Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #451005 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-02-28 08:32 -0800 |
| Last post | 2018-03-16 10:47 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 542 — 30 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 08:32 -0800
Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-02-28 09:22 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 09:26 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-02-28 09:37 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 09:48 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-02-28 10:01 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 11:56 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-01 21:00 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 14:14 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-02 13:27 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ický Bezdrátovì <ikbe@wmkfre.np> - 2018-03-02 12:34 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-02 05:59 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 09:47 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-02 00:05 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 17:26 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 09:42 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-02-28 09:50 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 09:55 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-02-28 10:05 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 12:06 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 12:22 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-02-28 13:00 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-02-28 13:23 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-02-28 14:16 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-02-28 13:21 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 13:30 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-02-28 13:44 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 13:56 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-02-28 19:25 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-02-28 10:48 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 12:13 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-02-28 13:58 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 14:02 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-02-28 15:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 07:49 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-01 10:00 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 13:30 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-02-28 12:36 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-02-28 21:33 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 13:07 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 13:17 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-01 21:42 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 14:23 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-02-28 13:34 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-02-28 13:43 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-02-28 14:11 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 07:40 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-03-01 11:26 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 13:59 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-03-01 14:08 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 15:09 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-03-01 17:16 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 09:16 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-03-01 14:47 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 08:55 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-03-02 09:43 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 13:19 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-03-02 18:01 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 09:32 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-03-03 09:55 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-03 10:06 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 10:21 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-03-03 11:36 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 18:45 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-02 06:49 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-01 13:26 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 08:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-02-28 18:48 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-01 13:40 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-01 17:26 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-01 20:26 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-01 21:44 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-02 11:44 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-02 13:28 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-01 13:18 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-02 00:08 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 08:38 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-01 17:42 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-01 09:13 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-03-01 09:10 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-01 13:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 14:55 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-01 14:24 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-02 07:01 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 13:01 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 08:48 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 10:30 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 13:36 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 13:57 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 14:21 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 15:41 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-03-02 15:58 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 08:57 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-03 09:10 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-03-03 12:18 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 15:08 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 09:12 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-03-05 09:15 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 10:09 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 18:32 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-05 10:43 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 18:47 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-05 11:15 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 20:21 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-05 12:29 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 22:54 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 10:51 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-05 19:00 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 14:10 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-05 22:41 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 14:48 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-05 22:56 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 15:47 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-06 15:50 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 12:51 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-07 23:19 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 13:20 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-05 21:23 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 14:39 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 14:38 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 10:02 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 13:24 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 14:34 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-06 14:56 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 03:21 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 21:19 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 15:56 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 09:21 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 10:06 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 10:27 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-03 10:37 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 10:53 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 14:16 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 14:47 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 09:46 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 11:54 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 15:01 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 15:32 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 09:53 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 13:56 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 09:43 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-03-05 10:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 23:34 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-04 15:49 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-03-02 16:22 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-02 16:45 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-03 08:02 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 14:07 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-02 14:17 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 14:30 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-02 15:03 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-02 23:07 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-03 08:27 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-03 04:36 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-03 05:21 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-03 14:29 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-03 05:50 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-04 18:16 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-05 05:55 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-04 23:36 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-05 15:17 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-05 09:21 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-05 18:27 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-05 09:59 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 08:50 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-03-03 08:56 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 15:44 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 09:10 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 09:44 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 10:14 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 10:47 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 