Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #614971 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2023-07-10 20:49 -0700 |
| Last post | 2023-07-14 16:01 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 64 — 18 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-10 20:49 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-07-11 12:26 +0200
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-11 03:39 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-07-12 07:57 +0200
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-11 23:12 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Miguel Sfakianos <iasi@ikmikksk.gn> - 2023-07-12 10:15 +0000
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-12 03:46 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Mickeal Tselios <stii@imklkkol.eo> - 2023-07-12 11:47 +0000
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-13 09:33 -0400
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Kodi Blades <aeeo@biikksek.is> - 2023-07-13 14:21 +0000
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-07-12 21:57 +1000
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-12 05:03 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-12 23:24 -0400
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-12 22:29 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-13 09:40 -0400
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-13 07:52 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Curtiss Strilakos <scss@urriourr.os> - 2023-07-13 17:42 +0000
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-07-14 07:13 +0200
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-13 22:16 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-14 15:07 -0400
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-14 12:28 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-14 18:46 -0400
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-14 16:00 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-07-15 06:46 +0200
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-14 22:14 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-07-16 07:01 +0200
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-15 22:04 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-07-16 08:30 +0200
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-16 00:57 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-07-17 07:01 +0200
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-16 23:58 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-07-18 08:04 +0200
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-17 23:41 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-07-19 07:42 +0200
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-18 22:52 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-07-20 07:43 +0200
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-19 23:13 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru 💩💩💩💩💩💩 <urma@isuarmsa.rr> - 2023-07-20 08:24 +0000
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-07-20 01:27 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Layne Jatzkovsky <sont@vaastvol.ea> - 2023-07-20 09:03 +0000
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-20 10:48 -0400
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-07-20 13:10 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-07-21 06:50 +0200
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-23 14:26 -0400
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-07-24 08:22 +0200
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-23 23:37 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-07-25 07:21 +0200
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 22:48 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-07-26 09:17 +0200
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-26 00:49 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-07-28 07:30 +0200
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Paul Awtandiloff <wnft@ifawllfo.lo> - 2023-07-20 20:44 +0000
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-07-20 17:15 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Bruce Zhigunov <iguu@uuznzczu.ui> - 2023-07-21 13:27 +0000
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-22 14:36 -0400
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Jona Babakov <ooba@jntaajta.aa> - 2023-07-22 20:25 +0000
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Augusta Prigorodov <rotu@popugtuo.io> - 2023-07-23 00:56 +0000
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-07-23 08:35 +0200
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-23 00:03 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Kip Mochanovsky <kcva@pckohooy.kk> - 2023-07-23 12:31 +0000
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-07-20 01:33 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Webster Mulatov <oeas@wltmrwrm.va> - 2023-07-20 09:49 +0000
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-07-14 13:40 -0700
Re: Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-14 16:01 -0700
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-10 20:49 -0700 |
| Subject | Inconsistent prediction of yhe physics of your idiot guru |
| Message-ID | <5cdacae8-81ae-4705-9fb5-8c9176f2ce8cn@googlegroups.com> |
