Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #455078 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-04-07 14:06 -0700 |
| Last post | 2018-04-10 10:01 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 428 — 28 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-07 14:06 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-04-07 23:20 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-07 14:38 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-07 15:29 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-07 17:52 -0400
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-08 08:58 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-08 09:13 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-07 16:32 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-08 09:14 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-08 10:27 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-08 12:49 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-08 13:09 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-08 13:38 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-08 14:03 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-08 14:53 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-08 15:00 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-08 15:13 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-09 07:09 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 07:16 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-09 14:08 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2018-04-08 20:12 -0500
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-04-09 04:10 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2018-04-09 16:30 -0500
[OT] Latin (was: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-04-10 03:56 +0200
Re: [OT] Latin (was: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics) Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 06:28 -0500
Re: [OT] Latin Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-04-10 18:18 +0200
Re: [OT] Latin Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-04-10 12:56 -0400
Newton’s «Principia» online (was: [OT] Latin) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-04-12 03:25 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-09 07:25 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2018-04-09 16:30 -0500
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-08 18:14 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-09 07:31 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 07:35 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-09 10:21 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-09 13:58 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 14:13 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-09 14:15 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-09 14:37 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-09 21:46 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 14:50 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-09 15:08 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-09 15:15 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-10 08:08 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-10 10:27 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-10 13:49 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-04-09 17:18 -0500
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 15:24 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 15:26 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-04-09 17:57 -0500
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 16:16 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-04-10 00:43 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 15:53 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-10 08:45 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-04-10 09:52 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-10 10:05 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 10:14 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-10 13:43 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 21:05 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 14:33 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-04-10 16:56 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-11 07:29 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-10 10:35 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-09 14:30 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-09 14:49 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-09 15:18 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-04-09 17:25 -0500
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 15:29 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-09 15:40 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-10 09:02 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-10 09:19 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 09:31 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-10 09:43 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 09:58 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-10 10:53 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-10 14:06 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 14:42 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-10 15:11 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 16:11 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Steve BH <sbharris@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 17:40 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-10 18:20 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-10 18:44 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-11 07:42 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-11 08:04 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-11 09:17 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Jed Serpa <iul@enwlew.lc> - 2018-04-11 16:40 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-11 09:57 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-11 17:25 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-11 12:17 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-11 12:43 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Jed Serpa <iul@enwlew.lc> - 2018-04-11 19:51 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-11 13:15 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-11 13:27 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-04-11 19:09 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Steve BH <sbharris@gmail.com> - 2018-04-11 16:30 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-12 09:33 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Steve BH <sbharris@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 17:15 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Steve BH <sbharris@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 18:46 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-13 08:53 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Steve BH <sbharris@gmail.com> - 2018-04-14 18:40 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Steve BH <sbharris@gmail.com> - 2018-04-14 18:55 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Steve BH <sbharris@gmail.com> - 2018-04-14 19:03 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-15 10:04 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-04-15 21:15 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-15 13:19 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-04-16 10:16 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-16 02:46 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-16 14:20 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-15 21:18 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-04-16 06:19 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-15 22:13 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-04-16 07:22 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-15 23:27 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-04-11 10:54 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-11 12:23 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Jed Serpa <iul@enwlew.lc> - 2018-04-11 19:27 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-11 13:33 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 10:27 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 10:24 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-12 14:41 