 2017-01-02 21:14 +0000
Re: Michelson's experiment eckard.blumschein@arcor.de - 2017-01-02 21:22 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-03 00:36 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-01-03 08:40 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Aubrey Primmer <myr@ejmr.info> - 2017-01-06 15:40 +0000
Re: Michelson's experiment Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-01-03 08:26 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Eckard B <eckard.blumschein@arcor.de> - 2017-01-09 06:53 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 16:47 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Eckard B <eckard.blumschein@arcor.de> - 2017-01-10 23:09 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 09:12 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Eckard B <eckard.blumschein@arcor.de> - 2017-01-11 08:05 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-12 11:29 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-12 10:05 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-12 11:50 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-12 16:59 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Estrella Batey <yeaetl@sryeaet.org> - 2016-12-13 00:19 +0000
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-12 22:43 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-13 18:53 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-14 07:54 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-12 23:21 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-12-11 04:29 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-10 19:37 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-12-11 09:20 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-11 20:25 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-12-12 06:31 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-11 23:58 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-12-12 07:47 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-11 23:18 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-12-13 06:25 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-13 01:42 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-12-13 22:29 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-13 15:01 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-12-15 06:08 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-14 21:46 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-14 22:05 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-15 05:10 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-12-14 06:08 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-12-14 07:42 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-13 05:25 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-12 12:51 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-12-13 06:12 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-13 18:53 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-13 20:46 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-12 07:35 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-12 07:42 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-10 20:27 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-12-11 09:38 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-11 05:25 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-11 11:47 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-12-11 20:59 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-11 12:47 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-11 16:40 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-11 14:52 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-12-12 01:32 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-10 10:51 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-10 12:45 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-10 13:11 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-10 12:49 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-10 18:25 -0500
Re: Michelson's experiment Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-10 19:23 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-10 18:42 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-10 18:53 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-10 19:02 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-11 00:46 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-10 14:52 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-11 16:09 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-10 15:40 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-12 13:41 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-12 16:56 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-12 15:04 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-12 17:02 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-12 17:49 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-12 17:49 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-13 13:46 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-13 13:55 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-13 17:18 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-13 17:21 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-13 17:24 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2016-12-13 20:28 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-13 20:55 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-14 15:31 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-14 17:32 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-14 17:36 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-14 17:38 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-14 17:43 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-14 17:58 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-14 18:11 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-15 12:56 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-15 13:00 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-16 03:48 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-16 14:04 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-16 07:34 -0800
Crackpot Jay Moseley full blown "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-16 07:48 -0800
Crackpot Jay Moseley full blown jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-17 12:02 -0800
Re: Crackpot Jay Moseley full blown Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-18 10:57 -0600
Re: Crackpot Jay Moseley full blown jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-18 13:20 -0800
Re: Crackpot Jay Moseley full blown "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-18 21:45 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-18 10:55 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-18 12:40 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-19 16:04 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-20 09:59 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-20 13:52 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-20 23:54 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-21 11:41 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-21 03:17 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-21 03:43 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-21 03:47 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-21 04:56 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-21 05:26 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-21 11:44 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Jacquelyn Schiffer <euefhqheeoeeSfaJn@euefhqhee.eeSfaJn.eue> - 2016-12-21 20:06 +0000
Re: Michelson's experiment Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-21 19:18 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Darleen Sloop <aolenD@nedfdealln.org> - 2016-12-22 21:15 +0000
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-21 05:39 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-21 19:02 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-21 11:02 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-22 15:03 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-22 14:35 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-28 14:24 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-29 10:50 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-29 07:04 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-29 23:11 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-29 16:38 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-31 13:43 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-31 11:44 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-01 15:10 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2017-01-01 09:18 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-01 22:14 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2017-01-02 21:11 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-03 16:10 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2017-01-05 14:11 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-06 15:40 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2017-01-08 02:49 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-08 14:11 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2017-01-08 07:23 -0800
