Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #613164 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2023-06-17 21:32 -0700 |
| Last post | 2023-09-07 16:51 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 317 — 40 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-17 21:32 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-18 10:44 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-18 10:56 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-18 11:03 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-18 13:10 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-18 15:11 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-06-19 09:31 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-19 07:45 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-19 07:51 -0700
Cranks Richard Hertz, Laurence Clark and Pat Dolan keep on slobbering "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-06-19 07:56 -0700
Re: Cranks Richard Hertz, Laurence Clark and Pat Dolan keep on slobbering Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-19 08:01 -0700
Re: Cranks Richard Hertz, Laurence Clark and Pat Dolan keep on slobbering "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-06-19 11:55 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-06-19 10:24 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-19 10:53 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-06-19 07:52 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-20 14:48 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-20 15:24 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-20 15:51 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-20 16:29 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-06-20 20:05 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-20 18:59 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-20 20:19 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-20 21:08 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-20 21:11 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-06-21 06:23 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-06-21 17:41 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-21 10:59 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-06-21 13:39 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-06-22 11:04 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-06-22 11:04 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-06-22 02:07 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-06-21 12:09 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-21 10:53 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-06-22 11:04 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-22 11:06 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-06-23 11:49 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-23 08:37 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-06-23 11:59 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-23 10:38 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-06-23 13:28 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Chaston Kuipers <rsoc@scusseee.ps> - 2023-06-23 21:42 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-06-24 10:46 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-06-24 10:46 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-24 08:05 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-24 08:20 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-24 09:37 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-24 10:30 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-24 10:54 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-24 11:04 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-24 11:07 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-24 11:21 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-24 11:28 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-24 13:44 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-25 13:48 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-06-26 11:48 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-26 07:22 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-26 10:15 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-26 11:06 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-26 11:31 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-26 12:45 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-06-26 22:53 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-26 14:58 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-24 11:20 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-24 11:23 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-23 08:44 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-21 11:17 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-21 11:22 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-21 11:22 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-21 11:26 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-21 11:39 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2023-06-20 18:33 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-20 15:31 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-21 19:59 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-23 07:07 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-06-23 16:47 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-23 08:51 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-06-23 13:13 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Epifanio Schoonenburg <urou@sucinora.br> - 2023-06-23 17:28 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-06-23 10:35 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Reginal Langbroek <gorl@gblarllb.ra> - 2023-06-23 17:40 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-23 10:43 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-23 12:01 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-23 12:58 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-23 13:02 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-06-23 21:28 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-23 15:49 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-23 16:35 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-23 17:55 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-23 16:43 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-23 16:46 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-27 09:51 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-27 10:55 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-27 12:50 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-06-27 13:58 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-27 12:32 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-06-27 21:55 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-27 13:41 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-06-27 23:30 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-27 21:14 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-06-28 13:23 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-28 07:07 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-28 10:20 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-06-28 23:31 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-28 15:03 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-06-29 12:48 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-29 06:29 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-29 11:56 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-09-08 12:47 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-09-08 04:36 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-09-08 06:12 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-09-08 16:11 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-09-08 08:46 