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-12 14:52 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 16:01 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-13 07:54 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-13 08:18 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 08:54 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-13 09:53 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 14:21 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-10 20:55 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-08 11:59 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-08 13:14 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-08 13:24 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-08 20:36 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-04-09 07:12 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-09 17:35 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-08 13:38 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-08 14:21 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-08 15:01 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-08 21:33 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-07 16:56 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-07 17:06 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-07 17:13 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-08 00:58 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-08 01:15 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-08 02:03 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-08 09:23 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics jgreenfield97@gmail.com - 2018-04-09 23:37 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-10 09:05 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-04-08 11:02 +1000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-07 22:46 -0400
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-08 09:31 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-08 09:37 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-07 22:27 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-08 09:28 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-08 09:33 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-04-09 12:13 +1000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-09 07:37 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 07:41 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-09 12:59 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Gaston Levell <jno@itwjwg.tn> - 2018-04-09 20:05 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-09 14:20 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-04-10 12:29 +1000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-09 17:39 -0400
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-09 14:59 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-04-09 17:07 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-08 03:55 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-08 09:35 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-08 09:40 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-04-08 16:33 -0500
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-08 14:43 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-08 14:48 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-08 15:11 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-08 15:23 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-08 19:00 -0700
Diffraction grating and annual Doppler effect (was: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics) Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-04-15 13:24 -0500
Re: Diffraction grating and annual Doppler effect (was: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics) dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-15 16:53 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-04-09 07:43 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-09 08:03 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-04-09 12:21 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-09 14:15 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-04-09 15:14 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-09 23:18 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 16:30 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-04-10 01:37 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 16:41 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-04-10 02:11 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 20:34 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-04-10 05:47 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 20:50 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-10 08:22 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-04-11 14:17 -0500
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Jed Serpa <iul@enwlew.lc> - 2018-04-11 19:23 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-11 13:30 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-11 13:41 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-11 13:51 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-04-11 17:52 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 11:04 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-04-12 06:26 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 13:39 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-04-12 11:27 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 01:55 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-04-13 04:47 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 12:07 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-04-13 05:30 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 06:13 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Rusty Willard <wuut@yaiw.wu> - 2018-04-13 14:43 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-04-13 22:17 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 16:02 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-04-13 22:32 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-14 12:58 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Jed Serpa <iul@enwlew.lc> - 2018-04-11 16:57 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-11 10:08 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Rusty Willard <wuut@yaiw.wu> - 2018-04-12 15:08 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-04-09 08:22 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Steve BH <sbharris@gmail.com> - 2018-04-08 17:08 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-09 07:22 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 07:27 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 07:31 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-04-08 18:36 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-09 07:34 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 07:37 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-04-09 16:59 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 08:31 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-09 08:37 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 08:28 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-10 08:38 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-10 09:26 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 09:40 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 18:36 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-04-10 15:24 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-11 07:28 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-04-11 16:33 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-04-11 10:50 -0400
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-11 08:48 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-11 08:55 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-11 08:58 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-11 09:41 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-11 09:43 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Jed Serpa <iul@enwlew.lc> - 2018-04-11 16:52 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-11 10:02 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Jed Serpa <iul@enwlew.lc> - 2018-04-11 17:08 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-11 10:12 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-11 12:32 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Jed Serpa <iul@enwlew.lc> - 2018-04-11 19:37 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-11 12:53 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics jgreenfield97@gmail.com - 2018-04-15 22:09 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-11 12:28 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Jed Serpa <iul@enwlew.lc> - 2018-04-11 19:30 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-11 12:40 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Jed Serpa <iul@enwlew.lc> - 2018-04-11 19:46 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-04-11 14:07 -0400