Autistic imbecile Jay Moseley keeps advertising his imbecility "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-08 07:29 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-08 21:37 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2017-01-08 13:33 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-09 09:32 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2017-01-09 07:48 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-09 22:20 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2017-01-09 23:09 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-10 11:29 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-01-10 03:25 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-10 21:40 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-01-10 13:56 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Jaqueline Yoho <eau@oeJqq.org> - 2017-01-10 22:16 +0000
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-11 11:17 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-01-11 05:12 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-11 19:36 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Debbra Herrin <debhe@eeeeneoaa.org> - 2017-01-11 19:22 +0000
Re: Michelson's experiment matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-01-11 07:20 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-10 11:30 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-01-10 02:58 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-10 21:33 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-01-10 23:10 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-11 11:16 +0100
Jay Moseley advertises his imbecility "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-02 08:16 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-28 21:13 +0100
Cretin Jay Moseley perseveres "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-21 06:01 -0800
Cretin Jay Moseley perseveres jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-21 09:04 -0800
Re: Cretin Jay Moseley perseveres "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-21 09:50 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-18 12:59 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-19 15:11 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-20 09:36 -0800
Idiot Jay Moseley keeps embarrassing the UK "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-16 07:12 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-15 13:13 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-15 14:00 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment furthermore123456@gmail.com - 2016-12-17 13:12 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-20 09:54 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-21 08:04 -0800
Robert Winn cretin is back "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-21 08:31 -0800
Re: Robert Winn cretin is back Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-21 09:09 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2016-12-21 19:51 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 02:00 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2016-12-22 12:22 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-22 03:41 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 07:58 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 07:53 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2016-12-22 17:21 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 09:19 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2016-12-22 18:33 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 10:34 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2016-12-22 19:43 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 12:11 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2016-12-22 21:18 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 13:24 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2016-12-22 22:35 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 14:50 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2016-12-23 00:41 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 16:58 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2016-12-23 03:28 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 19:19 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2016-12-23 11:13 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 07:18 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2016-12-23 16:36 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 08:30 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2016-12-23 17:45 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 10:29 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2016-12-23 19:35 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 11:29 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 11:29 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 12:37 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-23 10:43 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 11:35 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-23 12:45 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 12:49 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-23 13:08 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 13:20 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-12-27 09:18 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-27 18:53 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-29 07:29 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment 01405 <0140519@gmail.com> - 2017-01-02 11:43 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment alsor@interia.pl - 2017-01-02 11:59 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-03 13:57 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-03 12:17 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-03 15:41 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-03 14:26 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-03 14:44 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment xxein1@att.net - 2017-01-03 22:20 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 08:03 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 10:45 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 13:15 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 15:34 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 15:46 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 09:38 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 08:17 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 07:08 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 08:40 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 10:46 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 09:33 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 12:21 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 21:56 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 15:47 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 15:40 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 20:12 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-01-10 18:37 -0500
Re: Michelson's experiment John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-10 15:58 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-10 16:33 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 17:23 -0800
CRETIN Robert Winn at work "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-10 17:27 -0800
Re: CRETIN Robert Winn at work Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 19:00 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-10 19:41 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 20:09 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-10 20:46 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 23:23 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-11 04:17 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-11 04:35 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 06:12 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 06:43 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-11 06:47 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 07:52 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 09:07 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 08:19 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 17:35 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 20:54 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 08:17 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 08:30 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 10:42 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 09:14 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 09:48 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 09:54 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 10:13 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 11:01 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 11:05 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 12:09 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 13:43 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 08:19 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 08:31 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 17:36 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-11 12:10 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 12:13 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 12:27 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-11 20:43 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-11 12:48 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 13:18 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-11 13:47 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Ward Nusbaum <uqowm@msdmmsuus.org> - 2017-01-11 21:56 +0000