13:59 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 14:38 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 09:32 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 11:32 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 14:15 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 22:27 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 14:46 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 09:34 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-05 09:40 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 17:56 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 13:53 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 09:14 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 10:09 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 18:40 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 09:17 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 18:40 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 01:53 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 13:28 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 09:18 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 11:07 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 13:32 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 14:02 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 09:08 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 13:42 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 09:01 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-06 09:19 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 22:27 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 20:06 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-04 23:30 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 11:02 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 13:29 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-05 23:23 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-03-05 23:26 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 01:53 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-01 13:07 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-01 21:45 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-03-01 13:54 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-01 14:05 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 14:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-02 14:01 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 10:06 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-03 14:07 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-03 05:39 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 09:42 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-04 11:44 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 14:32 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-06 07:09 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-06 07:14 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 15:55 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-06 08:52 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 18:40 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-06 09:29 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 18:40 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-06 20:19 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-06 20:37 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 06:50 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 06:37 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-07 11:08 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-07 05:14 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-07 15:13 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-07 07:25 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 07:46 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-07 17:31 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-07 17:12 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-08 21:26 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-08 12:34 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-09 04:17 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-09 04:52 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-09 11:24 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-09 11:21 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-09 10:31 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-09 02:59 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-09 14:47 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-09 15:49 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-09 18:36 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 09:53 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-08 02:28 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-08 21:41 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-09 00:22 +0000
Just more BULL SHIT eh! Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-10 06:50 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-01 15:07 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-02 07:17 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-02 09:49 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 13:09 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-02 13:21 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-03 09:49 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-03 10:05 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-04 16:56 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-04 17:38 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-05 07:03 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-05 07:54 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-05 14:36 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-05 22:47 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-05 15:07 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-05 23:14 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-06 07:53 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-06 11:25 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 20:59 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-06 14:18 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-06 16:33 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 03:21 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 20:55 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-06 16:22 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 03:21 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-07 07:44 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 08:00 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 16:58 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 09:04 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-07 13:39 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 23:17 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-08 07:05 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 15:49 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 15:53 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-07 13:50 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 23:17 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 18:02 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-05 07:05 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-02 12:05 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-02 07:25 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 08:25 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-01 13:22 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 14:43 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-02-28 22:16 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-02-28 13:17 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-01 11:32 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 08:12 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-02 09:04 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-01 15:02 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-02 11:43 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 09:12 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 18:45 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-02 22:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 09:39 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-03 11:30 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 14:20 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-03 20:48 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-04 10:42 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-04 11:05 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 13:22 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-04 16:29 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-06 10:40 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-06 11:12 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-06 17:47 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-06 22:35 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-04 11:43 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-03-03 21:13 -0500
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-03 20:49 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-04 10:41 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-02 14:13 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-02 14:19 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-02 12:48 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-02 20:55 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-03 14:21 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-03 14:26 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 09:51 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-03 20:44 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-03 14:47 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-04 11:40 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 10:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-05 08:28 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 08:47 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-05 08:54 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-05 18:05 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-06 11:24 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 13:08 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 22:07 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-07 13:11 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 08:30 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 17:25 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-08 09:10 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 14:25 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 23:17 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-07 21:11 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-08 06:26 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-07 23:12 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-07 17:17 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-08 