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-11 12:39 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-04-11 18:56 -0400
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-12 08:57 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-12 09:02 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 09:30 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-12 09:50 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-04-12 18:55 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 10:05 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-12 10:22 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 16:34 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-13 08:21 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-04-13 18:00 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 16:09 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 09:05 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 09:09 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-12 10:19 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-12 14:27 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-12 15:13 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-12 21:24 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Rusty Willard <wuut@yaiw.wu> - 2018-04-13 09:23 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Rusty Willard <wuut@yaiw.wu> - 2018-04-13 09:29 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-13 07:46 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-13 15:14 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-13 09:44 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 09:59 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-13 14:11 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 16:08 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-13 19:11 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-13 08:56 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-13 09:56 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-13 12:44 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-13 14:31 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 16:13 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-13 16:54 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-13 17:19 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-14 08:44 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Rusty Willard <wuut@yaiw.wu> - 2018-04-14 15:51 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-14 10:44 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-14 12:41 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-14 15:02 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-14 15:37 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-15 10:14 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-15 10:33 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-15 11:24 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-15 11:27 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-15 11:49 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-15 12:59 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-15 13:23 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-15 20:39 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-15 20:39 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-04-18 09:32 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-18 09:35 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-14 11:38 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-14 13:02 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-14 14:48 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-14 15:56 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-15 10:26 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-15 10:35 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-15 12:43 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-15 13:40 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-15 22:01 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-15 15:53 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-16 13:32 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-16 14:12 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-16 14:31 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-16 15:34 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-17 07:42 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-17 08:14 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-17 08:33 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-04-17 17:45 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-17 08:46 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-17 09:23 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-17 09:44 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-17 13:05 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-17 14:46 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-18 09:14 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 09:27 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-18 13:27 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-17 11:26 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-04-17 20:17 -0500
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-18 09:38 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-18 09:49 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-04-16 14:35 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-17 07:52 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-15 16:21 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-16 13:58 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-16 14:54 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-16 15:02 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-16 15:39 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-17 08:10 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-04-17 17:13 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 15:42 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-17 12:31 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-17 13:34 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 14:07 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Rusty Willard <wuut@yaiw.wu> - 2018-04-17 21:14 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 15:49 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Erálnì Histickému <no@ovmwk.gn> - 2018-04-18 11:55 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 14:20 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-04-18 17:34 -0400
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Erálnì Histickému <no@ovmwk.gn> - 2018-04-21 06:19 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-04-21 09:47 -0400