Rober Winn, the village idiot "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-11 06:58 -0800
Re: Rober Winn, the village idiot Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 08:18 -0800
Re: Rober Winn, the village idiot "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-11 08:37 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 09:04 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-05 20:45 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment xxein1@att.net - 2017-01-06 16:53 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-06 17:31 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment xxein1@att.net - 2017-01-06 18:28 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-06 19:13 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-06 19:20 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment xxein1@att.net - 2017-01-07 13:08 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-07 14:17 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment xxein1@att.net - 2017-01-07 15:39 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-07 18:10 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-07 18:28 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-08 08:54 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment xxein1@att.net - 2017-01-09 06:12 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-09 06:48 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 10:10 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 13:08 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 15:28 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-04 13:54 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-01-04 23:29 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 16:42 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 17:06 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 20:16 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 09:47 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 09:33 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 07:08 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 08:43 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-06 08:48 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 10:53 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 09:34 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 12:22 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 15:43 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-04 16:19 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 16:49 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-04 17:57 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 20:19 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-04 20:23 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 21:28 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-05 05:13 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-05 06:20 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 07:35 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 07:21 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 08:06 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-05 07:06 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 07:43 -0800
Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-05 08:10 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 09:42 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-05 09:46 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 10:06 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 10:07 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-05 10:24 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 11:40 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-05 14:03 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 15:14 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-06 04:31 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 08:25 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-06 08:30 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-05 14:11 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 15:16 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-05 15:23 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 15:53 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-05 16:10 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 17:42 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-05 17:55 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 19:35 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-05 19:46 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 20:52 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-05 21:07 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-06 04:46 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 08:38 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 07:42 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-06 08:14 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-06 08:22 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 10:23 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-06 08:31 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 09:31 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 12:17 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Aubrey Primmer <myr@ejmr.info> - 2017-01-06 16:23 +0000
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 09:21 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Eckard B <eckard.blumschein@arcor.de> - 2017-01-09 07:04 -0800
Imbecile Eckard B. perseveres "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-09 07:09 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 15:50 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 15:41 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 20:27 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 20:31 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-09 21:07 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 07:30 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 06:00 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 08:38 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-10 06:47 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 07:08 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-10 07:14 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 10:57 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 09:10 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 08:54 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 08:07 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 17:34 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 20:50 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-11 21:01 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 08:20 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 08:32 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 10:38 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 11:26 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 14:07 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 17:35 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 21:00 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 08:23 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 08:34 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 12:09 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 14:38 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 07:26 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 07:12 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 11:15 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 14:17 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-10 15:05 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 17:17 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-10 17:23 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 18:59 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 08:55 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 08:16 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 17:35 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 20:57 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-11 21:03 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 08:23 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 08:36 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 14:06 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 20:46 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-09 21:10 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 05:58 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 08:33 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 07:08 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 10:59 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 09:14 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 15:38 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 15:26 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 17:37 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 17:08 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Reid Schaffner <dnfoonio@acdnfni.info> - 2017-01-14 01:16 +0000
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 19:36 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Reid Schaffner <dnfoonio@acdnfni.info> - 2017-01-14 17:04 +0000