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second As seen, the definition of second loved so much to be invoked by relativistic morons - wasn't valid in the time when their idiot guru lived and mumbled. Up to 1960 it was ordinary 1/86400 of a solar day, also in physics. Now: an observer moving with c/2 wrt solar system is measuring the length of solar day. What is the result predicted by the Einsteinian physics? One prediction is - 99766. From the postulates. The second prediction is - 86400. From definition. And similiarly with the prediction of a measurement of a meridian. Thank you for your attention, poor relativistic fanatics, have a nice day.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-11 12:26 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <kh4p0qFf6q2U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #614971 |
Am 11.07.2023 um 05:49 schrieb Maciej Wozniak: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second > As seen, the definition of second loved so > much to be invoked by relativistic morons - > wasn't valid in the time when their idiot guru > lived and mumbled. Up to 1960 it was ordinary > 1/86400 of a solar day, also in physics. > > Now: an observer moving with c/2 wrt > solar system is measuring the length > of solar day. What is the result predicted > by the Einsteinian physics? > One prediction is - 99766. From the > postulates. The second prediction is - > 86400. From definition. > And similiarly with the prediction of > a measurement of a meridian. If a spaceship approaches the solar system with c/2, the staff on board that ship would encounter massive blue-shift due to the Doppler effect. The people on that ship had real difficulty to measure events on Earth, because they would needs means to compensate their own velocity towards Earth. At first they would eliminate the Doppler effect and shift frequencies down. But also the temporal relations should be adjusted, because the limited speed of light would distort the measured time between events. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-11 03:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <14dfd381-fdd6-4ab5-bc6f-14924c7df510n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #614980 |
On Tuesday, 11 July 2023 at 12:25:34 UTC+2, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 11.07.2023 um 05:49 schrieb Maciej Wozniak: > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second > > As seen, the definition of second loved so > > much to be invoked by relativistic morons - > > wasn't valid in the time when their idiot guru > > lived and mumbled. Up to 1960 it was ordinary > > 1/86400 of a solar day, also in physics. > > > > Now: an observer moving with c/2 wrt > > solar system is measuring the length > > of solar day. What is the result predicted > > by the Einsteinian physics? > > One prediction is - 99766. From the > > postulates. The second prediction is - > > 86400. From definition. > > And similiarly with the prediction of > > a measurement of a meridian. > If a spaceship approaches the solar system with c/2, the staff on board > that ship would encounter massive blue-shift due to the Doppler effect. No spaceship really approaches. I see no point in determining what a fabricated crew is encountering in a fabicated spaceship. But The Shit is really providing a system of claims. They are real, and they are some interest for me. And I say the denied each other up to at least 1960.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-12 07:57 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <kh6tliFplriU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #614983 |
Am 11.07.2023 um 12:39 schrieb Maciej Wozniak: > On Tuesday, 11 July 2023 at 12:25:34 UTC+2, Thomas Heger wrote: >> Am 11.07.2023 um 05:49 schrieb Maciej Wozniak: >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second >>> As seen, the definition of second loved so >>> much to be invoked by relativistic morons - >>> wasn't valid in the time when their idiot guru >>> lived and mumbled. Up to 1960 it was ordinary >>> 1/86400 of a solar day, also in physics. >>> >>> Now: an observer moving with c/2 wrt >>> solar system is measuring the length >>> of solar day. What is the result predicted >>> by the Einsteinian physics? >>> One prediction is - 99766. From the >>> postulates. The second prediction is - >>> 86400. From definition. >>> And similiarly with the prediction of >>> a measurement of a meridian. >> If a spaceship approaches the solar system with c/2, the staff on board >> that ship would encounter massive blue-shift due to the Doppler effect. > > No spaceship really approaches. I see no point in > determining what a fabricated crew is encountering > in a fabicated spaceship. Didn't you mention an observer moving with c/2 in respect to the solar system? Wouldn't you want to give that observer a spaceship? TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-11 23:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0ee2d6f7-044a-493d-9435-d7bba5eee79an@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #615052 |