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Erálnì Histickému <no@ovmwk.gn> - 2018-04-21 06:16 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-17 14:19 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 14:47 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-17 14:57 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-18 09:27 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 09:53 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Steve BH <sbharris@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 15:52 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-18 21:10 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-04-18 20:14 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-17 14:13 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-17 14:27 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-17 20:13 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-18 10:20 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-18 12:21 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-18 13:53 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-18 14:57 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics dancouriann@gmail.com - 2018-04-18 15:13 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-04-20 10:13 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 14:02 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-17 14:37 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-04-17 00:18 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-04-17 00:37 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-04-16 16:42 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-04-16 17:02 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-16 17:12 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-04-16 22:22 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Rusty Willard <wuut@yaiw.wu> - 2018-04-17 19:25 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-04-16 15:32 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-16 22:37 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Steve BH <sbharris@gmail.com> - 2018-04-16 18:21 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-16 19:15 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-16 19:26 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-04-17 04:32 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-16 20:30 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Steve BH <sbharris@gmail.com> - 2018-04-16 22:52 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-16 23:49 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Steve BH <sbharris@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 01:28 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-17 02:09 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-17 08:17 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-14 15:03 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-04-18 09:59 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 10:11 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 20:56 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-14 00:09 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-13 10:16 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-04-13 19:20 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-13 20:20 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 16:17 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-13 02:03 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-12 19:16 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-04-13 13:25 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-04-13 19:53 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-04-17 15:22 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-04-12 12:35 -0400
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-12 10:08 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-04-12 22:26 -0500
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-04-13 05:51 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-04-11 15:31 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-11 22:38 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-04-11 19:05 -0500
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-12 09:08 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-12 09:11 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-04-12 09:46 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-04-12 23:19 -0500
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-13 03:01 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-04-13 12:16 +0200
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-13 08:29 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Rusty Willard <wuut@yaiw.wu> - 2018-04-13 15:53 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-13 09:26 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-04-13 22:34 -0500
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-14 12:23 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-14 08:20 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Rusty Willard <wuut@yaiw.wu> - 2018-04-14 15:33 +0000
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-04-14 09:33 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-14 10:11 -0700
Re: The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-04-09 13:24 -0700
The #4 Dumbest Belief in Physics KronosPrime@outlook.com - 2018-04-10 10:01 -0700
Page 8 of 22 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 22 Next page →
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-08 00:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e6370ffe-3735-41d1-9fdd-d1a5e0586c08@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455096 |
Can anyone identify ANY experiments which show that absurd belief to be true? > > > > > > Ed Doppler Effect, Binary Stars, Neutron Stars & Black Holes Lectures by Walter Lewin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=313C1zo9pyE So.. if Walter Lewin swings the whistle above 340 m/s, him being at the center, would not be able to hear the whistle himself. Because it is above the wave speed of the MEDIUM
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-08 01:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c69b6097-ffd7-4ad8-8d5e-a8968e09a43d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455105 |
Can anyone identify ANY experiments which show that absurd belief to be true? > > > > > > Ed Doppler Effect, Binary Stars, Neutron Stars & Black Holes Lectures by Walter Lewin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=313C1zo9pyE So.. if Walter Lewin swings the whistle above 340 m/s, him being at the center, would not be able to hear the whistle himself. Because it is above the wave speed of the MEDIUM https://photos.app.goo.gl/qtIjKmNQcrqrqntB2 https://photos.app.goo.gl/43rq1TM0i2kcnq2p2 The MEDIUM of Space time acts as a Klystron
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-08 02:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <105b40b6-1b8c-4c77-ac0a-cd95693b5608@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455106 |
Doppler Effect, Binary Stars, Neutron Stars & Black Holes Lectures by Walter Lewin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=313C1zo9pyE So.. if Walter Lewin swings the whistle above 340 m/s, him being at the center, would not be able to hear the whistle himself. Because it is above the wave speed of the MEDIUM (343 (m / s)) / (1 - (1 / tau)) = 407.922955 m / s
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-08 09:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <47575a58-de14-45fe-b4cc-ced73ba11a9a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455096 |
On Saturday, April 7, 2018 at 7:13:02 PM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > El sábado, 7 de abril de 2018, 21:06:49 (UTC-3), Paparios escribió: > > El sábado, 7 de abril de 2018, 20:57:02 (UTC-3), Paparios escribió: > > > El sábado, 7 de abril de 2018, 18:06:50 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > > The 4th dumbest belief in physics is “The speed of light is always measured to be the same by the emitter and all outside observers, regardless of their own velocity.” Source: http://oldguynewissues.blogspot.com/2018/02/the-10-dumbest-ideas-in-physics.html > > > > > > > > At this link http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/sr.html we can see that Ohio State University teaches the same absurd version of Einstein’s Second Postulate that most universities teach: > > > > > > > > “The speed of light in a vacuum is the same for all observers, regardless of their motion relative to the source.” > > > > > > > > Yet, anyone can demonstrate BY EXPERIMENT that that is NOT TRUE. All you need to understand is how a police radar gun is used to catch speeders. > > > > > > > > 1. Radio pulses are emitted from the radar gun at 1.5 Ghz, which is 1.5 BILLION evenly spaced pulses per second. Each pulse travels at c, or 299,799,458 meters per second. > > > > > > > > 2. If the pulses hit a STATIONARY car, the car will be hit by 1.5 billion pulses per second. The surface of the car will reflect back the pulses at 1.5 billion per second. > > > > > > > > 3. If the pulses hit an oncoming car traveling at 100 mph, that car will encounter the radio pulses arriving at c+v, where v is the speed of the car. The car will also be hit by 1,500,000,150 pulses per second. > > > > > > > > 4. The surface of the car will bounce the pulses back at c, but at that higher pulse rate of 1,500,000,150 pulses per second. > > > > > > > > 5. When the returned pulses reach the radar gun, the gun will subtract the emitted rate of 1,500,000,000 per second from the return rate of 1,500,000,150 