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 12:34 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-17 08:11 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 14:28 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 12:46 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-15 13:52 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-15 19:33 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 09:33 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 08:45 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 11:26 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 14:27 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 12:15 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-18 06:50 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-18 06:54 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 09:24 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-18 13:36 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-19 06:05 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-19 08:35 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-21 01:30 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-21 05:16 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-19 06:15 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-19 08:36 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-01-20 19:13 -0500
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-21 05:27 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 08:41 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-24 05:35 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 07:49 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Reid Schaffner <dnfoonio@acdnfni.info> - 2017-01-18 22:57 +0000
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-19 06:20 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 07:18 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 09:19 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-06 09:27 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Aubrey Primmer <myr@ejmr.info> - 2017-01-06 17:36 +0000
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 10:19 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 12:30 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 13:28 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 15:36 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 18:25 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 13:42 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 12:56 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 14:37 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 13:08 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 15:40 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 15:24 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 20:25 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 20:30 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 08:20 -0600
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 07:04 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-06 09:43 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 10:22 -0800
Re: Lying sack of shit, Robert Winn Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 12:14 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 10:07 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 09:41 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 07:08 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 09:10 -0800
CRETIN Robert Winn perseveres in his imbecility. "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-06 09:24 -0800
Re: CRETIN Robert Winn perseveres in his imbecility. Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 09:35 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-06 18:39 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 10:21 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-06 23:23 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 19:06 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-07 04:17 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-07 04:32 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 22:35 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-07 19:48 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 12:42 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-07 21:52 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 13:32 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-07 22:55 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 21:05 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-08 07:07 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 08:57 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-08 18:44 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 10:25 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-08 19:36 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 11:12 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-08 20:20 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 18:36 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-09 03:42 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 18:47 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-09 03:57 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-07 23:12 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 21:32 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-08 07:01 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 08:55 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-08 18:41 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 10:21 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-08 19:34 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 11:11 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-08 20:18 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-08 11:22 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 18:38 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 18:35 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-09 03:39 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 18:44 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-09 03:51 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 19:44 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-09 13:49 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 05:32 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-09 14:42 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 05:59 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 06:50 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 06:44 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-09 16:00 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 07:12 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-09 16:15 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 08:11 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 12:02 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 10:29 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 12:34 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-06 12:40 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 13:31 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 15:41 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 18:40 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 13:47 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 13:04 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-07 22:16 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 21:01 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-08 06:40 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 08:45 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 14:34 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 13:03 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 15:38 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 15:16 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-09 15:42 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 20:20 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 20:14 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 20:45 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 07:35 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 06:03 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 08:40 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-10 06:50 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 07:09 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 10:55 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 09:08 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-10 09:19 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 12:23 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-10 13:12 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 13:39 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 08:54 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 08:09 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 17:34 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 20:52 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-11 21:02 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 08:14 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 08:27 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 10:40 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 11:30 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 14:07 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 08:54 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 07:54 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 10:05 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 09:17 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 17:38 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 21:01 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-11 21:09 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 08:16 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-12 06:27 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-01-12 17:50 -0500