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-09-08 20:28 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-09-09 11:28 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-06-29 21:21 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-09-07 21:57 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-09-07 22:52 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-09-08 20:28 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-09-07 23:03 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-09-08 20:28 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-28 15:36 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-06-29 12:48 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-06-29 12:08 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-06-29 13:31 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-29 13:23 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-06-29 16:44 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-29 15:23 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-06-29 19:40 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-29 19:12 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-06-29 23:37 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-30 16:19 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-06-30 19:52 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-30 20:11 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-06-30 22:47 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-01 09:59 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-01 13:07 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-01 13:39 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-01 13:43 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-01 15:57 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-07-01 14:00 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-01 18:02 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-01 15:04 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-01 18:08 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-01 16:17 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-01 19:35 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-01 16:18 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-01 16:40 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-01 19:40 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-01 20:14 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-01 21:11 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-02 00:46 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-01 22:13 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-02 07:27 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-02 12:07 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-02 09:34 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-07-02 19:06 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-02 10:09 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-07-03 01:47 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-02 20:57 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-02 11:13 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-02 13:33 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-02 12:56 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-02 12:57 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-02 23:17 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-03 11:27 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-02 01:26 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-02 11:12 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-02 13:04 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-02 13:53 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-02 01:15 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-01 19:39 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Smith Can <aanh@nnnttcth.ia> - 2023-07-01 22:10 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-07-01 13:26 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Hillary Oorschot <lara@aocolror.ya> - 2023-06-29 21:29 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-06-29 17:04 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Emanuele Heel <manl@eeeeleee.ll> - 2023-06-29 22:31 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's FromTheRafters <FTR@nomail.afraid.org> - 2023-06-29 20:30 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-06-29 19:53 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-06-29 19:46 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's David Agteren <ainv@gvdideig.aa> - 2023-06-30 09:18 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-06-30 09:17 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Woodrow Richard <rwao@rwwrrooo.rw> - 2023-07-01 11:43 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Demonte Achthoven <oado@ennmoaea.ch> - 2023-06-28 16:42 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Braxton Amstel <txmt@asememtm.ra> - 2023-06-28 16:50 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Bob Rumpade <peab@orbmarer.ou> - 2023-06-28 23:04 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-06-28 13:23 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2023-06-28 15:09 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-28 17:47 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-28 18:46 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-28 20:29 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-28 21:24 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-06-29 12:48 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-29 05:37 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-28 21:21 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-06-29 05:53 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-29 07:02 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-06-29 12:14 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-29 12:17 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-06-29 14:03 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-29 15:09 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-06-29 15:42 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-29 15:51 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-06-29 17:33 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-06-30 13:27 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-30 14:16 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-06-30 19:44 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-06-30 21:08 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-06-30 21:49 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-06-30 00:25 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's Peter-John Maes <a-he@t-jtrjsm.ee> - 2023-06-30 11:13 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-06-30 00:23 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-06-30 11:45 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-06-30 04:13 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-07-01 13:26 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-03 14:37 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-03 19:30 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-03 19:56 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-07 11:34 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-07 11:13 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Keaton Konstantatos <ktnn@tksatooa.ta> - 2023-07-07 19:16 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-07-08 11:40 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 02:59 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-08 10:23 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 10:24 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-09 13:20 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-09 13:19 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-10 13:28 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-10 13:39 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-10 18:45 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-10 17:43 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-10 20:52 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-10 19:17 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-10 19:26 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-10 19:36 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-11 11:58 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-11 03:30 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-11 06:40 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-12 15:02 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-12 18:14 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-12 16:29 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-12 21:30 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-07-12 19:08 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-12 19:29 -0700