pulses per second and will calculate the difference to be 150 Hz. That computes to 100 mph as the speed for the oncoming car. > > > > > > > > (If you have such a radar gun, you can also do as some do at baseball games and measure the speed of the baseballs thrown by the pitcher. https://www.fangraphs.com/tht/the-physics-of-radar-guns/ ) > > > > > > > > So, the radar gun emits the 1.5 Ghz pulses at c, but the car undeniably encounters the pulses at c+v, where v is the car’s speed We know this because the car encounters the pulses at 1.500000150 Ghz. Is there any other way to explain the difference? > > > > > > > > The fact that light is measured by moving observers to arrive at c+ or –v can be demonstrated by any experiment where evenly spaced light or radio pulses can be counted. > > > > > > > > Pulsars emit evenly spaced light pulses which arrive at the earth at c+v when the earth is moving toward the pulsar during its orbit around the sun, and the light pulses arrive at c-v when the earth is moving away from the pulsar. > > > > > > > > In 1887, Vogel and Scheiner measured the same thing with regular stars along the ecliptic, using the Doppler effect to determine that when the earth is moving toward the star the light from the star arrives at c+v, and it arrives at c-v when the earth is moving away from the star. > > > > > > > > How can anyone believe that light is always measured to arrive at c by all observers regardless of their velocity toward or away from the light source???? > > > > > > > > Can anyone identify ANY experiments which show that absurd belief to be true? > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4OnBYrbCjY > > > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYt73-EshDI > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdiHmSWI2Ks > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfcG0IRuffA > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=313C1zo9pyE I understand the Doppler effect, Paparios. But I think there is a need to clarify exactly what is happening. Light and radio pulses consist of PHOTONS, not waves. That means that "frequency" has a different meaning when counting photons versus counting pulses. Plus, THE EMITTER will measure light and radio pulses as traveling at a different rate than a receiver. It is important to understand that motion is NOT reciprocal when there is a moving emitter and moving receiver involved. I'll watch the videos to see if they say anything worth discussing, but if you have a point to make, you should make it in words, not by providing a link that requires me to figure out what point you are trying to make. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jgreenfield97@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-09 23:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <81bd2336-4dd0-4609-aa58-19bedb7b8b72@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455135 |
On Monday, April 9, 2018 at 1:53:39 AM UTC+9:30, Ed Lake wrote: > On Saturday, April 7, 2018 at 7:13:02 PM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > El sábado, 7 de abril de 2018, 21:06:49 (UTC-3), Paparios escribió: > > > El sábado, 7 de abril de 2018, 20:57:02 (UTC-3), Paparios escribió: > > > > El sábado, 7 de abril de 2018, 18:06:50 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > > > The 4th dumbest belief in physics is “The speed of light is always measured to be the same by the emitter and all outside observers, regardless of their own velocity.” Source: http://oldguynewissues.blogspot.com/2018/02/the-10-dumbest-ideas-in-physics.html > > > > > > > > > > At this link http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/sr.html we can see that Ohio State University teaches the same absurd version of Einstein’s Second Postulate that most universities teach: > > > > > > > > > > “The speed of light in a vacuum is the same for all observers, regardless of their motion relative to the source.” > > > > > > > > > > Yet, anyone can demonstrate BY EXPERIMENT that that is NOT TRUE. All you need to understand is how a police radar gun is used to catch speeders. > > > > > > > > > > 1. Radio pulses are emitted from the radar gun at 1.5 Ghz, which is 1.5 BILLION evenly spaced pulses per second. Each pulse travels at c, or 299,799,458 meters per second. > > > > > > > > > > 2. If the pulses hit a STATIONARY car, the car will be hit by 1.5 billion pulses per second. The surface of the car will reflect back the pulses at 1.5 billion per second. > > > > > > > > > > 3. If the pulses hit an oncoming car traveling at 100 mph, that car will encounter the radio pulses arriving at c+v, where v is the speed of the car. The car will also be hit by 1,500,000,150 pulses per second. > > > > > > > > > > 4. The surface of the car will bounce the pulses back at c, but at that higher pulse rate of 1,500,000,150 pulses per second. > > > > > > > > > > 5. When the returned pulses reach the radar gun, the gun will subtract the emitted rate of 1,500,000,000 per second from the return rate of 1,500,000,150 pulses per second and will calculate the difference to be 150 Hz. That computes to 100 mph as the speed for the oncoming car. > > > > > > > > > > (If you have such a radar gun, you can also do as some do at baseball games and measure the speed of the baseballs thrown by the pitcher. https://www.fangraphs.com/tht/the-physics-of-radar-guns/ ) > > > > > > > > > > So, the radar gun emits the 1.5 Ghz pulses at c, but the car undeniably encounters the pulses at c+v, where v is the car’s speed We know this because the car encounters the pulses at 1.500000150 Ghz. Is there any other way to explain the difference? > > > > > > > > > > The fact that light is measured by moving observers to arrive at c+ or –v can be demonstrated by any experiment where evenly spaced light or radio pulses can be counted. > > > > > > > > > > Pulsars emit evenly spaced light pulses which arrive at the earth at c+v when the earth is moving toward the pulsar during its orbit around the sun, and the light pulses arrive at c-v when the earth is moving away from the pulsar. > > > > > > > > > > In 1887, Vogel and Scheiner measured the same thing with regular stars along the ecliptic, using the Doppler effect to determine that when the earth is moving toward the star the light from the star arrives at c+v, and it arrives at c-v when the earth is moving away from the star. > > > > > > > > > > How can anyone believe that light is always measured to arrive at c by all observers regardless of their velocity toward or away from the light source???? > > > > > > > > > > Can anyone identify ANY experiments which show that absurd belief to be true? > > > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4OnBYrbCjY > > > > > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYt73-EshDI > > > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdiHmSWI2Ks > > > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfcG0IRuffA > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=313C1zo9pyE > > I understand the Doppler effect, Paparios. But I think there is a need to clarify exactly what is happening. Light and radio pulses consist of PHOTONS, not waves. That means that "frequency" has a different meaning when counting photons versus counting pulses. Plus, THE EMITTER will measure light and radio pulses as traveling at a different rate than a receiver. It is important to understand that motion is NOT reciprocal when there is a moving emitter and moving receiver involved. > > I'll watch the videos to see if they say anything worth discussing, but if you have a point to make, you should make it in words, not by providing a link that requires me to figure out what point you are trying to make. > > Ed The police radar gun explanation of (c+/-v)is fully backed by the fact that those aircraft with the radar pod need to look sideways at the target, when establishing the air (or ground) speed of said target. Jim G
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-10 09:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fea3aa24-a431-464b-9e2f-dec08fecb300@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455392 |