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 08:28 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 10:41 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 11:31 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-12 11:53 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 12:50 -0800
Cretin Robert Winn inserts foot in mouth. Deep. "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-12 15:06 -0800
Re: Cretin Robert Winn inserts foot in mouth. Deep. Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 15:08 -0800
Re: Cretin Robert Winn inserts foot in mouth. Deep. "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-12 15:19 -0800
Re: Cretin Robert Winn inserts foot in mouth. Deep. Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 15:21 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 14:07 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 15:23 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 17:43 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 17:29 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 14:31 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 12:51 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-15 13:49 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-15 12:21 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-15 19:31 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-15 19:58 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-15 21:06 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-16 04:11 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-16 04:27 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-15 22:57 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 09:38 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-16 08:02 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 06:15 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-16 06:24 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 06:52 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-16 07:25 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 09:54 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 08:57 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 11:28 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 14:32 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-16 14:47 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 20:47 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-17 04:36 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-17 05:08 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 07:08 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-17 08:39 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 07:32 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 07:30 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 07:19 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 10:50 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-17 08:07 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 10:51 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-17 10:07 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 12:17 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-18 06:55 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 09:25 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-18 03:22 +0000
Re: Michelson's experiment kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-18 06:29 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 09:26 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 09:19 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 11:51 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 13:19 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 15:28 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 14:35 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 08:04 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-23 06:45 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 07:17 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 10:39 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 19:44 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 07:12 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 07:03 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-24 16:24 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 11:03 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-24 20:17 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-24 12:20 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 17:32 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 17:34 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-01-25 02:53 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 22:34 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 08:34 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-16 14:26 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 14:42 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 16:58 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 20:48 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 09:44 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 08:47 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 11:31 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-16 09:44 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 14:34 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-16 15:10 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 07:34 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-17 07:56 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-17 07:50 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-01-10 18:32 -0500
Imbecile Rober Winn spouts new idiocies "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-06 14:42 -0800
Re: Imbecile Rober Winn spouts new idiocies Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 19:08 -0800
Re: Imbecile Rober Winn spouts new idiocies "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-06 19:15 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 09:36 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 08:11 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-12-29 07:18 -0600
Re: Michelson's experiment Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2016-12-23 13:10 +0100
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-23 07:29 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-21 11:03 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 02:30 -0800
Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-09 07:18 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment xxein1@att.net - 2017-01-09 18:53 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-09 19:00 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment xxein1@att.net - 2017-01-09 20:51 -0800
Re: Michelson's experiment Eckard B <eckard.blumschein@arcor.de> - 2017-01-10 23:34 -0800
Page 5 of 38 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 38 Next page →
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-12 23:21 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <c7888541-4218-4597-a7dc-750a58196834@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #401551 |
W dniu poniedziałek, 12 grudnia 2016 23:59:58 UTC+1 użytkownik tjrob137 napisał: > Hint: mathematical theorems and scientific theories are eternal. > They are discovered or first proven on some date, but they > themselves are not limited chronologically. Just some posts above we can read: >Again, you do not understand science. In science, there is no possibility of >"proof" -- that is for mathematics, not science. I always knew you don't really believe these wise things of models you sometimes write.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-11 04:29 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <eb3vhcF92maU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #401277 |
Am 10.12.2016 15:58, schrieb Tom Roberts: >> Apparently the debate phase among theoretical physicists is still >> going on. So >> we have to wait another century, until they decide about how to >> interpret this >> experiment. > > Nope. This is merely your FANTASY, which seems to be shared by many > fools and idiots around here. It is based purely on IGNORANCE. Among > PHYSICISTS there is no "debate". Yes. But somehow I think, there should be a debate. So it took a century and a few decades, in which physicist have not solved the riddle. Eventually some kind of discussion would be helpful. I for my side would say, that horizontal rotation of the device would not be subject to changes, because 'ether' is not supposed to blow over the surface of the Earth. Somehow we would experience changes in daily life, if there would be a 'ether drift', blowing past the Earth. But vertical 'ether drift' could be possible. And - as a matter of fact - the vertical version of the MMX had shown an effect. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-10 19:37 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <159dc397-4b37-44da-86ac-8ef1fd525df3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #401337 |