09:06 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-08 11:21 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-08 13:49 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-08 15:38 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-09 10:56 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-08 15:07 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-08 09:10 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-09 11:49 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 23:01 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 19:48 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-03 20:12 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-03 20:14 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 12:21 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-04 12:27 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-03-04 12:30 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 13:03 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 08:08 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-05 08:14 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 13:22 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 08:34 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 09:53 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 14:05 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 22:13 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 15:43 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 07:42 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-07 16:46 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 08:02 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 07:58 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 09:10 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 09:22 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-07 17:35 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-07 17:40 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 17:25 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 17:14 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-06 15:43 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 08:01 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 17:14 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 16:10 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 08:18 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 08:26 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 09:34 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 09:50 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 10:15 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-07 12:09 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 12:11 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 14:08 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-07 23:18 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 14:47 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 23:17 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 16:29 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-08 08:25 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-08 17:32 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 18:36 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 23:01 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 15:30 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-08 09:02 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 12:05 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-03-07 19:09 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-07 08:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 17:14 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 17:25 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-07 01:42 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-03-06 20:49 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 08:51 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 17:25 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-04 11:26 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 15:27 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 13:16 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-11 08:43 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-11 06:54 -0700
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-11 07:14 -0700
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-05 17:11 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 13:08 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 21:21 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-04 23:33 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 15:18 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-05 09:23 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 17:56 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-05 10:01 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 18:09 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-05 10:34 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 18:45 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-05 11:11 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-05 21:20 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-05 22:55 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-06 09:38 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-03-06 11:06 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 14:15 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-03-06 09:26 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-03-05 12:35 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-03-05 23:17 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 14:28 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-01 21:28 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-03-01 09:45 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2018-03-03 18:29 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-04 09:58 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-04 10:23 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2018-03-04 15:18 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 08:33 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 11:05 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 14:04 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 14:41 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 12:49 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 22:07 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-06 16:29 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 03:21 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-07 07:33 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 16:58 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-03-07 13:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-03-07 13:41 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-06 20:06 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 15:58 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-03-05 14:00 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-05 21:25 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 08:40 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-03-06 12:30 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-06 19:06 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-06 19:10 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 14:22 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-03-06 20:43 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 08:41 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 08:55 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-07 09:50 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 12:00 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 17:25 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-03-07 16:55 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-08 08:32 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 08:41 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-08 09:24 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 12:11 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-03-08 23:04 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-08 21:32 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-08 21:31 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-09 06:33 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 22:33 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-09 10:41 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-08 23:02 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-09 12:27 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-09 04:36 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-09 15:00 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-09 08:41 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-09 18:35 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-09 10:44 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-09 19:30 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 18:36 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-03-09 11:17 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-09 09:32 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-10 09:59 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-03-10 23:44 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-08 17:06 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-05 21:29 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-08 17:09 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-03-05 23:07 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 14:42 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-08 17:12 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-03-05 17:19 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-06 18:47 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-05 14:12 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-03-05 23:24 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-03-05 16:28 -0600
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 09:46 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 12:52 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-03-06 23:25 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-07 01:36 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 18:46 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 14:45 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 12:54 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 19:33 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-06 20:11 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 15:44 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 12:57 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-03-07 01:39 +0100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-06 20:08 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-05 17:24 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 14:14 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-03-06 13:14 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-03-06 12:53 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-03-06 23:16 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-07 17:48 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Ernie Shackelford <iugtar@ttrwrta.oc> - 2018-03-07 17:58 +0000