On Tuesday, April 10, 2018 at 1:37:16 AM UTC-5, jgreen...@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, April 9, 2018 at 1:53:39 AM UTC+9:30, Ed Lake wrote: > > On Saturday, April 7, 2018 at 7:13:02 PM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > > El sábado, 7 de abril de 2018, 21:06:49 (UTC-3), Paparios escribió: > > > > El sábado, 7 de abril de 2018, 20:57:02 (UTC-3), Paparios escribió: > > > > > El sábado, 7 de abril de 2018, 18:06:50 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > > > > The 4th dumbest belief in physics is “The speed of light is always measured to be the same by the emitter and all outside observers, regardless of their own velocity.” Source: http://oldguynewissues.blogspot.com/2018/02/the-10-dumbest-ideas-in-physics.html > > > > > > > > > > > > At this link http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/sr.html we can see that Ohio State University teaches the same absurd version of Einstein’s Second Postulate that most universities teach: > > > > > > > > > > > > “The speed of light in a vacuum is the same for all observers, regardless of their motion relative to the source.” > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet, anyone can demonstrate BY EXPERIMENT that that is NOT TRUE. All you need to understand is how a police radar gun is used to catch speeders. > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Radio pulses are emitted from the radar gun at 1.5 Ghz, which is 1.5 BILLION evenly spaced pulses per second. Each pulse travels at c, or 299,799,458 meters per second. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. If the pulses hit a STATIONARY car, the car will be hit by 1.5 billion pulses per second. The surface of the car will reflect back the pulses at 1.5 billion per second. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. If the pulses hit an oncoming car traveling at 100 mph, that car will encounter the radio pulses arriving at c+v, where v is the speed of the car. The car will also be hit by 1,500,000,150 pulses per second. > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. The surface of the car will bounce the pulses back at c, but at that higher pulse rate of 1,500,000,150 pulses per second. > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. When the returned pulses reach the radar gun, the gun will subtract the emitted rate of 1,500,000,000 per second from the return rate of 1,500,000,150 pulses per second and will calculate the difference to be 150 Hz. That computes to 100 mph as the speed for the oncoming car. > > > > > > > > > > > > (If you have such a radar gun, you can also do as some do at baseball games and measure the speed of the baseballs thrown by the pitcher. https://www.fangraphs.com/tht/the-physics-of-radar-guns/ ) > > > > > > > > > > > > So, the radar gun emits the 1.5 Ghz pulses at c, but the car undeniably encounters the pulses at c+v, where v is the car’s speed We know this because the car encounters the pulses at 1.500000150 Ghz. Is there any other way to explain the difference? > > > > > > > > > > > > The fact that light is measured by moving observers to arrive at c+ or –v can be demonstrated by any experiment where evenly spaced light or radio pulses can be counted. > > > > > > > > > > > > Pulsars emit evenly spaced light pulses which arrive at the earth at c+v when the earth is moving toward the pulsar during its orbit around the sun, and the light pulses arrive at c-v when the earth is moving away from the pulsar. > > > > > > > > > > > > In 1887, Vogel and Scheiner measured the same thing with regular stars along the ecliptic, using the Doppler effect to determine that when the earth is moving toward the star the light from the star arrives at c+v, and it arrives at c-v when the earth is moving away from the star. > > > > > > > > > > > > How can anyone believe that light is always measured to arrive at c by all observers regardless of their velocity toward or away from the light source???? > > > > > > > > > > > > Can anyone identify ANY experiments which show that absurd belief to be true? > > > > > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4OnBYrbCjY > > > > > > > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYt73-EshDI > > > > > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdiHmSWI2Ks > > > > > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfcG0IRuffA > > > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=313C1zo9pyE > > > > I understand the Doppler effect, Paparios. But I think there is a need to clarify exactly what is happening. Light and radio pulses consist of PHOTONS, not waves. That means that "frequency" has a different meaning when counting photons versus counting pulses. Plus, THE EMITTER will measure light and radio pulses as traveling at a different rate than a receiver. It is important to understand that motion is NOT reciprocal when there is a moving emitter and moving receiver involved. > > > > I'll watch the videos to see if they say anything worth discussing, but if you have a point to make, you should make it in words, not by providing a link that requires me to figure out what point you are trying to make. > > > > Ed > > The police radar gun explanation of (c+/-v)is fully backed by the fact that those aircraft with the radar pod need to look sideways at the target, when establishing the air (or ground) speed of said target. > Jim G You need to clarify what you are talking about. It might also help if you provide a link. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-08 11:02 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <fit81hFd3eaU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #455078 |
On 8/04/2018 7:06 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > Yet, anyone can demonstrate BY EXPERIMENT that that is NOT TRUE. All > you need to understand is how a police radar gun is used to catch > speeders. Your thought experiment contains within it the assumption that light does not move at the same velocity for all observers. So you're assuming what you're trying to prove. Try reformulating the experiment without that assumption, and see how far you get. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-07 22:46 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <DofyC.10382$rz2.9311@fx08.iad> |
| In reply to | #455097 |
On 4/7/2018 9:02 PM, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 8/04/2018 7:06 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > >> Yet, anyone can demonstrate BY EXPERIMENT that that is NOT TRUE. All >> you need to understand is how a police radar gun is used to catch >> speeders. > > Your thought experiment contains within it the assumption that light > does not move at the same velocity for all observers. So you're assuming > what you're trying to prove. > > Try reformulating the experiment without that assumption, and see how > far you get. > > Sylvia. Or he might try reformulating his radar gun explanation the way it really works instead of his "kensi" level journalist understanding.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-08 09:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <208369b8-d24a-4229-b609-47977eb88c0e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455100 |
On Saturday, April 7, 2018 at 9:47:01 PM UTC-5, benj wrote: > On 4/7/2018 9:02 PM, Sylvia Else wrote: > > On 8/04/2018 7:06 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > > > >> Yet, anyone can demonstrate BY EXPERIMENT that that is NOT TRUE. All > >> you need to understand is how a police radar gun is used to catch > >> speeders. > > > > Your thought experiment contains within it the assumption that light > > does not move at the same velocity for all observers. So you're assuming > > what you're trying to prove. > > > > Try reformulating the experiment without that assumption, and see how > > far you get. > > > > Sylvia. > > Or he might try reformulating his radar gun explanation the way it > really works instead of his "kensi" level journalist understanding. Why don't you explain how it really works? Ah, yes, of course. Mathematician can only discuss mathematics, they cannot explain how ANYTHING really works. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-08 09:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0e6f7d8d-f737-4a40-84fe-cde9eb55216a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455138 |
EdTard prophesied Why don't you explain how it really works? Ah, yes, of course. Mathematician can only discuss mathematics, they cannot explain how ANYTHING really works. Ed Everyone has done so repeatedly But you are a dog that always returns to eating it’s comit Pearls before Swine ..........