Kapo Imbecile Richard Hertz gets to eat shit "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-07-13 18:48 -0700
Re: Kapo Imbecile Richard Hertz gets to eat shit Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-13 20:48 -0700
Re: Kapo Imbecile Richard Hertz gets to eat shit "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-07-14 08:29 -0700
Re: Kapo Imbecile Richard Hertz gets to eat shit Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-14 08:38 -0700
Re: Kapo Imbecile Richard Hertz gets to eat shit "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-07-14 08:52 -0700
Re: Kapo Imbecile Richard Hertz gets to eat shit Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-14 09:47 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-12 21:36 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-10 23:14 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-10 20:43 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Barton Demakis <erom@akadikmr.no> - 2023-07-11 09:24 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Pasquale Nomikos <osai@qoauqsqm.ka> - 2023-07-08 20:47 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-07-09 12:35 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 09:29 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-08 10:11 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 10:38 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 10:40 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-08 10:44 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 12:22 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-08 13:00 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 13:32 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-08 13:34 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 13:40 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-08 11:27 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 12:03 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 12:20 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-08 12:56 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 13:39 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-08 13:47 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 14:20 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 22:24 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-09 11:01 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-09 14:10 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-09 11:16 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-09 12:08 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-09 14:25 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-09 18:43 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-09 16:07 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-09 16:18 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Lee Kanavos <alke@avvvvekn.ll> - 2023-07-09 19:21 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-09 13:21 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-09 19:54 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-09 21:25 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-09 21:58 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-10 13:31 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-10 10:37 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Jeiker Paraskos <okas@ppkiesre.rr> - 2023-07-10 22:20 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-10 16:30 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-10 23:27 -0400
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Eugene Antimisiaris <anse@neanenae.ir> - 2023-07-11 09:07 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Wyouman Petrakis <iawp@eyapkrsk.or> - 2023-07-10 11:39 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 14:34 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 15:05 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-07-08 17:46 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-09 11:12 +0200
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Fraga Kalakos <akol@fgkkakar.gk> - 2023-07-09 15:11 +0000
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-08 19:00 -0500
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 17:06 -0700
Crank Richard Hertz refuses to concede, "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-07-08 06:16 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-18 08:57 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-18 09:05 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-18 11:21 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-18 13:05 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-18 13:09 -0700
Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-18 16:44 -0700
Crank Richard Hertz digs up some fellow crank "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-07-18 16:56 -0700
Re: Crank Richard Hertz digs up some fellow crank Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-18 18:43 -0700
Re: Crank Richard Hertz digs up some fellow crank Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-07-18 19:30 -0700
Re: Crank Richard Hertz digs up some fellow crank "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-07-18 19:46 -0700
Re: Crank Richard Hertz digs up some fellow crank Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-18 20:37 -0700
Re: Crank Richard Hertz digs up some fellow crank Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-18 21:30 -0700
Re: Crank Richard Hertz digs up some fellow crank Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-09-07 14:06 -0700
Re: Crank Richard Hertz digs up some fellow crank Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-09-07 16:20 -0700
Re: Crank Richard Hertz digs up some fellow crank Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-09-07 16:54 -0700
Re: Crank Richard Hertz digs up some fellow crank Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-09-07 16:51 -0700
Page 13 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 Next page →
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-12 21:30 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <kh95ttF7is3U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #615103 |