On Saturday, December 10, 2016 at 7:29:52 PM UTC-8, Thomas Heger wrote: > And - as a matter of fact the vertical version of the MMX had shown an effect. No, it hasn't, crank.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-11 09:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <eb4gi9Fck1eU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #401338 |
Am 11.12.2016 04:37, schrieb Dono,: > On Saturday, December 10, 2016 at 7:29:52 PM UTC-8, Thomas Heger wrote: >> And - as a matter of fact the vertical version of the MMX had shown an effect. > No, it hasn't, crank. > Extended Michelson-Morley Interferometer experiment. English version https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7T0d7o8X2-E TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-11 20:25 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a6929d0e-0237-4f9e-af01-b9a8c6f28fdf@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #401342 |
On Sunday, December 11, 2016 at 12:20:28 AM UTC-8, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 11.12.2016 04:37, schrieb Dono,: > > On Saturday, December 10, 2016 at 7:29:52 PM UTC-8, Thomas Heger wrote: > >> And - as a matter of fact the vertical version of the MMX had shown an effect. > > No, it hasn't, crank. > > > > Extended Michelson-Morley Interferometer experiment. English version > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7T0d7o8X2-E > > > TH This is the idiocy posted by Martin Grusenik.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-12 06:31 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <eb6r1sFtridU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #401438 |
Am 12.12.2016 05:25, schrieb Dono,: >>>> And - as a matter of fact the vertical version of the MMX had shown an effect. >>> No, it hasn't, crank. >>> >> >> Extended Michelson-Morley Interferometer experiment. English version >> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7T0d7o8X2-E >> >> >> TH > > This is the idiocy posted by Martin Grusenik. Well, the video was created by Martin Grusenick. But it's by no means idiotic. Since if there is a vertical effect, this would render the MMX experiment useless for its intended purpose. We know from other circumstances, that gravity has an effect on light. E.g. there was the famous experiment at the Harvard towers. Or we have GR and 'gravitational lensing'. So an effect of gravity on light is not obviously impossible, hence an experiment to detect and/or measure it is plausible - or at least not 'idiotic'. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-11 23:58 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <N46dnc2XjpAYodPFnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #401441 |
On 12/11/16 12/11/16 11:31 PM, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 12.12.2016 05:25, schrieb Dono,: >> This is the idiocy posted by Martin Grusenik. > > Well, the video was created by Martin Grusenick. But it's by no means idiotic. > [...] > We know from other circumstances, that gravity has an effect on light. E.g. > there was the famous experiment at the Harvard towers. [...] Yes. And from that experiment we know that effect is TRILLIONS OF TIMES SMALLER than Grusenick's apparatus could possibly detect. Why do you think Pound, Snider, and Rebka used a complex but ultra-sensitive Moessbauer apparatus, rather than the much simpler but vastly less sensitive Michelson interferometer??? > So an effect of gravity on light is not obviously impossible, hence an > experiment to detect and/or measure it is plausible - or at least not 'idiotic'. An experiment with a KNOWN BACKGROUND that is TRILLIONS of times larger than the expected effect is indeed idiotic. Hint: if the effect you fantasize about were indeed trillions of times larger than GR predicts, and thus big enough that Grusenick could see it, essentially none of the experiments that have confirmed GR could possibly have done so; especially the "famous experiment at the Harvard towers [sic]". You keep forgetting that physics is a QUANTITATIVE science. Just "there is an effect" is woefully insufficient -- you must COMPUTE (or at least estimate) how large the effect might be. In this case it is straightforward to do so, and your fantasies are HOPELESS. By a factor of TRILLIONS. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-12 07:47 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <eb6vg2F8ulU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #401443 |
Am 12.12.2016 06:58, schrieb Tom Roberts: >> Well, the video was created by Martin Grusenick. But it's by no means >> idiotic. >> [...] >> We know from other circumstances, that gravity has an effect on light. >> E.g. >> there was the famous experiment at the Harvard towers. [...] > > Yes. And from that experiment we know that effect is TRILLIONS OF TIMES > SMALLER than Grusenick's apparatus could possibly detect. > > Why do you think Pound, Snider, and Rebka used a complex but > ultra-sensitive Moessbauer apparatus, rather than the much > simpler but vastly less sensitive Michelson interferometer??? > >> So an effect of gravity on light is not obviously impossible, hence an >> experiment to detect and/or measure it is plausible - or at least not >> 'idiotic'. > > An experiment with a KNOWN BACKGROUND that is TRILLIONS of times larger > than the expected effect is indeed idiotic. > > Hint: if the effect you fantasize about were indeed trillions of > times larger than GR predicts, and thus big enough that Grusenick > could see it, essentially none of the experiments that have > confirmed GR could possibly have done so; especially the "famous > experiment at the Harvard towers [sic]". > > You keep forgetting that physics is a QUANTITATIVE science. Just "there > is an effect" is woefully insufficient -- you must COMPUTE (or at least > estimate) how large the effect might be. In this case it is > straightforward to do so, and your fantasies are HOPELESS. By a factor > of TRILLIONS. If the device of Mr. Grusenick was too flimsy, than make a better one. But you and 'Dono' wrote, the experiment was idiotic. No! It was an experiment by a young student with a low budget, but it was not at all idiotic. Supposed there is an effect, which could be measured by a vertical Michelson interferometer, than a device should be more rigid and should somehow compensate the elongation of its part by its own weight. This sounds possible to me and I don't see any unsolvable problems with it. This is so because the relevant parts of the device are very small and have almost no weight at all ( only tiny mirrors). TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-11 23:18 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b10d82d2-fe93-4872-937e-4a479b4568e3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #401450 |
On Monday, December 12, 2016 at 12:47:34 AM UTC-6, Thomas Heger wrote: > If the device of Mr. Grusenick was too flimsy, than make a better one. > > But you and 'Dono' wrote, the experiment was idiotic. > > No! It was an experiment by a young student with a low budget, but it > was not at all idiotic. > > Supposed there is an effect, which could be measured by a vertical > Michelson interferometer, than a device should be more rigid and should > somehow compensate the elongation of its part by its own weight. > > This sounds possible to me and I don't see any unsolvable problems with it. > > This is so because the relevant parts of the device are very small and > have almost no weight at all ( only tiny mirrors). There is no solution: -No weight at all means no strength at all = unacceptable sag. -Strong and rugged means heavy weight = unacceptable sag. -Active feedback control to compensate for distance changes requires measurements that are susceptible to the same effects as those that are intended to be measured. -Taking into free fall orbit would eliminate sag, but would also eliminate the effect to be measured.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-13 06:25 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <eb9f2bFiocqU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #401453 |