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 13:01 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 16:53 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 22:39 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 22:57 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-03-07 23:55 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-08 00:17 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 09:25 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 10:48 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-03-08 10:49 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-03-08 11:08 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-03-08 19:39 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-03-08 15:16 +1100
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-03-07 20:42 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-03-07 13:13 -0800
Re: Proper Time, Clock Tick Rates and Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-16 10:47 +0000
Page 15 of 28 — ← Prev page 1 … 13 14 [15] 16 17 … 28 Next page →
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-07 23:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p7prtu$p36$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #451873 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 12:04:13 PM UTC-5, rotchm wrote: >> On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 11:58:25 kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >> >>> IRT has the same equations as SR. >>> IRT has equations that SR doesn’t. >> >> idiot ken, do you see that your two above statements you just made are contradictory? > > Moron, I didn’t write that. I said that IRT has the same equations as LET and SR has.... Ok, so that’s the same as IRT has the same equations as SR these equations that predicts a clock moving wrt the observer is accumulating clock seconds at a slower rate. In addition, IRT has additional equations Ok, so that’s the same as IRT has equations that SR doesn’t. See? Exactly the same as what was above. > that predict that a clock moving wrt the observer can accumulate clock > seconds at a faster rate than the observer’s clock. Gee you are stupid. > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-08 07:05 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <0f965405-97a7-4d2d-9030-f759d5116244@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451896 |
On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 6:17:23 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > > On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 12:04:13 PM UTC-5, rotchm wrote: > >> On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 11:58:25 kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >> > >>> IRT has the same equations as SR. > >>> IRT has equations that SR doesn’t. > >> > >> idiot ken, do you see that your two above statements you just made are contradictory? > > > > Moron, I didn’t write that. I said that IRT has the same equations as LET and SR has.... > > Ok, so that’s the same as IRT has the same equations as SR > > these equations that predicts a clock moving wrt the observer is > accumulating clock seconds at a slower rate. In addition, IRT has > additional equations > > Ok, so that’s the same as IRT has equations that SR doesn’t. OK that means that IRT is a superset of SRT and LET. Gee you are so stupid. > > See? Exactly the same as what was above. > > > that predict that a clock moving wrt the observer can accumulate clock > > seconds at a faster rate than the observer’s clock. Gee you are stupid. > > > > > > -- > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-08 15:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p7rm1u$1o3r$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #451956 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 6:17:23 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>> On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 12:04:13 PM UTC-5, rotchm wrote: >>>> On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 11:58:25 kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> IRT has the same equations as SR. >>>>> IRT has equations that SR doesn’t. >>>> >>>> idiot ken, do you see that your two above statements you just made are contradictory? >>> >>> Moron, I didn’t write that. I said that IRT has the same equations as LET and SR has.... >> >> Ok, so that’s the same as IRT has the same equations as SR >> >> these equations that predicts a clock moving wrt the observer is >> accumulating clock seconds at a slower rate. In addition, IRT has >> additional equations >> >> Ok, so that’s the same as IRT has equations that SR doesn’t. > > OK that means that IRT is a superset of SRT and LET. Gee you are so stupid. And therefore has a different set of equations than SR. Which means that when you said they have the same set of equations, you were contradicting yourself. Which you STILL can’t see. > >> >> See? Exactly the same as what was above. >> >>> that predict that a clock moving wrt the observer can accumulate clock >>> seconds at a faster rate than the observer’s clock. Gee you are stupid. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-07 15:53 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <69dda45b-4e0a-4da6-a4a2-37c08425db03@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451873 |
On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 4:39:07 PM UTC-5, kenseto wrote: > On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 12:04:13 PM UTC-5, rotchm wrote: > > On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 11:58:25 kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > > > > > IRT has the same equations as SR. > > > IRT has equations that SR doesn’t. > > > > idiot ken, do you see that your two above statements you just made are contradictory? > > Moron, I didn’t write that. Why not? Its there, no?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-07 13:50 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <65d01831-839e-4fdc-a9a1-7797ba3585b1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451821 |
On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 11:58:25 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > > On Tuesday, March 6, 2018 at 10:21:53 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > >>> On Tuesday, March 6, 2018 at 3:59:26 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> wrote: > >>>>> On Tuesday, March 6, 2018 at 8:53:17 AM UTC-7, Idiotic Ignorant kenseto wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 6:07:48 PM UTC-5, Gary Harnagel wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 3:36:48 PM UTC-7, kenseto wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Idiot, this just means that the LT (and SR math) is incomplete > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Nope. It means that IRT is useless. It's like locking two economists in > >>>>>>> a room. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Moron, it means that IRT includes SR or LET as subsets. > >>>>> > >>>>> I already told you that SR refutes IRT, so repeating the same sorry bull > >>>>> plop is what an autistic imbecile does. > >>>> > >>>> Wasting time. Ken doesn’t seem to get that the following statements are > >>>> self-contradictory: > >>>> > >>>> 1. IRT and SRT use the same math equations. > >>> > >>> Hey, Moron wood worker--IRT has the same equations as SR that predicts > >>> that a clock moving wrt the observer accumulates clock seconds at a slower rate. > >>> > >>>> 2. IRT has more math equations than SRT and includes SRT as a subset. > >>> > >>> In addition, IRT has other equation that the clock moving wrt the > >>> observer can accumulate clock seconds at a faster rate. > >> > >> And therefore has more equations than SR does, and therefore does not have > >> the same equations as SR. > >> And in fact the extra equations are things that SR insists cannot happen so > >> they do not have the same predictions. > > > > ROTFLOL....Moron woodworker logic. > > So IRT equations has the same equations as SR means that it does not have > > the same equations as SR. > > Well it’s you that has made both statements: > That IRT has the same equations as SR. The correct context of my statement is that IRT has the same equation as LET and SRT....these equations predicts that a clock moving wrt the observer is accumulating clock seconds at a slower rate than the observer’s clock. > That IRT has equations that SR doesn’t. Again the correct context of my statement is that IRT has additional equations that predict that a clock moving wrt the observer accumulate clock seconds at a faster rate. This is designed to eliminate the claim that the observer is in a more preferred situation. > > You see the problem with your statements? Everyone else will. > > > > >> > >>> The reason is that the IRT observer does not claim to be more preferred > >>> than the observed clock. Now how does these two detailed explanations are > >>> self contradictory. No wonder you are a moron woodworker--you have no > >>> business criticizing me. > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Ken’s mind really is gone now, you know. He can’t do 3rd grade arithmetic > >>>> anymore, let alone what he could do when he was earning his chemical > >>>> engineering degree. It sucks to go senile, and denial is one symptom. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> ......why? The unprimed observer cannot claim exclusively that his clock > >>>>>>>> is running faster than the unprimed clock. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Actually, he can be SURE that it’s running at the same rate as his. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Then how come the SR math predicts that the primed clock is accumulating > >>>>>> clock second at a slower rate of 1/gamma than the unprimed clock (your > >>>>>> clock)? > >>>>> > >>>>> It doesn't say that. Only autistic imbeciles think it does. > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> IOW, the unprimed observer cannot claim to be more preferred. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> IOW, you are missing too many brain cells. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Pot kettle black. > >>>>> > >>>>> SO you agree that we both are missing brain cells. > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> No, it is not....the LT is based on the ether. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Okay, you are fresh OUT of brain cells and can't even read the paper that > >>>>>>> Einstein wrote. Making up denials of reality is a sure way to get a trip > >>>>>>> to the loony farm. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> There is no reality in Einstein’s paper....it is all based on faulty > >>>>>> assumptions. > >>>>> > >>>>> Since you say IRT includes the LT and SR, then IRT is based on faulty > >>>>> assumptions, too. You just proved that you are an illogical ignoramus. > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> No moron, LET and SR is a subset of IRT. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Repeating bull plop doesn't make it smell any better. > >>>>>>> Gee you are stupid. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Your head in in the bull plop....no wonder that’s all you smell. > >>>>> > >>>>> You'd better worry about where YOUR head is. > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> The ether was detected by past experiments. See the following link: > >>>>>>>> http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015experiment.pdf > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I read them, imbecile. It was wrong then and it's wrong now. > >>>>>>> Gee you are imbecilic. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> You didn’t read them or you didn’t understand what you read. > >>>>> > >>>>> You wish! You are an illogical ignoramus and an imbecile, so how would YOU > >>>>> know if what you wrote made any sense? You need to pound sand up your butt > >>>>> until it fills that vacuum in your skull so it won't implode. > >>>>> > >>>>> And you're also dead wrong about the egg on the rocket, witless wonder. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > > > > > > > -- > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-07 23:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p7prtv$p36$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #451876 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 11:58:25 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>> On Tuesday, March 6, 2018 at 10:21:53 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>> On Tuesday, March 6, 2018 at 3:59:26 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Tuesday, March 6, 2018 at 8:53:17 AM UTC-7, Idiotic Ignorant kenseto wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 6:07:48 PM UTC-5, Gary Harnagel wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Monday, March 5, 2018 at 3:36:48 PM UTC-7, kenseto wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Idiot, this just means that the LT (and SR math) is incomplete >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Nope. It means that IRT is useless. It's like locking two economists in >>>>>>>>> a room. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Moron, it means that IRT includes SR or LET as subsets. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I already told you that SR refutes IRT, so repeating the same sorry bull >>>>>>> plop is what an autistic imbecile does. >>>>>> >>>>>> Wasting time. Ken doesn’t seem to get that the following statements are >>>>>> self-contradictory: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. IRT and SRT use the same math equations. >>>>> >>>>> Hey, Moron wood worker--IRT has the same equations as SR that predicts >>>>> that a clock moving wrt the observer accumulates clock seconds at a slower rate. >>>>> >>>>>> 2. IRT has more math equations than SRT and includes SRT as a subset. >>>>> >>>>> In addition, IRT has other equation that the clock moving wrt the >>>>> observer can accumulate clock seconds at a faster rate. >>>> >>>> And therefore has more equations than SR does, and therefore does not have >>>> the same equations as SR. >>>> And in fact the extra equations are things that SR insists cannot happen so >>>> they do not have the same predictions. >>> >>> ROTFLOL....Moron woodworker logic. >>> So IRT equations has the same equations as SR means that it does not have >>> the same equations as SR. >> >> Well it’s you that has made both statements: >> That IRT has the same equations as SR. > > The correct context of my statement is that IRT has the same equation as > LET and SRT....these equations predicts that a clock moving wrt the > observer is accumulating clock seconds at a slower rate than the observer’s clock. Says the same thing in more words. > >> That IRT has equations that SR doesn’t. > > Again the correct context of my statement is that IRT has additional > equations that predict that a clock moving wrt the observer accumulate > clock seconds at a faster rate. This is designed to eliminate the claim > that the observer is in a more preferred situation. Says the same thing in more words. > >> >> You see the problem with your statements? Everyone else will. >> >>> >>>> >>>>> The reason is that the IRT observer does not claim to be more preferred >>>>> than the observed clock. Now how does these two detailed explanations are >>>>> self contradictory. No wonder you are a moron woodworker--you have no >>>>> business criticizing me. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Ken’s mind really is gone now, you know. He can’t do 3rd grade arithmetic >>>>>> anymore, let alone what he could do when he was earning his chemical >>>>>> engineering degree. It sucks to go senile, and denial is one symptom. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ......why? The unprimed observer cannot claim exclusively that his clock >>>>>>>>>> is running faster than the unprimed clock. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Actually, he can be SURE that it’s running at the same rate as his. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Then how come the SR math predicts that the primed clock is accumulating >>>>>>>> clock second at a slower rate of 1/gamma than the unprimed clock (your >>>>>>>> clock)? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It doesn't say that. Only autistic imbeciles think it does. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> IOW, the unprimed observer cannot claim to be more preferred. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> IOW, you are missing too many brain cells. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Pot kettle black. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> SO you agree that we both are missing brain cells. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> No, it is not....the LT is based on the ether. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Okay, you are fresh OUT of brain cells and can't even read the paper that >>>>>>>>> Einstein wrote. Making up denials of reality is a sure way to get a trip >>>>>>>>> to the loony farm. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is no reality in Einstein’s paper....it is all based on faulty >>>>>>>> assumptions. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Since you say IRT includes the LT and SR, then IRT is based on faulty >>>>>>> assumptions, too. You just proved that you are an illogical ignoramus. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> No moron, LET and SR is a subset of IRT. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Repeating bull plop doesn't make it smell any better. >>>>>>>>> Gee you are stupid. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Your head in in the bull plop....no wonder that’s all you smell. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You'd better worry about where YOUR head is. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The ether was detected by past experiments. See the following link: >>>>>>>>>> http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015experiment.pdf >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I read them, imbecile. It was wrong then and it's wrong now. >>>>>>>>> Gee you are imbecilic. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You didn’t read them or you didn’t understand what you read. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You wish! You are an illogical ignoramus and an imbecile, so how would YOU >>>>>>> know if what you wrote made any sense? You need to pound sand up your butt >>>>>>> until it fills that vacuum in your skull so it won't implode. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And you're also dead wrong about the egg on the rocket, witless wonder. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-04 18:02 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <24953419-3e92-471a-b943-5d673879b84d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451499 |
On Sunday, March 4, 2018 at 7:56:44 PM UTC-5, kenseto wrote: > Moron, 3-min soft boiled egg only occur on earth--in another other > place it will take a different number of minutes. LOL! You do at least put a big smile on our faces!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-05 07:05 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <026976cc-f931-4d2c-bd87-ce17c9d3f6cf@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451502 |
On Sunday, March 4, 2018 at 9:02:54 PM UTC-5, rotchm wrote: > On Sunday, March 4, 2018 at 7:56:44 PM UTC-5, kenseto wrote: > > > Moron, 3-min soft boiled egg only occur on earth--in another other > > place it will take a different number of minutes. > > > LOL! You do at least put a big smile on our faces! Yeah BIG SMILE like a moron don’t know the basis of relativity.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-02 12:05 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <reamC.57987$SB6.36537@fx34.am4> |
| In reply to | #451141 |
Den 01.03.2018 22.07, skrev kenseto: > On Thursday, March 1, 2018 at 7:40:57 AM UTC-5, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> Den 01.03.2018 03.48, skrev kenseto: >>> On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 3:34:01 PM UTC-5, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>>> >>>> "Time", as used in physics, is per definition what is measured >>>> with a clock. >>>> SI-has defined the time unit "second" thus: >>>> "The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of >>>> the radiation corresponding to the transition between >>>> the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of >>>> the cesium 133 atom." >>>> >>>> Note that according to this definition, the frequency >>>> of the Cs hyperfine transition photon is 9 192 631 770 Hz. >>>> Always! >>> >>> with this definition, a clock second does not represent the same amount of time in different frames. The SR math says so: one second on a moving clock is correspoded to gamma seconds on the observer’s clock. >> >> The SR math says that if you are boiling an egg, you can safely use >> your wristwatch to time the boiling, because neither the egg nor your >> wristwatch will be affected by your speed relative the observer. > > On earth you boil an egg for 3 min. you will get a soft boil egg. If you go off on a rocket at 0.9 c and boil an egg for three minute you will not get a soft boil egg.....instead you will get a very hard boiled egg. > Can you please explain why the speed of the egg and wristwatch relative the Earth affects the wristwatch but not the egg? :-D -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-02 07:25 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3b8a728e-7991-417a-ac2c-94934f3211c0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451189 |