On 7/12/2023 6:29 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 4:14:48 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: >> On 7/12/2023 5:02 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: >> <...> >>> Here's another corrective for getting a more accurate measure (although the author is a relativist): "Not relying on the Newton gravitational constant gives more accurate >>> gravitational predictions" by Espen Gaarder Haug. The constant was added in early in the 19th century to fine tune it. >> You really should stick to your strong suit, the history of >> science. You're not much good in discussing its future. > I suppose the one thing a consultant would understand is the value of unsolicited advice. Jealousy of my success really gets you knickers in a twist? That wasn't advice, fool. But then the truth hurts, You know, one of the things you and uncle al have(had) in common is a smart mouth devoid of anything of actual value. OTOH at least he amused some of the readers. You don't.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-12 19:08 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <EK6cnVKsSaQF3TL5nZ2dnZfqlJ9j4p2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #615102 |
On 7/12/23 6:14 PM, whodat wrote: > On 7/12/2023 5:02 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: >> Here's another corrective for getting a more accurate measure >> (although the author is a relativist): "Not relying on the Newton >> gravitational constant gives more accurate gravitational >> predictions" by Espen Gaarder Haug. The constant was added in >> early in the 19th century to fine tune it. > > You really should stick to your strong suit, the history of science. > You're not much good in discussing its future. His "history" is wrong, too. Newton's gravitational constant was introduced by him in the mid-1700s, not "early in the 19th century"; it is not "fine tuning" at all. Crossen is not much good in discussing anything about physics. [I have no idea what Haug was trying to say.] Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-12 19:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a1a048bf-7523-4448-b2a5-31495714be72n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #615110 |
On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 9:09:01 PM UTC-3, Tom Roberts wrote: <snip> > His "history" is wrong, too. Newton's gravitational constant was > introduced by him in the mid-1700s, not "early in the 19th century"; it > is not "fine tuning" at all. Crossen is not much good in discussing > anything about physics. > > [I have no idea what Haug was trying to say.] > > Tom Roberts In the "54 pages lost Einstein-Besso manuscript" from 1913/1914, which was BURIED IN SHAME by both, and that only resurfaced 45 years after Besso's death, to be put in public auction, both "geniuses" used several values of the Newton's gravitational constant, all of them by "trial and error" calculations of the gravitational pull of planets on Mercury's orbit: https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol4-doc/382 Volume 4: The Swiss Years: Writings 1912-1914 Page 413} NOTE 119: The value for the Newtonian gravitational constant K is given in various forms in the manuscript: 1) 1/38622 (p. 26) 2) 9.6 • 10E-8 [eq. 184] on [p. 30] 3) 1/(1.5 • 10E7) [p. 35] 4) 0.7 • 10E-6 ([eq. 214] on [p. 35]) 5) 1/(3.6 • 10E3)^2 ([eq. 234] on [p. 37]) 6) 1/1.49 • 10E7 (p. 40) 7) 7 • 10E-7 ([p. 42] and [p. 49]) 8) 6.7 • 10E-8 m^3/g/s^2 (Doc. 17, p. 1259) Eight different values in 54 pages. It seems that they also wanted to derive G (k) by calculations, but they were too inept. Not for nothing Einstein never spoke about those months of feverish and idiotic calculations. Better plagiarize Gerber two years later. What did you say about "fine tuning" G?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-13 18:48 -0700 |
| Subject | Kapo Imbecile Richard Hertz gets to eat shit |
| Message-ID | <86752def-1438-43a1-b66b-411176f9a2e1n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #615117 |
On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 7:29:15 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > > https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol4-doc/382 > > Volume 4: The Swiss Years: Writings 1912-1914 Page 413} > > NOTE 119: The value for the Newtonian gravitational constant K is given in various forms in the manuscript: > > 1) 1/38622 (p. 26) > 2) 9.6 • 10E-8 [eq. 184] on [p. 30] > 3) 1/(1.5 • 10E7) [p. 35] > 4) 0.7 • 10E-6 ([eq. 214] on [p. 35]) > 5) 1/(3.6 • 10E3)^2 ([eq. 234] on [p. 37]) > 6) 1/1.49 • 10E7 (p. 40) > 7) 7 • 10E-7 ([p. 42] and [p. 49]) > 8) 6.7 • 10E-8 m^3/g/s^2 (Doc. 17, p. 1259) > > Eight different values in 54 pages. You left out the last sentence, kapo piece of shit: " all these numbers reduce to rounded-off versions of the value 6.7 • 10-8 m^3/gs^2 given, for instance, in Einstein 1913c (Doc. 17), p. 1259 "
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-13 20:48 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Kapo Imbecile Richard Hertz gets to eat shit |
| Message-ID | <ed38ae95-05e5-4cc9-9a5c-c1c787bbafc5n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #615203 |
On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 10:48:53 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote: > On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 7:29:15 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > > > > > https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol4-doc/382 > > > > Volume 4: The Swiss Years: Writings 1912-1914 Page 413} > > > > NOTE 119: The value for the Newtonian gravitational constant K is given in various forms in the manuscript: > > > > 1) 1/38622 (p. 26) > > 2) 9.6 • 10E-8 [eq. 184] on [p. 30] > > 3) 1/(1.5 • 10E7) [p. 35] > > 4) 0.7 • 10E-6 ([eq. 214] on [p. 35]) > > 5) 1/(3.6 • 10E3)^2 ([eq. 234] on [p. 37]) > > 6) 1/1.49 • 10E7 (p. 40) > > 7) 7 • 10E-7 ([p. 42] and [p. 49]) > > 8) 6.7 • 10E-8 m^3/g/s^2 (Doc. 17, p. 1259) > > > > Eight different values in 54 pages. > You left out the last sentence, kapo piece of shit: " all these numbers reduce to rounded-off versions of the value 6.7 • 10-8 m^3/gs^2 given, for instance, in Einstein 1913c (Doc. 17), p. 1259 " The list shows a progression in the manuscript: pages 26, 30, 35, 37, 40 and 49. The 8th. value IS NOT in the manuscript, but in a SEPARATE document. Probably obtained from Freundlich, his astronomer buddy, when Einstein showed him the DISASTERS contained in the shameful manuscript, which is A DISPLAY OF IDIOCY and the scientific ineptitude of Einstein and Besso. If you can't read and understand the context in which the values were used, it is because you are a fucking retarded. ANY BOOK ON SOLAR SYSTEM MECHANICS of that epoch (more than 100), had k(G) in any appendix, with four decimal digits. It seems that the cretin also wanted TO FUDGE k to fit their lame calculations. Why the 54 pages manuscript remained HIDDEN for 79 years, until some Besso's descendants decided TO MONETIZE IT?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-14 08:29 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Kapo Imbecile Richard Hertz gets to eat shit |
| Message-ID | <968a3e4a-ca86-47c3-96cb-ab766ac21253n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #615211 |
On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 8:48:03 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 10:48:53 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote: > > On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 7:29:15 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > > > > > > > > https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol4-doc/382 > > > > > > Volume 4: The Swiss Years: Writings 1912-1914 Page 413} > > > > > > NOTE 119: The value for the Newtonian gravitational constant K is given in various forms in the manuscript: > > > > > > 1) 1/38622 (p. 26) > > > 2) 9.6 • 10E-8 [eq. 184] on [p. 30] > > > 3) 1/(1.5 • 10E7) [p. 35] > > > 4) 0.7 • 10E-6 ([eq. 214] on [p. 35]) > > > 5) 1/(3.6 • 10E3)^2 ([eq. 234] on [p. 37]) > > > 6) 1/1.49 • 10E7 (p. 40) > > > 7) 7 • 10E-7 ([p. 42] and [p. 49]) > > > 8) 6.7 • 10E-8 m^3/g/s^2 (Doc. 17, p. 1259) > > > > > > Eight different values in 54 pages. > > You left out the last sentence, kapo piece of shit: " all these numbers reduce to rounded-off versions of the value 6.7 • 10-8 m^3/gs^2 given, for instance, in Einstein 1913c (Doc. 17), p. 1259 " > The list shows a progression in the manuscript: pages 26, 30, 35, 37, 40 and 49. The 8th. value IS NOT in the manuscript, but in > a SEPARATE document. Dumbestfuck, All the values round off to 6.7 • 10-8 m^3/gs^2. You have been pantsed. gain.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-14 08:38 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Kapo Imbecile Richard Hertz gets to eat shit |