Am 12.12.2016 08:18, schrieb Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog: >> If the device of Mr. Grusenick was too flimsy, than make a better one. >> >> But you and 'Dono' wrote, the experiment was idiotic. >> >> No! It was an experiment by a young student with a low budget, but it >> was not at all idiotic. >> >> Supposed there is an effect, which could be measured by a vertical >> Michelson interferometer, than a device should be more rigid and should >> somehow compensate the elongation of its part by its own weight. >> >> This sounds possible to me and I don't see any unsolvable problems with it. >> >> This is so because the relevant parts of the device are very small and >> have almost no weight at all ( only tiny mirrors). > > There is no solution: > -No weight at all means no strength at all = unacceptable sag. In an interferometer the most of parts do not sit at the end of a long tube. Only the mirrors would need some kind of support. The other parts could be mounted near to the centre and there is no problem with weight. A mirror is not a particular heavy part and it is not subject to any kind of stress. So a tiny extra-light mirror at the end of an extra-rigid construction would do. Why should that be impossible? > -Strong and rugged means heavy weight = unacceptable sag. > -Active feedback control to compensate for distance changes requires > measurements that are susceptible to the same effects as those that are > intended to be measured. The elongation due to the weight of the tube can be calculated very precisely. It will be an incredibly small elongation. But by such a small distance the mirror could be moved, to compensate the effect of gravity on the construction of the interferometer. But as I understand the video of Mr. Grusenick, the observed effect is WAY larger than that of gravity on light and/or the construction of the interferometer. Possibly the effect IS gravity itself. So I would suggest, to take the experiment serious and that someone might replicate it with better means. > -Taking into free fall orbit would eliminate sag, but would also eliminate the > effect to be measured. > Well yes, you can't measure gravity in free fall. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-13 01:42 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <6094defb-3672-4c6b-a26d-f3762dfa4771@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #401584 |
On Monday, December 12, 2016 at 11:25:34 PM UTC-6, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 12.12.2016 08:18, schrieb Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog: > > There is no solution: > > -No weight at all means no strength at all = unacceptable sag. > > In an interferometer the most of parts do not sit at the end of a long > tube. Only the mirrors would need some kind of support. > > The other parts could be mounted near to the centre and there is no > problem with weight. > > A mirror is not a particular heavy part and it is not subject to any > kind of stress. > > So a tiny extra-light mirror at the end of an extra-rigid construction > would do. > > Why should that be impossible? > > > > -Strong and rugged means heavy weight = unacceptable sag. > > -Active feedback control to compensate for distance changes requires > > measurements that are susceptible to the same effects as those that are > > intended to be measured. > > > The elongation due to the weight of the tube can be calculated very > precisely. It will be an incredibly small elongation. The important part is not the tube, but the mirror assembly. All the tubes do is magnify the SIZE of the fringes; they do not contribute to the hypothetical fringe shift. In Grusenick's apparatus, which he built with *ZERO* knowledge of the theory of how MMX works, he might as well simply have substituted a diverging lens for the long tubes. Re mirror assembly: Suppose we mounted the mirrors, beam splitter, laser diode and detector on a solid block of silicon carbide. Silicon carbide has a Young's modulus of 450e9 Pa and a density of 3.21 g/cm^3. Using the formula for compression/elongation of a bar under its own weight Δl = 0.5(Wl)/(EA), I find that even using this *exceedingly* stiff material, gravitational distortions of the mounting block amount to a third as much as expected fringe shifts from aetheric effects. If using more realistic materials like aluminum or steel, the expected distortions would be around an order of magnitude larger. I couldn't really evaluate Grusenick's mirror mounts due to the bad viewing angle, but from what I could see, they weren't very rigid. Formulas exist that would enable me to calculate bending of the mirror mounts, and a rough calculation says you could have "several" fringes of shift due to the mirrors sagging in their mounts. > But by such a > small distance the mirror could be moved, to compensate the effect of > gravity on the construction of the interferometer. > > But as I understand the video of Mr. Grusenick, the observed effect is > WAY larger than that of gravity on light and/or the construction of the > interferometer. > > Possibly the effect IS gravity itself. > > So I would suggest, to take the experiment serious and that someone > might replicate it with better means. > > > > -Taking into free fall orbit would eliminate sag, but would also eliminate the > > effect to be measured. > > > > > Well yes, you can't measure gravity in free fall. > > > TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-13 22:29 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ebb7hkF1t0uU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #401607 |
Am 13.12.2016 10:42, schrieb Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog: >> A mirror is not a particular heavy part and it is not subject to any >> kind of stress. >> >> So a tiny extra-light mirror at the end of an extra-rigid construction >> would do. >> >> Why should that be impossible? >> >> >>> -Strong and rugged means heavy weight = unacceptable sag. >>> -Active feedback control to compensate for distance changes requires >>> measurements that are susceptible to the same effects as those that are >>> intended to be measured. >> >> >> The elongation due to the weight of the tube can be calculated very >> precisely. It will be an incredibly small elongation. > > The important part is not the tube, but the mirror assembly. All the tubes do > is magnify the SIZE of the fringes; they do not contribute to the hypothetical > fringe shift. In Grusenick's apparatus, which he built with *ZERO* knowledge of > the theory of how MMX works, he might as well simply have substituted a > diverging lens for the long tubes. 'There is a mirror, but an assembly is not really necessary. It is actually possible to use mirrors, that are not adjustable. These mirrors could be small and very light, since all they have to do is to reflect a beam from a tiny laser. So I do not see any reason, why such a device cannot be built. Possibly with a better device the effect is gone. But also possible is the effect is not caused by 'sagging'. So it is essential to build a better device, not to claim that would be impossible. > Re mirror assembly: Suppose we mounted the mirrors, beam splitter, laser diode > and detector on a solid block of silicon carbide. Silicon carbide has a Young's > modulus of 450e9 Pa and a density of 3.21 g/cm^3. Using the formula for > compression/elongation of a bar under its own weight Δl = 0.5(Wl)/(EA), I find > that even using this *exceedingly* stiff material, gravitational distortions > of the mounting block amount to a third as much as expected fringe shifts from > aetheric effects. If using more realistic materials like aluminum or steel, the > expected distortions would be around an order of magnitude larger. You don't need 'solid bars' as construction elements of the apparatus. I would use disks, which are thicker at the centre. Also possible would be arms, that have most of their strength near the centre and are thinner and lighter near the mirrors. > I couldn't really evaluate Grusenick's mirror mounts due to the bad viewing > angle, but from what I could see, they weren't very rigid. Formulas exist that > would enable me to calculate bending of the mirror mounts, and a rough > calculation says you could have "several" fringes of shift due to the mirrors > sagging in their mounts. (Small) bending of the tubes would be irrelevant, since it would not make the path of the beam longer or shorter. >> But by such a >> small distance the mirror could be moved, to compensate the effect of >> gravity on the construction of the interferometer. >> >> But as I understand the video of Mr. Grusenick, the observed effect is >> WAY larger than that of gravity on light and/or the construction of the >> interferometer. >> >> Possibly the effect IS gravity itself. This is why the experiment is so important: There is a fair chance, the effect is real and has a close relation to gravity. If so, it would be totally idiotic, if the experiment is not repeated (with much better means). TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-13 15:01 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <cdebcbfa-1761-4628-8a37-b41504700e4c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #401670 |
Thomas Heger wrote: >> Possibly the effect IS gravity itself. This is why the experiment is so important: There is a fair chance, the effect is real and has a close relation to gravity. If so, it would be totally idiotic, if the experiment is not repeated (with much better means). TH If Gravity itself IS the fringe shift that is being sought after, i fear the fringe shift will be completely self canceling and undetectable other than picking up a brick and dropping it under the interferometer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-15 06:08 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ebemraFr1tjU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #401691 |