On Friday, March 2, 2018 at 6:06:02 AM UTC-5, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > Den 01.03.2018 22.07, skrev kenseto: > > On Thursday, March 1, 2018 at 7:40:57 AM UTC-5, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > >> Den 01.03.2018 03.48, skrev kenseto: > >>> On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 3:34:01 PM UTC-5, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > >>>> > >>>> "Time", as used in physics, is per definition what is measured > >>>> with a clock. > >>>> SI-has defined the time unit "second" thus: > >>>> "The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of > >>>> the radiation corresponding to the transition between > >>>> the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of > >>>> the cesium 133 atom." > >>>> > >>>> Note that according to this definition, the frequency > >>>> of the Cs hyperfine transition photon is 9 192 631 770 Hz. > >>>> Always! > >>> > >>> with this definition, a clock second does not represent the same amount of time in different frames. The SR math says so: one second on a moving clock is correspoded to gamma seconds on the observer’s clock. > >> > >> The SR math says that if you are boiling an egg, you can safely use > >> your wristwatch to time the boiling, because neither the egg nor your > >> wristwatch will be affected by your speed relative the observer. > > > > On earth you boil an egg for 3 min. you will get a soft boil egg. If you go off on a rocket at 0.9 c and boil an egg for three minute you will not get a soft boil egg.....instead you will get a very hard boiled egg. > > > > Can you please explain why the speed of the egg and wristwatch > relative the Earth affects the wristwatch but not the egg? :-D Because all the processes in the universe are based on absolute time. A wristwatch second does not represent the same amount of absolute time in different frames. :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-01 08:25 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <bd315903-2550-4972-832b-407241865718@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451085 |
On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 8:48:11 PM UTC-6, kenseto wrote: > On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 3:34:01 PM UTC-5, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > > Den 28.02.2018 17.32, skrev Ed Lake: > > > A couple weeks ago, I tried to get Tom Roberts to explain why he believes the Hafele-Keating experiments do not show that clocks tick at different rates in different reference frames. His entire explanation was: > > > > > > Hafele and Keating compared ELAPSED PROPER TIMES of clocks, not clock rates. > > > > > > How is comparing "elapsed proper times" different from comparing "clock rates"? There's no point in asking Tom Roberts, since he seems unable to explain anything. Here is what the text book "Spacetime Physics: an Introduction to Special Relativity" by Edwin F. Taylor & John Archibald Wheeler says on page 10 about "proper time": > > > > > > --- start quote --- > > > > > > When two events both occur at the position of a certain clock, that special clock measures directly the interval between these two events. The interval is called the proper time (or sometimes the local time). The special clock that records the proper time directly has the name proper clock for this pair of events. In this book we often call the proper time the wristwatch time and the proper clock the wristwatch to emphasize that the proper clock is carried so that it is "present" at each of the two events as the events occur. In Einstein's German, the word for proper time is Eigenzeit, or "own-time," implying "one's very own time." The German word provides a more accurate description than the English. In English, the word "proper" has come to mean "following conventional rules." Proper time certainly does not do that! > > > > > > --- end quote --- > > > > > > So, "proper time" just means "an observer's local time." > > > > Or simpler: "proper time" is what is measured with a clock. > > > > "Time", as used in physics, is per definition what is measured > > with a clock. > > SI-has defined the time unit "second" thus: > > "The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of > > the radiation corresponding to the transition between > > the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of > > the cesium 133 atom." > > > > Note that according to this definition, the frequency > > of the Cs hyperfine transition photon is 9 192 631 770 Hz. > > Always! > > with this definition, a clock second does not represent the same amount of time in different frames. The SR math says so: one second on a moving clock is correspoded to gamma seconds on the observer’s clock. You're not making sense. "the observer's clock"? WHICH observer? Yes, it is TRUE that "a clock second does not represent the same amount of time in different frames." That is what Relativity is all about. The SR math says 1 second on a moving clock is not the same as 1 second on a stationary clock. For example for a clock that is moving 298,290 kilometers per second, one second will pass while TEN seconds pass for a stationary clock. You can use the calculator at this link to verify that: http://keisan.casio.com/exec/system/1224059993 <snip> Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-01 13:22 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a4b04efe-fe06-430d-8c54-921c627df31b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451109 |
On Thursday, March 1, 2018 at 11:25:49 AM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote: > On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 8:48:11 PM UTC-6, kenseto wrote: > > On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 3:34:01 PM UTC-5, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > > > Den 28.02.2018 17.32, skrev Ed Lake: > > > > A couple weeks ago, I tried to get Tom Roberts to explain why he believes the Hafele-Keating experiments do not show that clocks tick at different rates in different reference frames. His entire explanation was: > > > > > > > > Hafele and Keating compared ELAPSED PROPER TIMES of clocks, not clock rates. > > > > > > > > How is comparing "elapsed proper times" different from comparing "clock rates"? There's no point in asking Tom Roberts, since he seems unable to explain anything. Here is what the text book "Spacetime Physics: an Introduction to Special Relativity" by Edwin F. Taylor & John Archibald Wheeler says on page 10 about "proper time": > > > > > > > > --- start quote --- > > > > > > > > When two events both occur at the position of a certain clock, that special clock measures directly the interval between these two events. The interval is called the proper time (or sometimes the local time). The special clock that records the proper time directly has the name proper clock for this pair of events. In this book we often call the proper time the wristwatch time and the proper clock the wristwatch to emphasize that the proper clock is carried so that it is "present" at each of the two events as the events occur. In Einstein's German, the word for proper time is Eigenzeit, or "own-time," implying "one's very own time." The German word provides a more accurate description than the English. In English, the word "proper" has come to mean "following conventional rules." Proper time certainly does not do that! > > > > > > > > --- end quote --- > > > > > > > > So, "proper time" just means "an observer's local time." > > > > > > Or simpler: "proper time" is what is measured with a clock. > > > > > > "Time", as used in physics, is per definition what is measured > > > with a clock. > > > SI-has defined the time unit "second" thus: > > > "The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of > > > the radiation corresponding to the transition between > > > the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of > > > the cesium 133 atom." > > > > > > Note that according to this definition, the frequency > > > of the Cs hyperfine transition photon is 9 192 631 770 Hz. > > > Always! > > > > with this definition, a clock second does not represent the same amount of time in different frames. The SR math says so: one second on a moving clock is correspoded to gamma seconds on the observer’s clock. > > You're not making sense. "the observer's clock"? WHICH observer? There is only one observer. > > Yes, it is TRUE that "a clock second does not represent the same amount of time in different frames." That is what Relativity is all about. No, that’s not what relativity (SR) is all about. What Tom is saying is that a clock second represents the same amount of time (proper time) in different frames. The problem is that Tom and SR assumes that a clock second is a universal interval of time....it is not. > > The SR math says 1 second on a moving clock is not the same as 1 second on a stationary clock. For example for a clock that is moving 298,290 kilometers per second, one second will pass while TEN seconds pass for a stationary clock. You can use the calculator at this link to verify that: http://keisan.casio.com/exec/system/1224059993 No, what they are saying is that between two events relative clock is recording different amount of proper time as the two relative moving clocks passing the positions of these two events.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-01 14:43 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <f08da5d2-2a7e-4501-a230-c88d796052f7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451144 |