| Message-ID | <9e23423f-5870-43b4-ae6e-9cbba7c26003n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #615255 |
On Friday, July 14, 2023 at 12:29:32 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote: > On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 8:48:03 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > > On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 10:48:53 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote: > > > On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 7:29:15 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol4-doc/382 > > > > > > > > Volume 4: The Swiss Years: Writings 1912-1914 Page 413} > > > > > > > > NOTE 119: The value for the Newtonian gravitational constant K is given in various forms in the manuscript: > > > > > > > > 1) 1/38622 (p. 26) > > > > 2) 9.6 • 10E-8 [eq. 184] on [p. 30] > > > > 3) 1/(1.5 • 10E7) [p. 35] > > > > 4) 0.7 • 10E-6 ([eq. 214] on [p. 35]) > > > > 5) 1/(3.6 • 10E3)^2 ([eq. 234] on [p. 37]) > > > > 6) 1/1.49 • 10E7 (p. 40) > > > > 7) 7 • 10E-7 ([p. 42] and [p. 49]) > > > > 8) 6.7 • 10E-8 m^3/g/s^2 (Doc. 17, p. 1259) > > > > > > > > Eight different values in 54 pages. > > > You left out the last sentence, kapo piece of shit: " all these numbers reduce to rounded-off versions of the value 6.7 • 10-8 m^3/gs^2 given, for instance, in Einstein 1913c (Doc. 17), p. 1259 " > > The list shows a progression in the manuscript: pages 26, 30, 35, 37, 40 and 49. The 8th. value IS NOT in the manuscript, but in > > a SEPARATE document. > Dumbestfuck, > > All the values round off to 6.7 • 10-8 m^3/gs^2. You have been pantsed. gain. Dono, you're my bitch. I like how I make you work by fact-checking my numbers and references, imbecile.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-14 08:52 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Kapo Imbecile Richard Hertz gets to eat shit |
| Message-ID | <e44f44b8-d15f-4476-8335-413251ded3a3n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #615257 |
On Friday, July 14, 2023 at 8:38:57 AM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > On Friday, July 14, 2023 at 12:29:32 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote: > > On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 8:48:03 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > > > On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 10:48:53 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 7:29:15 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol4-doc/382 > > > > > > > > > > Volume 4: The Swiss Years: Writings 1912-1914 Page 413} > > > > > > > > > > NOTE 119: The value for the Newtonian gravitational constant K is given in various forms in the manuscript: > > > > > > > > > > 1) 1/38622 (p. 26) > > > > > 2) 9.6 • 10E-8 [eq. 184] on [p. 30] > > > > > 3) 1/(1.5 • 10E7) [p. 35] > > > > > 4) 0.7 • 10E-6 ([eq. 214] on [p. 35]) > > > > > 5) 1/(3.6 • 10E3)^2 ([eq. 234] on [p. 37]) > > > > > 6) 1/1.49 • 10E7 (p. 40) > > > > > 7) 7 • 10E-7 ([p. 42] and [p. 49]) > > > > > 8) 6.7 • 10E-8 m^3/g/s^2 (Doc. 17, p. 1259) > > > > > > > > > > Eight different values in 54 pages. > > > > You left out the last sentence, kapo piece of shit: " all these numbers reduce to rounded-off versions of the value 6.7 • 10-8 m^3/gs^2 given, for instance, in Einstein 1913c (Doc. 17), p. 1259 " > > > The list shows a progression in the manuscript: pages 26, 30, 35, 37, 40 and 49. The 8th. value IS NOT in the manuscript, but in > > > a SEPARATE document. > > Dumbestfuck, > > > > All the values round off to 6.7 • 10-8 m^3/gs^2. You have been pantsed. gain. > I like how you expose my stupid lies Yup
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-14 09:47 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Kapo Imbecile Richard Hertz gets to eat shit |
| Message-ID | <a40aaa78-6b67-41f9-8597-ca1eecdda16dn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #615259 |
On Friday, 14 July 2023 at 17:52:22 UTC+2, Dono. wrote: > On Friday, July 14, 2023 at 8:38:57 AM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > > I like how you expose my stupid lies No, he didn't. Poor halfbrain Dono is impudently lying, as expected from a relativistic halfbrain.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-12 21:36 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <kh96afF7is3U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #615110 |
On 7/12/2023 7:08 PM, Tom Roberts wrote: > On 7/12/23 6:14 PM, whodat wrote: >> On 7/12/2023 5:02 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: >>> Here's another corrective for getting a more accurate measure >>> (although the author is a relativist): "Not relying on the Newton >>> gravitational constant gives more accurate gravitational predictions" >>> by Espen Gaarder Haug. The constant was added in early in the 19th >>> century to fine tune it. >> >> You really should stick to your strong suit, the history of science. >> You're not much good in discussing its future. > > His "history" is wrong, too. Newton's gravitational constant was > introduced by him in the mid-1700s, not "early in the 19th century"; it > is not "fine tuning" at all. Crossen is not much good in discussing > anything about physics. > > [I have no idea what Haug was trying to say.] > > Tom Roberts You're right of course. But this poster (actually Jane actually _____) is not going to cause any damage being wrong about history, whereas misstatements about the future of science brings us an altogether different set of issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-10 23:14 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <u8ihdv$2qg91$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #614944 |
On 7/10/2023 4:39 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: > On Monday, July 10, 2023 at 2:28:17 PM UTC-3, Volney wrote: >> On 7/9/2023 4:19 PM, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > <snip> > >>>> Jan explicitly stated that general relativity was needed for the extreme >>>> accuracy needed for multiple flybys. GR is not Euclidean math. >>> >>> And Jan explicitly lied. >> No, janitor, Jan told the truth. Jan said GR was necessary for precise multiple flybys and GR is non-Euclidean geometry. > >>> Of course your GR is not not Euclidean math, and it's Euclidean math what is used. > >> Except, as Jan stated, GR is used, so Euclidean geometry isn't being used. No matter how much you rave and spit about it, >> Euclidean geometry isn't being used when GR is used. Too bad for you. > >>> Even idiots like JJ are not stupid enough to apply The Shit for real. They only pretend. >> Except it's NASA which is using GR for its flybys, not JJ. JJ is just trying to correct your misunderstandings. > > Who the fuck Jan is? Sagan, Michio Kaku or Neil DeGrasse ? > > He's a self-entitled NOBODY, and you're an ass-kisser, as it comes to your personality and tastes (you know). I don't know Jan, other than from his postings. On the other hand, it is plainly obvious that Jan knows MUCH more physics than you ever will. In addition, you are a blowhard who loves to pretend you know more than you really do, usually going off into the weeds in the process with some unrelated factoid. > > NASA rejects General Relativity, No, NASA does not "reject" GR. It merely doesn't need the extra accuracy of GR for 99.9 percent of its work, as gravity is too weak and speeds too slow to matter. The extra 0.1% is where extreme precision is needed such as multiple flybys. <snip going off into the weeds again>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-10 20:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <85e79a3f-6975-40c6-9973-404631b13965n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #614967 |