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-07 22:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <70c03229-659b-485b-9541-2b336d69e05e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455097 |
On Sunday, 8 April 2018 03:02:44 UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 8/04/2018 7:06 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > > > Yet, anyone can demonstrate BY EXPERIMENT that that is NOT TRUE. All > > you need to understand is how a police radar gun is used to catch > > speeders. > > Your thought experiment contains within it the assumption that light > does not move at the same velocity for all observers. So you're assuming > what you're trying to prove. So You are.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-08 09:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <cd1c8691-b93d-4fa5-aa90-669364d36fcf@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455097 |
On Saturday, April 7, 2018 at 8:02:44 PM UTC-5, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 8/04/2018 7:06 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > > > Yet, anyone can demonstrate BY EXPERIMENT that that is NOT TRUE. All > > you need to understand is how a police radar gun is used to catch > > speeders. > > Your thought experiment contains within it the assumption that light > does not move at the same velocity for all observers. So you're assuming > what you're trying to prove. > > Try reformulating the experiment without that assumption, and see how > far you get. > > Sylvia. If I am stationary and shoot pulses toward and oncoming baseball, and those pulses come back showing the baseball is traveling toward me at 60 mph, what assumption am I making? That the earth is not moving under me at 60 mph away from a stationary ball that is inexplicably hovering motionless in the air? Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-08 09:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <01f69f35-ddfc-4e93-804d-4180107758f1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455136 |
Sylvia Else wrote On 8/04/2018 7:06 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > Yet, anyone can demonstrate BY EXPERIMENT that that is NOT TRUE. All > you need to understand is how a police radar gun is used to catch > speeders. Your thought experiment contains within it the assumption that light does not move at the same velocity for all observers. So you're assuming what you're trying to prove. And ..... What you are implying without knowing it is.... the speed of light is random like a bunch of individual Bullets flying around at different velocities. This would fog out all the stars. We would would only be able to see clearly for a very shot distance & the sun would be just a foggy glow from a general direction. And Causality itself would have no meaning. Reality would not exist You never get beyond using Newton’s Second Law ..... for EVERYTHING
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-09 12:13 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <fj00hhF15jjU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #455136 |
On 9/04/2018 2:28 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > On Saturday, April 7, 2018 at 8:02:44 PM UTC-5, Sylvia Else wrote: >> On 8/04/2018 7:06 AM, Ed Lake wrote: >> >>> Yet, anyone can demonstrate BY EXPERIMENT that that is NOT TRUE. >>> All you need to understand is how a police radar gun is used to >>> catch speeders. >> >> Your thought experiment contains within it the assumption that >> light does not move at the same velocity for all observers. So >> you're assuming what you're trying to prove. >> >> Try reformulating the experiment without that assumption, and see >> how far you get. >> >> Sylvia. > > If I am stationary and shoot pulses toward and oncoming baseball, and > those pulses come back showing the baseball is traveling toward me at > 60 mph, what assumption am I making? That the earth is not moving > under me at 60 mph away from a stationary ball that is inexplicably > hovering motionless in the air? That's fine as far as it goes, but your extrapolation to what the baseball sees requires assumptions about the speed of light relative to the baseball. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-09 07:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <eeac929d-0095-4abe-ac2b-64a6ede34704@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455204 |
On Sunday, April 8, 2018 at 9:13:07 PM UTC-5, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 9/04/2018 2:28 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > > On Saturday, April 7, 2018 at 8:02:44 PM UTC-5, Sylvia Else wrote: > >> On 8/04/2018 7:06 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > >> > >>> Yet, anyone can demonstrate BY EXPERIMENT that that is NOT TRUE. > >>> All you need to understand is how a police radar gun is used to > >>> catch speeders. > >> > >> Your thought experiment contains within it the assumption that > >> light does not move at the same velocity for all observers. So > >> you're assuming what you're trying to prove. > >> > >> Try reformulating the experiment without that assumption, and see > >> how far you get. > >> > >> Sylvia. > > > > If I am stationary and shoot pulses toward and oncoming baseball, and > > those pulses come back showing the baseball is traveling toward me at > > 60 mph, what assumption am I making? That the earth is not moving > > under me at 60 mph away from a stationary ball that is inexplicably > > hovering motionless in the air? > > That's fine as far as it goes, but your extrapolation to what the > baseball sees requires assumptions about the speed of light relative to > the baseball. > > Sylvia. Okay, but if you work things out logically, the solution isn't really an "assumption," it's a "conclusion." Then please answer this question: The radar gun emits pulses at a frequency of 1,500,000,000 Hz. The pulses that come back from the speeding car are at a frequency of 1,500,000,150 Hz. The baseball problem is similar, except that the pulses that come back from the baseball are at a frequency of say 1,500,000,120 Hz. The question: What do you conclude PHYSICALLY happened to cause the pulses to return at a higher frequency than the frequency at which they were emitted? Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-09 07:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f99d0744-a0ab-4005-bcd7-f11c0b9c8d25@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455246 |
Eduardo Del Lago prophesied The question: What do you conclude PHYSICALLY happened to cause the pulses to return at a higher frequency than the frequency at which they were emitted? It’s Speed relative to the MEDIUM.... http://vixra.org/pdf/1804.0120v1.pdf (planck length)/((2.99792458e-36 m)) / phi^(7/2) = 1.00051886735 Planck Length = 1.6153902e-35 2 * 5^2 * 7 * 23 * 73 * 293339 / 54870469331 = pi ....... Fractal https://goo.gl/KPwJJr 2 * 7 * 73 * 293339 = the speed of light ...... Fractal https://goo.gl/8xaFdZ (67 log(10))/log(299792458/6.52477625 ^(1/8)) = 8 (67 log(10))*log(299792458/6.52477625 ^(1/8)) = e^8 = 2975.0275772484 e^8 = 2980.957987041 https://goo.gl/y4MNe3 6.52477625 = Planck Momentum ( 2 * 5^2 * 7 * 23 * 73 * 293339 / 54870469331)*3^3/13 = 6.52484628056 1/(hbar*planck length*(6.52799351 kg m/s)*1e67)/2.99792458^2 = 1 1 / ((hbar * planck length * (6.52799351 ((kg m) / s)) * 8.98755178737e67)^0.5) = 1 m- 2 kg- 1 s (2 * 5)^67 = Phi Golden Triangle