On Thursday, March 1, 2018 at 3:22:13 PM UTC-6, kenseto wrote: > On Thursday, March 1, 2018 at 11:25:49 AM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote: > > On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 8:48:11 PM UTC-6, kenseto wrote: > > > On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 3:34:01 PM UTC-5, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > > > > Den 28.02.2018 17.32, skrev Ed Lake: > > > > > A couple weeks ago, I tried to get Tom Roberts to explain why he believes the Hafele-Keating experiments do not show that clocks tick at different rates in different reference frames. His entire explanation was: > > > > > > > > > > Hafele and Keating compared ELAPSED PROPER TIMES of clocks, not clock rates. > > > > > > > > > > How is comparing "elapsed proper times" different from comparing "clock rates"? There's no point in asking Tom Roberts, since he seems unable to explain anything. Here is what the text book "Spacetime Physics: an Introduction to Special Relativity" by Edwin F. Taylor & John Archibald Wheeler says on page 10 about "proper time": > > > > > > > > > > --- start quote --- > > > > > > > > > > When two events both occur at the position of a certain clock, that special clock measures directly the interval between these two events. The interval is called the proper time (or sometimes the local time). The special clock that records the proper time directly has the name proper clock for this pair of events. In this book we often call the proper time the wristwatch time and the proper clock the wristwatch to emphasize that the proper clock is carried so that it is "present" at each of the two events as the events occur. In Einstein's German, the word for proper time is Eigenzeit, or "own-time," implying "one's very own time." The German word provides a more accurate description than the English. In English, the word "proper" has come to mean "following conventional rules." Proper time certainly does not do that! > > > > > > > > > > --- end quote --- > > > > > > > > > > So, "proper time" just means "an observer's local time." > > > > > > > > Or simpler: "proper time" is what is measured with a clock. > > > > > > > > "Time", as used in physics, is per definition what is measured > > > > with a clock. > > > > SI-has defined the time unit "second" thus: > > > > "The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of > > > > the radiation corresponding to the transition between > > > > the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of > > > > the cesium 133 atom." > > > > > > > > Note that according to this definition, the frequency > > > > of the Cs hyperfine transition photon is 9 192 631 770 Hz. > > > > Always! > > > > > > with this definition, a clock second does not represent the same amount of time in different frames. The SR math says so: one second on a moving clock is correspoded to gamma seconds on the observer’s clock. > > > > You're not making sense. "the observer's clock"? WHICH observer? > > There is only one observer. Then why didn't you say, "One second on a moving clock corresponds to one second for the observer standing next to the clock"? One second on a moving clock does NOT correspond to one second for an observer who is NOT moving with the clock. > > > > > Yes, it is TRUE that "a clock second does not represent the same amount of time in different frames." That is what Relativity is all about. > > No, that’s not what relativity (SR) is all about. What Tom is saying is that a clock second represents the same amount of time (proper time) in different frames. The problem is that Tom and SR assumes that a clock second is a universal interval of time....it is not. Tom assumes that. SR does not. > > > > The SR math says 1 second on a moving clock is not the same as 1 second on a stationary clock. For example for a clock that is moving 298,290 kilometers per second, one second will pass while TEN seconds pass for a stationary clock. You can use the calculator at this link to verify that: http://keisan.casio.com/exec/system/1224059993 > > No, what they are saying is that between two events relative clock is recording different amount of proper time as the two relative moving clocks passing the positions of these two events. Sorry, but that is bad English. I cannot decipher it. Do you mean, the proper time between two events will be different for someone standing next to the events versus someone passing at high speed past the events? If so, then I agree. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-28 22:16 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <d9f46618-7d1e-4f78-a189-8c7229efe8c9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451043 |
On Wednesday, 28 February 2018 21:34:01 UTC+1, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > Den 28.02.2018 17.32, skrev Ed Lake: > > A couple weeks ago, I tried to get Tom Roberts to explain why he believes the Hafele-Keating experiments do not show that clocks tick at different rates in different reference frames. His entire explanation was: > > > > Hafele and Keating compared ELAPSED PROPER TIMES of clocks, not clock rates. > > > > How is comparing "elapsed proper times" different from comparing "clock rates"? There's no point in asking Tom Roberts, since he seems unable to explain anything. Here is what the text book "Spacetime Physics: an Introduction to Special Relativity" by Edwin F. Taylor & John Archibald Wheeler says on page 10 about "proper time": > > > > --- start quote --- > > > > When two events both occur at the position of a certain clock, that special clock measures directly the interval between these two events. The interval is called the proper time (or sometimes the local time). The special clock that records the proper time directly has the name proper clock for this pair of events. In this book we often call the proper time the wristwatch time and the proper clock the wristwatch to emphasize that the proper clock is carried so that it is "present" at each of the two events as the events occur. In Einstein's German, the word for proper time is Eigenzeit, or "own-time," implying "one's very own time." The German word provides a more accurate description than the English. In English, the word "proper" has come to mean "following conventional rules." Proper time certainly does not do that! > > > > --- end quote --- > > > > So, "proper time" just means "an observer's local time." > > Or simpler: "proper time" is what is measured with a clock. Right. Thus, as in yourr moronic physics clocks measure your moronic time dilation - in your moronic physics time dilates. And as in real GPS real clocks indicate t'=t - in the relity time is galilean.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-02-28 13:17 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <857955f5-54df-4b7b-8b6e-05b6e9808f4d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451005 |
On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 10:33:00 AM UTC-6, Ed Lake wrote: > <snip> > > Ed Ba ba Booey https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_cPir6MwLM
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-01 11:32 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ffp010FqjebU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #451005 |
On 1/03/2018 3:32 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > A couple weeks ago, I tried to get Tom Roberts to explain why he believes the Hafele-Keating experiments do not show that clocks tick at different rates in different reference frames. His entire explanation was: > > Hafele and Keating compared ELAPSED PROPER TIMES of clocks, not clock rates. > > How is comparing "elapsed proper times" different from comparing "clock rates"? There's no point in asking Tom Roberts, since he seems unable to explain anything. Here is what the text book "Spacetime Physics: an Introduction to Special Relativity" by Edwin F. Taylor & John Archibald Wheeler says on page 10 about "proper time": You can't directly compare the rates of relatively moving clocks because they inevitably move apart. This means that your attempted comparison will involve the use of a theory of space-time, and not be a direct comparison. Further, given that the situation is symmetrical, you can apply the same theory in the frame of either clock to conclude that the other clock runs more slowly, which has to cast doubt on your conclusions about the rates. If the clocks eventually come back together, you can then compare the elapsed times shown on each clock (which are necessarily the elapsed proper times in the frame of each clock). You may then conclude that one clock has a lesser elapsed time than the other, but it goes beyond the facts to say that one clock had a lower rate than the other. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-01 08:12 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <e36b4bb8-d258-4431-9746-b4326bb99ec8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451079 |
On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 6:32:38 PM UTC-6, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 1/03/2018 3:32 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > > A couple weeks ago, I tried to get Tom Roberts to explain why he believes the Hafele-Keating experiments do not show that clocks tick at different rates in different reference frames. His entire explanation was: > > > > Hafele and Keating compared ELAPSED PROPER TIMES of clocks, not clock rates. > > > > How is comparing "elapsed proper times" different from comparing "clock rates"? There's no point in asking Tom Roberts, since he seems unable to explain anything. Here is what the text book "Spacetime Physics: an Introduction to Special Relativity" by Edwin F. Taylor & John Archibald Wheeler says on page 10 about "proper time": > > You can't directly compare the rates of relatively moving clocks because > they inevitably move apart. This means that your attempted comparison > will involve the use of a theory of space-time, and not be a direct > comparison. You do not have to use space-time to understand that a clock will continue to tick when out of sight. And, if you have accurate clocks, a clock that moves will tick slower than a clock that is relatively stationary. > Further, given that the situation is symmetrical, you can > apply the same theory in the frame of either clock to conclude that the > other clock runs more slowly, which has to cast doubt on your > conclusions about the rates. Hmm. I have a blog thread at this link that might be of interest to you: http://oldguynewissues.blogspot.com/ Look at the first topic on the list. It's titled "The 10 DUMBEST Ideas in Physics." #1 on the list is: "All movement is reciprocal." If you believe that there is no way to tell which clock is moving faster than the other, and that "all movement is reciprocal," then you are embracing what I consider to be the DUMBEST idea in physics. If I drop a pencil, do you believe it is just as likely that the earth moved upward toward the pencil? What force caused that to happen? If the government spends 10 BILLION dollars to send a spacecraft to Mars, is it just as likely that Mars and the rest of the universe actually moved to intercept the spacecraft? Should I also assume you also do not believe in "cause and effect." All movement is relative to the point where the Big Bang occurred. If you think the Big Bang occurred "everywhere," check #7 on the list of DUMBEST ideas. > > If the clocks eventually come back together, you can then compare the > elapsed times shown on each clock (which are necessarily the elapsed > proper times in the frame of each clock). > > You may then conclude that one clock has a lesser elapsed time than the > other, but it goes beyond the facts to say that one clock had a lower > rate than the other. > > Sylvia. I guess it all depends upon what you consider to be a "fact." If it is a FACT that the moving clock showed less elapsed time than the relatively stationary clock. And if it is a FACT that the clocks were synchronized before one of the clocks was moved. And if it is a FACT that nothing "magical" happened to the clock that was moved. Then it is a FACT that the clock that moved MUST have ticked slower WHILE moving. If it is not a FACT, then please explain how the clock that moved ended up showing less elapsed time. A fact is something that is "indisputable." If you dispute the fact that elapsed time represents the amount of time experienced between events, then please present your case. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-02 09:04 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ffrbn6FcdroU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #451108 |