On Tuesday, 11 July 2023 at 05:14:10 UTC+2, Volney wrote: > On 7/10/2023 4:39 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: > > On Monday, July 10, 2023 at 2:28:17 PM UTC-3, Volney wrote: > >> On 7/9/2023 4:19 PM, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > >>>> Jan explicitly stated that general relativity was needed for the extreme > >>>> accuracy needed for multiple flybys. GR is not Euclidean math. > >>> > >>> And Jan explicitly lied. > >> No, janitor, Jan told the truth. Jan said GR was necessary for precise multiple flybys and GR is non-Euclidean geometry. > > > >>> Of course your GR is not not Euclidean math, and it's Euclidean math what is used. > > > >> Except, as Jan stated, GR is used, so Euclidean geometry isn't being used. No matter how much you rave and spit about it, > >> Euclidean geometry isn't being used when GR is used. Too bad for you. > > > >>> Even idiots like JJ are not stupid enough to apply The Shit for real. They only pretend. > >> Except it's NASA which is using GR for its flybys, not JJ. JJ is just trying to correct your misunderstandings. > > > > Who the fuck Jan is? Sagan, Michio Kaku or Neil DeGrasse ? > > > > He's a self-entitled NOBODY, and you're an ass-kisser, as it comes to your personality and tastes (you know). > I don't know Jan, other than from his postings. On the other hand, it is > plainly obvious that Jan knows MUCH more physics than you ever will. In > addition, you are a blowhard who loves to pretend you know more than you > really do, usually going off into the weeds in the process with some > unrelated factoid. > > > > NASA rejects General Relativity, > > No, NASA does not "reject" GR. It merely doesn't need the extra accuracy And do you still believe that 9 192 631 770 ISO idiocy is some "Newton mode"? You're such an amazing idiot, stupid Mike, even considering the standards of your moronic religion.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Barton Demakis <erom@akadikmr.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-11 09:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <u8j74r$101i0$2@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #614967 |
Volney wrote: > I don't know Jan, other than from his postings. On the other hand, it is > plainly obvious that Jan knows MUCH more physics than you ever will. nonsense, he knows shit about physics. Trying to fake it. He don't know the basics introductory level. And no laboratory experience. You have more lab experience than he has, and you are stupid. You poor wankers don't know what a lab is. You take labs from wikipedia. You are a fucking joke. “without our army, the eastern flank [of NATO] could not be defended at all.” I have a question if you please Dmitry. What army? OMG !! Kuleba are you auditioning for a comedian double act with ya bud Zelensky ?? God what a moron NATO is the problem, but the fools can't see it. So he believes that "war is peace" and a full war with Russia will help achieve this. These American puppet leaders brought War to their home, causing destruction, innocent deaths in hundreds of thousands. Now, want to do the same with EU / NATO nations. America support this because, its the EU nations that will burn and make their lives hell and die, not America which is far from the conflict zone. While this loser would be hiding in a nuclear bunker The biggest khazar goy parasite in Europe = Ukraine. Free Gonzalo Lira! https://%72t.com/ru%73%73ia/579509-kuleba-ukraine-nato-argument/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pasquale Nomikos <osai@qoauqsqm.ka> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-08 20:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <u8ci1d$3ra60$2@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #614759 |
Volney wrote: > On 7/8/2023 5:59 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote: >> For innocent children - instead the general shit of the poor idiot >> Einstein those simulations apply good, old Euclidean math. > > No, janitor, if you paid attention to Jan's post, including the part you > snipped, they need to use GR math due to the extreme accuracy required > when doing flybys. two faced c0ckface https://mf.b37mrtl.ru/files/2023.07/l/64a8eea185f54011fd5d6655.jpg Ukraine ‘deserves’ NATO membership – Erdogan https://%72t.com/news/579372-erdogan-ukraine-deserves-nato/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-09 12:35 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1qdlh72.wsu3xn5euahfN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #614759 |
Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> wrote: > On 7/8/2023 5:59 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > On Saturday, 8 July 2023 at 11:40:20 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > >> Did you notice that all of your references are completely dated? > >> Modern numerical integration, taking 'all' bodies in the solar system > >> into account, (including hundreds of asteroids) > >> result in agreement with general relativity > >> at the milliarcsecond/cy level. (yes, -milli-arcseconds, not arcseconds) > > > > > > For innocent children - instead the general > > shit of the poor idiot Einstein those simulations > > apply good, old Euclidean math. > > No, janitor, if you paid attention to Jan's post, including the part you > snipped, they need to use GR math due to the extreme accuracy required > when doing flybys. Yes, and it works both ways. Because you can track those probes with great acccuracy you also know where those planets is to great accuracy. There is real-time feedback on the correctness of the computation. Apart from navigation of probes, accurate computation also has fundamental physics repercussions. Nordvedt's relativisticall correct scalar theory of gravitation was ruled out right-away because it predicts a Mercury advance of -1/6 of the GR value. (it is retrograde instead of advancing) Brans-Dicke's alternative mixed Scalar/GR theory is also ruled out effectively by tracking the Cassini–Huygens mission to Saturn. (it can never be ruled out completely because it has a free parameter) Anyway, there is only a very small margin to improve on GR, because GR fits prediction and observation that accurately. But of course accurate computation in the solar system is also done just because it can be done, Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-08 09:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1257391f-a96b-4dbc-863d-3f775ebd5611n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #614754 |