On Wednesday, 12 July 2023 at 07:57:11 UTC+2, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 11.07.2023 um 12:39 schrieb Maciej Wozniak: > > On Tuesday, 11 July 2023 at 12:25:34 UTC+2, Thomas Heger wrote: > >> Am 11.07.2023 um 05:49 schrieb Maciej Wozniak: > >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second > >>> As seen, the definition of second loved so > >>> much to be invoked by relativistic morons - > >>> wasn't valid in the time when their idiot guru > >>> lived and mumbled. Up to 1960 it was ordinary > >>> 1/86400 of a solar day, also in physics. > >>> > >>> Now: an observer moving with c/2 wrt > >>> solar system is measuring the length > >>> of solar day. What is the result predicted > >>> by the Einsteinian physics? > >>> One prediction is - 99766. From the > >>> postulates. The second prediction is - > >>> 86400. From definition. > >>> And similiarly with the prediction of > >>> a measurement of a meridian. > >> If a spaceship approaches the solar system with c/2, the staff on board > >> that ship would encounter massive blue-shift due to the Doppler effect. > > > > No spaceship really approaches. I see no point in > > determining what a fabricated crew is encountering > > in a fabicated spaceship. > Didn't you mention an observer moving with c/2 in respect to the solar > system? No, I mentioned Shit's mumble about an observer moving with c/2 in respect to the solar system. I'm not interested in gedanken delusions, like an observer moving with c/2 in respect to the solar system. I'm interested in the reality, which is (very unfortunately) including The Shit and its mumble about an observer moving with c/2 in respect to the solar system.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Miguel Sfakianos <iasi@ikmikksk.gn> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-12 10:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <u8lufk$1daq5$1@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #615052 |
Thomas Heger wrote: > Didn't you mention an observer moving with c/2 in respect to the solar > system? Wouldn't you want to give that observer a spaceship? Poland spits on The graves of their people killed by Banderas in ww2 by supporting todays Bandera followers in Ukraine! Poland should raise a Banderas monument in all their cities! Sick people! https://%72t.com/news/579580-ukrainian-nationalists-massacres-poles/ Poland should be renamed as Poo-land. Polookaville. Stupid Poland finally remembering it's history? A little to late. Without the U.S. and Canadian government support, there would be no glorification of the Banderites. Once all the Poles are found and reburied, Poland can find and rebury the 58,000 German ethnics they brutally slaughtered themselves in 1939, thus triggering Hitler's R2P invasion of their wretched nation. Search "Bromberg Massacre" for the hideously gory details. Hypocrisy, thy name is Polska. Present-day Poland appears to be the result of an experiment in anti- Slavic, degenerate Western genetic experiments and propaganda—very sad to say. When science falls into the wrong hands, the world is at stake, not only specific regions and beings in the long term. this motherfucker, khazar goy gay actor zelenske, really thinks now *_he_is_a_"president"_*.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-12 03:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b16d6356-2c0f-4946-a5dc-87effefc694en@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #615066 |
On Wednesday, 12 July 2023 at 12:15:24 UTC+2, Miguel Sfakianos wrote: > Thomas Heger wrote: > > > Didn't you mention an observer moving with c/2 in respect to the solar > > system? Wouldn't you want to give that observer a spaceship? > Poland spits on The graves of their people killed by Banderas in ww2 Ukrainians were killing us and we were killing them. In 1940-ies, and much more fiercely in 1600-ies. The history. Similiarly Russians, and Germans, Swedish and Turkish and others.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mickeal Tselios <stii@imklkkol.eo> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-12 11:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <u8m3td$1db0a$1@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #615068 |
Maciej Wozniak wrote: > On Wednesday, 12 July 2023 at 12:15:24 UTC+2, Miguel Sfakianos wrote: >> Thomas Heger wrote: >> >> > Didn't you mention an observer moving with c/2 in respect to the >> > solar system? Wouldn't you want to give that observer a spaceship? >> Poland spits on The graves of their people killed by Banderas in ww2 > > Ukrainians were killing us and we were killing them. In 1940-ies, and > much more fiercely in 1600-ies. The history. > Similiarly Russians, and Germans, Swedish and Turkish and others. not true. You are lying. One is to be killed in the war, another to enter defenseless villages and massacre civilians, because ethnicity. You are a nazi mazafaka. Change your name and move to america. Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacres_of_Poles_in_Volhynia_and_Eastern_Galicia#Atrocities Villages were torched. Roman Catholic priests were axed or crucified. Churches were burned with all their parishioners. Isolated farms were attacked by gangs carrying pitchforks and kitchen knives. Throats were cut. Pregnant women were bayoneted. Children were cut in two. Men were ambushed in the field and led away. The perpetrators could not determine the province's future. But at least they could determine that it would be a future without Poles.[149] Liquidate all Polish traces. Destroy all walls in the Catholic Church and other Polish prayer houses. Destroy orchards and trees in the courtyards so that there will be no trace that someone lived there.... Pay attention to the fact that when something remains that is Polish, then the Poles will have pretensions to our land".