On 2/03/2018 3:12 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 6:32:38 PM UTC-6, Sylvia Else wrote: >> On 1/03/2018 3:32 AM, Ed Lake wrote: >>> A couple weeks ago, I tried to get Tom Roberts to explain why he believes the Hafele-Keating experiments do not show that clocks tick at different rates in different reference frames. His entire explanation was: >>> >>> Hafele and Keating compared ELAPSED PROPER TIMES of clocks, not clock rates. >>> >>> How is comparing "elapsed proper times" different from comparing "clock rates"? There's no point in asking Tom Roberts, since he seems unable to explain anything. Here is what the text book "Spacetime Physics: an Introduction to Special Relativity" by Edwin F. Taylor & John Archibald Wheeler says on page 10 about "proper time": >> >> You can't directly compare the rates of relatively moving clocks because >> they inevitably move apart. This means that your attempted comparison >> will involve the use of a theory of space-time, and not be a direct >> comparison. > > You do not have to use space-time to understand that a clock will continue to tick when out of sight. And, if you have accurate clocks, a clock that moves will tick slower than a clock that is relatively stationary. Since each clock moves relative to the other, you end up with the contradiction that each clock runs more slowly than the other. Since physical contradictions cannot occur, there must be something wrong with the analysis. In this case, it's the assumption that it's possible to compare the rates of moving clocks. > >> Further, given that the situation is symmetrical, you can >> apply the same theory in the frame of either clock to conclude that the >> other clock runs more slowly, which has to cast doubt on your >> conclusions about the rates. > > Hmm. I have a blog thread at this link that might be of interest to you: http://oldguynewissues.blogspot.com/ > > Look at the first topic on the list. It's titled "The 10 DUMBEST Ideas in Physics." #1 on the list is: "All movement is reciprocal." > > If you believe that there is no way to tell which clock is moving faster than the other, and that "all movement is reciprocal," then you are embracing what I consider to be the DUMBEST idea in physics. > > If I drop a pencil, do you believe it is just as likely that the earth moved upward toward the pencil? What force caused that to happen? > > If the government spends 10 BILLION dollars to send a spacecraft to Mars, is it just as likely that Mars and the rest of the universe actually moved to intercept the spacecraft? > > Should I also assume you also do not believe in "cause and effect." > > All movement is relative to the point where the Big Bang occurred. If you think the Big Bang occurred "everywhere," check #7 on the list of DUMBEST ideas. > >> >> If the clocks eventually come back together, you can then compare the >> elapsed times shown on each clock (which are necessarily the elapsed >> proper times in the frame of each clock). >> >> You may then conclude that one clock has a lesser elapsed time than the >> other, but it goes beyond the facts to say that one clock had a lower >> rate than the other. >> >> Sylvia. > > I guess it all depends upon what you consider to be a "fact." If it is a FACT that the moving clock showed less elapsed time than the relatively stationary clock. And if it is a FACT that the clocks were synchronized before one of the clocks was moved. And if it is a FACT that nothing "magical" happened to the clock that was moved. Then it is a FACT that the clock that moved MUST have ticked slower WHILE moving. If it is not a FACT, then please explain how the clock that moved ended up showing less elapsed time. The simple answer is that the clocks took different paths through space-time. An analogy is where two cars take different routes to arrive at the same place. Their odometers will show different accumulated distances, but it's not because they ran at different rates in terms of increments indicated per distance travelled. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-01 15:02 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b02a8c6c-4e84-4c64-a2bf-6da4efa6d192@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #451150 |
On Thursday, March 1, 2018 at 4:04:26 PM UTC-6, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 2/03/2018 3:12 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > > On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 6:32:38 PM UTC-6, Sylvia Else wrote: > >> On 1/03/2018 3:32 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > >>> A couple weeks ago, I tried to get Tom Roberts to explain why he believes the Hafele-Keating experiments do not show that clocks tick at different rates in different reference frames. His entire explanation was: > >>> > >>> Hafele and Keating compared ELAPSED PROPER TIMES of clocks, not clock rates. > >>> > >>> How is comparing "elapsed proper times" different from comparing "clock rates"? There's no point in asking Tom Roberts, since he seems unable to explain anything. Here is what the text book "Spacetime Physics: an Introduction to Special Relativity" by Edwin F. Taylor & John Archibald Wheeler says on page 10 about "proper time": > >> > >> You can't directly compare the rates of relatively moving clocks because > >> they inevitably move apart. This means that your attempted comparison > >> will involve the use of a theory of space-time, and not be a direct > >> comparison. > > > > You do not have to use space-time to understand that a clock will continue to tick when out of sight. And, if you have accurate clocks, a clock that moves will tick slower than a clock that is relatively stationary. > > Since each clock moves relative to the other, you end up with the > contradiction that each clock runs more slowly than the other. Since > physical contradictions cannot occur, there must be something wrong with > the analysis. In this case, it's the assumption that it's possible to > compare the rates of moving clocks. Clocks do not move "relative to each other" anywhere except in the minds of mathematicians. Everywhere else, they move relative to the point where the Big Bang occurred. Comparing the rates of moving clocks is not only possible, it's an excellent way to determine which clock is moving faster relative to the point where the Big Bang occurred. The clock that runs slower is the clock that is moving faster. It is as simple as that. > > > > >> Further, given that the situation is symmetrical, you can > >> apply the same theory in the frame of either clock to conclude that the > >> other clock runs more slowly, which has to cast doubt on your > >> conclusions about the rates. > > > > Hmm. I have a blog thread at this link that might be of interest to you: http://oldguynewissues.blogspot.com/ > > > > Look at the first topic on the list. It's titled "The 10 DUMBEST Ideas in Physics." #1 on the list is: "All movement is reciprocal." > > > > If you believe that there is no way to tell which clock is moving faster than the other, and that "all movement is reciprocal," then you are embracing what I consider to be the DUMBEST idea in physics. > > > > If I drop a pencil, do you believe it is just as likely that the earth moved upward toward the pencil? What force caused that to happen? > > > > If the government spends 10 BILLION dollars to send a spacecraft to Mars, is it just as likely that Mars and the rest of the universe actually moved to intercept the spacecraft? > > > > Should I also assume you also do not believe in "cause and effect." > > > > All movement is relative to the point where the Big Bang occurred. If you think the Big Bang occurred "everywhere," check #7 on the list of DUMBEST ideas. > > > >> > >> If the clocks eventually come back together, you can then compare the > >> elapsed times shown on each clock (which are necessarily the elapsed > >> proper times in the frame of each clock). > >> > >> You may then conclude that one clock has a lesser elapsed time than the > >> other, but it goes beyond the facts to say that one clock had a lower > >> rate than the other. > >> > >> Sylvia. > > > > I guess it all depends upon what you consider to be a "fact." If it is a FACT that the moving clock showed less elapsed time than the relatively stationary clock. And if it is a FACT that the clocks were synchronized before one of the clocks was moved. And if it is a FACT that nothing "magical" happened to the clock that was moved. Then it is a FACT that the clock that moved MUST have ticked slower WHILE moving. If it is not a FACT, then please explain how the clock that moved ended up showing less elapsed time. > > The simple answer is that the clocks took different paths through > space-time. An analogy is where two cars take different routes to arrive > at the same place. Their odometers will show different accumulated > distances, but it's not because they ran at different rates in terms of > increments indicated per distance travelled. > > Sylvia. Spacetime is a mathematical model. It's like a chart. The fact that you can illustrate on a chart that it is a longer line from A to B if the line is curved than if it is straight has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with what happens in reality. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-02 11:43 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ffrl0nFeaumU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #451161 |
On 2/03/2018 10:02 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > Clocks do not move "relative to each other" anywhere except in the minds of mathematicians. Everywhere else, they move relative to the point where the Big Bang occurred. Do you have any evidence to support that? It's not as if relativity was devised in some ivory tower - it was based on experiments. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 15 of 28 — ← Prev page 1 … 13 14 [15] 16 17 … 28 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web