On Saturday, July 8, 2023 at 6:40:20 AM UTC-3, J. J. Lodder wrote: > Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote: <snip> > > Newtonian N-body calculations of the advance of Mercury's perihelion > > J. V. Narlikar, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bombay, India > > N. C. Rana, Department of Physics, University of Durham, South Road, Durham > > 1984 November 15 > [snip more over-age stuff] > > Did you notice that all of your references are completely dated? > Modern numerical integration, taking 'all' bodies in the solar system into account, (including hundreds of asteroids) > result in agreement with general relativity at the milliarcsecond/cy level. (yes, -milli-arcseconds, not arcseconds) > And not just for Mercury, also for Venus, Earth, and Mars. > > Those computations are directly verified by tracking spacecraft, to kilometer accuracy nowadays. > > As far as navigation in the solar system is concerned, general relativity is 'completed science'. It has turned into engineering. (at JPL for example) > And yes, that accuracy is really needed for making those 'gravity-assist' swings around planets. > The orbital windows for that are quite narrow, especially so when several consecutive swings are needed. > > Summary: You are fighting windmills, I left what you call "outdated reference" on purpose, so your IGNORANCE and LIES can be exhibited. Let's jump 38 years from that paper to September 6, 2022. This is the online HORIZONS Ephemeris system, from NASA JPL, which help to calculate "Approximate Positions of the Planets", in a span of +/- 3,000 years. https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/horizons/manual.html It provides free information to calculate ORBITS using newtonian FORMULAE with SIX Keplerian elements: 1) semi-major axis [au, au/century] 2) eccentricity 3) inclination [degrees, degrees/century] 4) mean longitude [degrees, degrees/century] 5) longitude of perihelion [degrees, degrees/century] 6) longitude of the ascending node [degrees, degrees/century] PLUS x,y,z information (in different coordinate systems) on a daily basis, given the start hour, for any significant body in the SS. YOU WILL LEARN, THEN, THAT ALL THE POSSIBLE CALCULATIONS ARE BASED ON KEPLER/NEWTON PLUS INFINITE SPEED OF GRAVITY (NOT A SINGLE TRACE OF RELATIVITY). Yet, MOST CALCULATIONS for asteroid belts are performed using a RING MODEL, originally developed by Gauss and used by Maxwell. To this date, NO CALCULATIONS of the N-Body problem that really works are made without a supercomputer. For every calculation over Mercury's orbital and precession, on a daily basis, more than 36,500 x 88 x [6 x N(N-1)] calculations have to be performed to accumulate data over 100 years. And for EACH SINGLE CALCULATION, a new computing or orbital parameters for EACH body (six parameters) has to be done. It amounts to MILLIONS OF CALCULATIONS to provide AN APPROXIMATION. And the result is AN APPROXIMATION ONLY, because dozens of minor perturbations HAVE TO BE LEFT OUT, due to the gargantuan complexity of the MODEL (like Sun's center wobbling due to Newton/Kepler laws, extra solar system perturbations and oscillations in orbits of planets due to THE FACT that every planet has its own plane of rotation: a 3D problem, etc.). Once this complexity has ENTERED INTO YOUR HEAD, you will stop writing IDIOCIES like milli-arcseconds resolutions, hundreds of asteroids entering into the computation (impossible: a torus model is used) and relativity being taken into account. As of today, the overall problem of Mercury and of the trajectory OF ANY celestial body or human spacecraft has solutions that are JUST APPROXIMATIONS. The many algorithms used in the calculation have to be STOPPED every X number of cycles, TO ADJUST intermediate results and ELIMINATE CUMULATIVE ERRORS in orbits, because every algorithm DEGENERATES if it's left to run the whole period of time (100 years in the case of Mercury's perihelion advance). As I wrote several times before: There is no single calculation in the world, publicly available (USA, Russia. EU, China, etc.), that as a CORRECT RESULT of the newtonian/keplerian influence. Errors in models are in the range of +/- 2 arcseconds/century, depending on the simplifications of the computer model. Any smallest parameter dismissed, to make calculations easier/faster, traduces in fractions of arcsecond/cy, like an insignificant influence due to unknown oscillations between Jupiter and Saturn over a century, the dismissal of perturbations of moons of planets, the irregular behavior of the main belt of asteroids, etc. Not to mention that masses and diameters of planets are known only to 5 significant digits EVEN TODAY. If you like to buy the shit of 42.99"/cy for GR effects, because it makes you FEEL SAFE under the umbrella of GR physics, then do it. But don't propagate your ignorance like a parrot, repeating things that you DIDN'T STUDY and find easier to believe and repeat. GR IS AN HOAX, and the 43"/cy result IS FALSE. No real calculation has been made as of today: TOO EXPENSIVE AND COMPLEX for being just an approximation. Read more: http://www.alternativephysics.org/book/MercuryPerihelion.htm https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/planets/approx_pos.html#tables https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/horizons/app.html#/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-08 10:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f05b41df-1213-4c57-9087-1b8cb62a2858n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #614754 |
On Saturday, July 8, 2023 at 2:40:20 AM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote: > Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sunday, June 18, 2023 at 1:32:48?AM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > > > As of today, astronomers KEEP USING Clemence values from 1943: > > > > > > Newton: 532.33 arcsec/century > > > GR: 42.98 arcsec/century > > > Total: 575.31 arcsec/century > > > > > > The above values are from an undisputed calculation that was made > > > almost 125 years ago by Newcomb and NOBODY, after Einstein 1919, > > > dared to refute. In particular, Clemence (1943, 1947, 1952). > > > > > > GR IS AN HOAX. > > > > > > Newtonian N-body calculations of the advance of Mercury's perihelion > > J. V. Narlikar, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bombay, India > > N. C. Rana, Department of Physics, University of Durham, South Road, Durham > > 1984 November 15 > [snip more over-age stuff] > > Did you notice that all of your references are completely dated? > Modern numerical integration, taking 'all' bodies in the solar system > into account, (including hundreds of asteroids) > result in agreement with general relativity > at the milliarcsecond/cy level. (yes, -milli-arcseconds, not arcseconds) > And not just for Mercury, also for Venus, Earth, and Mars. > > Those computations are directly verified by tracking spacecraft, > to kilometer accuracy nowadays. > > As far as navigation in the solar system is concerned, > general relativity is 'completed science'. > It has turned into engineering. (at JPL for example) > And yes, that accuracy is really needed > for making those 'gravity-assist' swings around planets. > The orbital windows for that are quite narrow, > especially so when several consecutive swings are needed. > > Summary: You are fighting windmills, > > Jan The conclusion of the pdf Hertz reffed above called "Mercury's Perihelion Advance" = "Conclusion Early analysis of Mercury’s motion was based on simplified models that ignored aspects such as the outer planets’ speeds, their combined contributions, and the motion of the Sun. This led to the conclusion that Newtonian gravity would predict Mercury to precess by 532 arcseconds per century, and that there exists a discrepancy of 43 arcs/cent that can be attributed to General Relativity. A proper analysis that considers all aspects of Solar System motion however shows the Newtonian prediction to be 528 arcs/cent, making the discrepancy 46 arcs/cent, and this is not in agreement with GR." That means GR has to curve space some more and jigger more free variables.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-08 10:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <37e488e1-ce49-4202-b273-1e527166b4a0n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #614763 |