Am 14.12.2016 00:01, schrieb David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller: > >>> Possibly the effect IS gravity itself. > > This is why the experiment is so important: > > There is a fair chance, the effect is real and has a close relation to > gravity. > > If so, it would be totally idiotic, if the experiment is not repeated > (with much better means). > > > TH > > If Gravity itself IS the fringe shift that is being sought after, i fear the fringe shift will be completely self canceling and undetectable other than picking up a brick and dropping it under the interferometer What gravity actually is, that is not well understood. So some sort of physical effect could be related to gravity in unexpected ways. There were two experiments with superconducting spinning rings, which had some influence on gravity. One was conducted by the Austrian Martin Tajmar and the other by Podclednov. (As far as I remember he worked in Turku in Finnland. First name I forgot) The experiment was to lift a cooled superconductor by magnets and setting into fast rotation. This seemed to reduce gravity above the device. (The experiment of Martin Tajmar war somehow similar.) Now: what could spinning superconductors do, that would create such an effect? Somehow they shielded off gravity. So gravity should be something spinning and magnetic/electric/wavelike. An interferometer would actually measure this, since light is also an em-wave. But gravity is quite a weak force, so the coupling between light and gravity is VERY small. So gravity is not itself an em-wave. My personal explanation is geometric and based on GR: matter behaves timelike and gravity works on matter. The opposite to timelike is spacelike and that the realm of static fields. (Waves belong to the realm called 'light-like'.) Now I combine mass-like and static fields to atoms and that to matter, what belongs to a certain timeline. Matter in one FoR is radiation in a FoR in an angle (lightlike). So matter in one FoR could be waves in another. The realm called 'space' is than expanded (or shrunk), while the content is shrunk with it (or expanded). Matter tends to shrink space around, what curves the axis of time in the vicinity. So the Earth creates a specific wave by its own gravity (usually called CMBR). This 'curved spacetime' has an effect on time in the vertical direction. Since light moves always with c (measured in its local FoR) the local observer on the ground would measure a different velocity horizontal and vertical. And that is, what causes fringe shift in a vertical interferometer. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-14 21:46 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <1a87fe42-3ccb-4dc5-9d89-bba89245a5e4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #401870 |
Thomas Heger wrote: Super conducting rings reducing gravity For the moment, Pretend I am correct Gravity = 49 units of (reciprocal c) = 50 units of time = mass = higher Entropy = nodes Space = Kinetic Energy = 1 unit of c = anti-nodes = waves Super Fluid helium is cold , gravity is cold Super conductivity occurs when cold. Impedance of the vacuum 376.75 is for "c" 376.75 is NOT for gravity. 376.75 / (50^0.5) = 53.2804959624 Ohms for super conductivity Electricity is taking a path 7 times shorter during super conductivity with the super conducting ring effectively shielding from the entropy of Gravity https://goo.gl/photos/o7GEq7GK4wjvn933A
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-14 22:05 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <866480da-86a8-4674-9c6f-06e8d9b059a6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #401871 |
Thomas Heger wrote: Super conducting rings reducing gravity For the moment, Pretend I am correct Gravity = 49 units of (reciprocal c) = 49 units of time = mass = higher Entropy = nodes Space = Kinetic Energy = 1 unit of c = anti-nodes = waves Super Fluid helium is cold , gravity is cold Super conductivity occurs when cold. Impedance of the vacuum 376.75 is for "c" 376.75 is NOT for gravity. 376.75 / (50^0.5) = 53.2804959624 Ohms for super conductivity Electricity is taking a path 7 times shorter during super conductivity with the super conducting ring effectively shielding from the entropy of Gravity https://goo.gl/photos/o7GEq7GK4wjvn933A When looking at the surface of an Einstein Bose condensate, you are probably looking at the surface of a black holes event horizon
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-15 05:10 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <19fcdf36-238c-424f-8c89-10854c4807c0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #401870 |
Thomas Heger wrote: What gravity actually is, that is not well understood. So some sort of physical effect could be related to gravity in unexpected ways. Gravity is making MisUnderstood likely because the vacuum of free space is misUnderstood Let's pretend that Rising Entropy is what is pushing the arrow of time Ever into the future. Now in you MMX Experiment, acceleration/velocity will cause a fringe shift. What if Relativistic Time of mass is the acceleration of mass counteracting the rising Entropy of the arrow of time by slowing the Loss of available energy due to rising Entropy? Gravity & Mass & Time are Entropic or Stillness or Nodes Light or em is energy Approx 49.81 units of time per 1 unit of ( space or energy ) The Higgs boson is approx 137 protons or (137*N) additional Nodes of Entropy The Hubble redshift is space time losing Kinetic Energy (not expansion ) 137/49.817*4/11 = 1
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-14 06:08 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ebc2emF7m0iU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #401670 |
Am 13.12.2016 22:29, schrieb Thomas Heger: > > 'There is a mirror, but an assembly is not really necessary. There a word went missing. I wanted to write 'mirror assembly' - of course. These assemblies used by Mr. Grusenick have significant weight. This could eventually put 'stress' on the arms of the device. But adjustable mirrors are nor really important and it is possible to use just mirrors and put them in fixed mounts, that are carefully adjusted themselves. So only a mirror is needed and that could be made extremely light weight (fraction of a gram). That should not apply too much stress on the device. The 'arms' of the interferometer could also be of special design, which would minimize elongation. Since the apparatus is rotated around a central axis, the inner parts near this axis could be made very bulgy, since the weight there is irrelevant for elongation of the arms. The only things, that require a fixed position away from this axis are the mirrors and the screen. The beam-splitter will be put at the centre and the laser close to the centre (similar the batteries). So the only relevant task is to keep these mirrors at a fixed distance from the centre, if the weight (of a few grams) pulls on it. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-14 07:42 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ebc7v6F8s5pU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #401724 |
Am 14.12.2016 06:08, schrieb Thomas Heger: >> 'There is a mirror, but an assembly is not really necessary. > > There a word went missing. I wanted to write 'mirror assembly' - of course. > > These assemblies used by Mr. Grusenick have significant weight. This > could eventually put 'stress' on the arms of the device. > > But adjustable mirrors are nor really important and it is possible to > use just mirrors and put them in fixed mounts, that are carefully > adjusted themselves. > > So only a mirror is needed and that could be made extremely light weight > (fraction of a gram). > > That should not apply too much stress on the device. > > The 'arms' of the interferometer could also be of special design, which > would minimize elongation. > > Since the apparatus is rotated around a central axis, the inner parts > near this axis could be made very bulgy, since the weight there is > irrelevant for elongation of the arms. > > The only things, that require a fixed position away from this axis are > the mirrors and the screen. The beam-splitter will be put at the centre > and the laser close to the centre (similar the batteries). > > So the only relevant task is to keep these mirrors at a fixed distance > from the centre, if the weight (of a few grams) pulls on it. > There is also no need, that the mirrors are mounted to 'arms'. Instead the device could be build the other way round: inside a circular rail. There is another possible form, which looks somehow similar to such a toy: http://magento.p144929.webspaceconfig.de/media/import/514019401_02.jpg or http://www.abc-team.de/media/produkte/images/norm/dscn0519.jpg The rotation angle is not that vertical, but at least it does not rotate in the horizontal plane. Since such a device is mounted quite close to where I live, I could eventually use it for 'science'. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-13 05:25 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <c12793ab-39f6-403f-affb-be04b8f24724@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #401584 |
Thomas's Heger wrote: Possibly the effect IS gravity itself. So I would suggest, to take the experiment serious and that someone might replicate it with better means. > -Taking into free fall orbit would eliminate sag, but would also eliminate the > effect to be measured. > Well yes, you can't measure gravity in free fall. TH That is what I keep saying, the fringe shift shows up as gravity. The wrong concept of space time persists.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 38 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 38 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web