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-09 12:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c09348ef-bc2d-4b6b-9f6a-8f322d3bd056@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455246 |
El lunes, 9 de abril de 2018, 11:37:30 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > The question: What do you conclude PHYSICALLY happened to cause the pulses to return at a higher frequency than the frequency at which they were emitted? > > Ed You seriously have some problems in understanding basic physics: 1) The laser gun emits light pulses at a certain rate (pulses per second) which depart from the gun at a speed very close to c (we will assume the pulse propagation speed is c). The first laser pulse reaches the car at a certain location (say at 500 meters from the gun) and some of the photons of the pulse are reflected back to the laser gun. Notice that, when the second pulse reaches the car, the car has already moved closer to the gun location (now it is at 470 meters from the gun). Therefore, the reflected pulse rate, logically, increases with respect to the receiving rate. 2)This increase on the frequency of the reflected pulses is the direct result of the "closing speed" between the car and the laser gun, which is c+v. This closing speed is not the speed of light, nor the speed of the car and nor the speed of the laser gun. The light pulses are moving at c before reaching the car and still moving at c after being reflected by the car, but the frequency of the pulses has now increased (this is the Doppler effect which are clearly shown in the provided videos and where professor Lewin makes a very good effort in showing how this effect occurs). 3) It is obvious that neither the movement of the laser gun nor the movement of the car, can have any effect on the value of the speed of the ligth pulses (bunch of photons) which is c at either case.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gaston Levell <jno@itwjwg.tn> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-09 20:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pagh2d$1fvb$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #455288 |
Paparios wrote: > 1) The laser gun emits light pulses at a certain rate (pulses per > second) which depart from the gun at a speed very close to c (we will > assume the pulse propagation speed is c). 1st error. You don't have to assume. Laws of Nature are not assumptions.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-09 14:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9df66621-4ebc-4265-b4bc-50764a1dd6d0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455288 |
On Monday, April 9, 2018 at 3:00:00 PM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > El lunes, 9 de abril de 2018, 11:37:30 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > > > The question: What do you conclude PHYSICALLY happened to cause the pulses to return at a higher frequency than the frequency at which they were emitted? > > > > Ed > > You seriously have some problems in understanding basic physics: > > 1) The laser gun emits light pulses at a certain rate (pulses per second) which > depart from the gun at a speed very close to c (we will assume the pulse > propagation speed is c). The first laser pulse reaches the car at a certain > location (say at 500 meters from the gun) and some of the photons of the pulse > are reflected back to the laser gun. Notice that, when the second pulse reaches > the car, the car has already moved closer to the gun location (now it is at 470 > meters from the gun). Therefore, the reflected pulse rate, logically, increases with respect to the receiving rate. > > 2)This increase on the frequency of the reflected pulses is the direct result of > the "closing speed" between the car and the laser gun, which is c+v. This > closing speed is not the speed of light, nor the speed of the car and nor the > speed of the laser gun. The light pulses are moving at c before reaching the car > and still moving at c after being reflected by the car, but the frequency of the > pulses has now increased (this is the Doppler effect which are clearly shown in > the provided videos and where professor Lewin makes a very good effort in > showing how this effect occurs). > > 3) It is obvious that neither the movement of the laser gun nor the movement of > the car, can have any effect on the value of the speed of the ligth pulses > (bunch of photons) which is c at either case. Okay. I should have constructed a better question where the WAVELENGTH of light photons is used to determine speed of arrival, not the frequency of light pulses. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-10 12:29 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <fj2lt5FjhaeU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #455298 |
On 10/04/2018 7:20 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > On Monday, April 9, 2018 at 3:00:00 PM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: >> El lunes, 9 de abril de 2018, 11:37:30 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: >> >>> >>> The question: What do you conclude PHYSICALLY happened to cause the pulses to return at a higher frequency than the frequency at which they were emitted? >>> >>> Ed >> >> You seriously have some problems in understanding basic physics: >> >> 1) The laser gun emits light pulses at a certain rate (pulses per second) which >> depart from the gun at a speed very close to c (we will assume the pulse >> propagation speed is c). The first laser pulse reaches the car at a certain >> location (say at 500 meters from the gun) and some of the photons of the pulse >> are reflected back to the laser gun. Notice that, when the second pulse reaches >> the car, the car has already moved closer to the gun location (now it is at 470 >> meters from the gun). Therefore, the reflected pulse rate, logically, increases with respect to the receiving rate. >> >> 2)This increase on the frequency of the reflected pulses is the direct result of >> the "closing speed" between the car and the laser gun, which is c+v. This >> closing speed is not the speed of light, nor the speed of the car and nor the >> speed of the laser gun. The light pulses are moving at c before reaching the car >> and still moving at c after being reflected by the car, but the frequency of the >> pulses has now increased (this is the Doppler effect which are clearly shown in >> the provided videos and where professor Lewin makes a very good effort in >> showing how this effect occurs). >> >> 3) It is obvious that neither the movement of the laser gun nor the movement of >> the car, can have any effect on the value of the speed of the ligth pulses >> (bunch of photons) which is c at either case. > > Okay. I should have constructed a better question where the WAVELENGTH of light photons is used to determine speed of arrival, not the frequency of light pulses. > > Ed > OK. So we'll wait until you've done that. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 22 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 22 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web