On Saturday, July 8, 2023 at 10:11:39 AM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > On Saturday, July 8, 2023 at 2:40:20 AM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sunday, June 18, 2023 at 1:32:48?AM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote: > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > As of today, astronomers KEEP USING Clemence values from 1943: > > > > > > > > Newton: 532.33 arcsec/century > > > > GR: 42.98 arcsec/century > > > > Total: 575.31 arcsec/century > > > > > > > > The above values are from an undisputed calculation that was made > > > > almost 125 years ago by Newcomb and NOBODY, after Einstein 1919, > > > > dared to refute. In particular, Clemence (1943, 1947, 1952). > > > > > > > > GR IS AN HOAX. > > > > > > > > > Newtonian N-body calculations of the advance of Mercury's perihelion > > > J. V. Narlikar, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bombay, India > > > N. C. Rana, Department of Physics, University of Durham, South Road, Durham > > > 1984 November 15 > > [snip more over-age stuff] > > > > Did you notice that all of your references are completely dated? > > Modern numerical integration, taking 'all' bodies in the solar system > > into account, (including hundreds of asteroids) > > result in agreement with general relativity > > at the milliarcsecond/cy level. (yes, -milli-arcseconds, not arcseconds) > > And not just for Mercury, also for Venus, Earth, and Mars. > > > > Those computations are directly verified by tracking spacecraft, > > to kilometer accuracy nowadays. > > > > As far as navigation in the solar system is concerned, > > general relativity is 'completed science'. > > It has turned into engineering. (at JPL for example) > > And yes, that accuracy is really needed > > for making those 'gravity-assist' swings around planets. > > The orbital windows for that are quite narrow, > > especially so when several consecutive swings are needed. > > > > Summary: You are fighting windmills, > > > > Jan > The conclusion of the pdf Hertz reffed above called "Mercury's Perihelion Advance" = "Conclusion > Early analysis of Mercury’s motion was based on simplified models that ignored aspects such as the outer > planets’ speeds, their combined contributions, and the motion of the Sun. This led to the conclusion that > Newtonian gravity would predict Mercury to precess by 532 arcseconds per century, and that there exists > a discrepancy of 43 arcs/cent that can be attributed to General Relativity. > A proper analysis that considers all aspects of Solar System motion however shows the Newtonian > prediction to be 528 arcs/cent, making the discrepancy 46 arcs/cent, and this is not in agreement with GR." > That means GR has to curve space some more and jigger more free variables. Here is what the International Skeptics Forum thinks about that author, Bernard Burchell... http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=305897 This author also offers a superconducting model of the Sun... https://versounmondonuovo.wordpress.com/2013/11/23/bernard-burchell-a-superconducting-model-of-the-sun/ ... which puts him securely into the crank category... don't you think?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-08 10:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0a6ff994-2358-41bf-a102-4d0e9d3a403fn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #614774 |
On Saturday, 8 July 2023 at 19:38:20 UTC+2, Paul Alsing wrote: > On Saturday, July 8, 2023 at 10:11:39 AM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > > On Saturday, July 8, 2023 at 2:40:20 AM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Sunday, June 18, 2023 at 1:32:48?AM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote: > > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > > As of today, astronomers KEEP USING Clemence values from 1943: > > > > > > > > > > Newton: 532.33 arcsec/century > > > > > GR: 42.98 arcsec/century > > > > > Total: 575.31 arcsec/century > > > > > > > > > > The above values are from an undisputed calculation that was made > > > > > almost 125 years ago by Newcomb and NOBODY, after Einstein 1919, > > > > > dared to refute. In particular, Clemence (1943, 1947, 1952). > > > > > > > > > > GR IS AN HOAX. > > > > > > > > > > > > Newtonian N-body calculations of the advance of Mercury's perihelion > > > > J. V. Narlikar, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bombay, India > > > > N. C. Rana, Department of Physics, University of Durham, South Road, Durham > > > > 1984 November 15 > > > [snip more over-age stuff] > > > > > > Did you notice that all of your references are completely dated? > > > Modern numerical integration, taking 'all' bodies in the solar system > > > into account, (including hundreds of asteroids) > > > result in agreement with general relativity > > > at the milliarcsecond/cy level. (yes, -milli-arcseconds, not arcseconds) > > > And not just for Mercury, also for Venus, Earth, and Mars. > > > > > > Those computations are directly verified by tracking spacecraft, > > > to kilometer accuracy nowadays. > > > > > > As far as navigation in the solar system is concerned, > > > general relativity is 'completed science'. > > > It has turned into engineering. (at JPL for example) > > > And yes, that accuracy is really needed > > > for making those 'gravity-assist' swings around planets. > > > The orbital windows for that are quite narrow, > > > especially so when several consecutive swings are needed. > > > > > > Summary: You are fighting windmills, > > > > > > Jan > > > The conclusion of the pdf Hertz reffed above called "Mercury's Perihelion Advance" = "Conclusion > > Early analysis of Mercury’s motion was based on simplified models that ignored aspects such as the outer > > planets’ speeds, their combined contributions, and the motion of the Sun. This led to the conclusion that > > Newtonian gravity would predict Mercury to precess by 532 arcseconds per century, and that there exists > > a discrepancy of 43 arcs/cent that can be attributed to General Relativity. > > A proper analysis that considers all aspects of Solar System motion however shows the Newtonian > > prediction to be 528 arcs/cent, making the discrepancy 46 arcs/cent, and this is not in agreement with GR." > > That means GR has to curve space some more and jigger more free variables. > Here is what the International Skeptics Forum thinks about that author, Bernard Burchell... > > http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=305897 > > This author also offers a superconducting model of the Sun... > > https://versounmondonuovo.wordpress.com/2013/11/23/bernard-burchell-a-superconducting-model-of-the-sun/ > > ... which puts him securely into the crank category... don't you think? Maybe, but not as deep as the supportes of The Shit of your idiot guru.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-08 10:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5490468c-6830-4707-915d-0b75ed9ac233n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #614774 |
On Saturday, July 8, 2023 at 10:38:20 AM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote: > Here is what the International Skeptics Forum thinks about that author, Bernard Burchell... > > http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=305897 > > This author also offers a superconducting model of the Sun... > > https://versounmondonuovo.wordpress.com/2013/11/23/bernard-burchell-a-superconducting-model-of-the-sun/ > > ... which puts him securely into the crank category... don't you think? I have studied skeptics like Michael Shermer and The Skeptical Inquirer and they have their biases too. You have the mentality of a lemming but there is little safety in numbers. For example, there is the ridiculous beliefs in AGW, which just depends on which baseline you choose to claim a warming trend.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 13 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web