[150] UPA commander's order of 6 April 1944 stated: "Fight them [the Poles] unmercifully. No one is to be spared, even in case of mixed marriages".[151] Timothy Snyder describes the murders: "Ukrainian partisans burned homes, shot or forced back inside those who tried to flee, and used sickles and pitchforks to kill those they captured outside. In some cases, beheaded, crucified, dismembered, or disemboweled bodies were displayed, in order to encourage remaining Poles to flee".[49] A similar account has been presented by Niall Ferguson, who wrote: "Whole villages were wiped out, men beaten to death, women raped and mutilated, babies bayoneted".[152] The Ukrainian historian Yuryi Kirichuk described the conflict as similar to medieval peasant uprisings.[153]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-13 09:33 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <u8oufi$3ll19$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #615072 |
On 7/12/2023 7:47 AM, Mickeal Tselios wrote: > Villages were torched. Roman Catholic priests were axed or crucified. Churches were burned with all their parishioners. Isolated farms were attacked by gangs carrying pitchforks and kitchen knives. Throats were cut. Pregnant women were bayoneted. Children were cut in two. Men were ambushed in the field and led away. The perpetrators could not determine the province's future. But at least they could determine that it would be a future without Poles.[149] > > Liquidate all Polish traces. Destroy all walls in the Catholic Church and other Polish prayer houses. Destroy orchards and trees in the courtyards so that there will be no trace that someone lived there.... Pay attention to the fact that when something remains that is Polish, then the Poles will have pretensions to our land".[150] Wow, replace the word "Poles" with "Ukrainians" and it sounds like what 卐Ru⚡︎⚡︎ia卐 has been doing to Ukrainians in Donbass and currently occupied territories. Or to Ukraine in general, with 卐Ru⚡︎⚡︎ia卐 shelling pizza places, apartment complexes, schools etc. Right now, Poles are really pissed -- at 卐Ru⚡︎⚡︎ians卐. They remember quite well what the 卐Ru⚡︎⚡︎ians卐 did to them between 1945 (really 1939) and 1989. In fact the Poles are itching for an excuse to march on Moscow. (they'd probably succeed, too).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kodi Blades <aeeo@biikksek.is> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-13 14:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <u8p19u$1n0qr$1@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #615151 |
Volney wrote: > On 7/12/2023 7:47 AM, Mickeal Tselios wrote: > >> Villages were torched. Roman Catholic priests were axed or crucified. >> Churches were burned with all their parishioners. Isolated farms were >> attacked by gangs carrying pitchforks and kitchen knives. Throats were >> cut. Pregnant women were bayoneted. Children were cut in two. Men were >> ambushed in the field and led away. The perpetrators could not >> determine the province's future. But at least they could determine that >> it would be a future without Poles.[149] >> >> Liquidate all Polish traces. Destroy all walls in the Catholic Church >> and other Polish prayer houses. Destroy orchards and trees in the >> courtyards so that there will be no trace that someone lived there.... >> Pay attention to the fact that when something remains that is Polish, >> then the Poles will have pretensions to our land".[150] > > Wow, replace the word "Poles" with "Ukrainians" and it sounds like what > 卐Ru⚡︎⚡︎ia卐 has been doing to Ukrainians in Donbass and currently > occupied you just proved you can't read wikipedia. You are a janitor without lab experience. When you want lab, you look it up ij wikipedia. Beyond Ohm's Law you know not much in physics. You need a math book, to read the Ohm's Law when about applying physics. You have to make sure...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-12 21:57 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <kh7ip8Fsv3bU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #614971 |
On 11-July-23 1:49 pm, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second > As seen, the definition of second loved so > much to be invoked by relativistic morons - > wasn't valid in the time when their idiot guru > lived and mumbled. Up to 1960 it was ordinary > 1/86400 of a solar day, also in physics. > > Now: an observer moving with c/2 wrt > solar system is measuring the length > of solar day. What is the result predicted > by the Einsteinian physics? > One prediction is - 99766. From the > postulates. The second prediction is - > 86400. From definition. > And similiarly with the prediction of > a measurement of a meridian. > > Thank you for your attention, poor > relativistic fanatics, have a nice day. The definition of the second has no bearing on special relativity. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-12 05:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <22474f8f-a825-49e9-9d6d-7b37ea8a4070n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #615073 |
On Wednesday, 12 July 2023 at 13:57:33 UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 11-July-23 1:49 pm, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second > > As seen, the definition of second loved so > > much to be invoked by relativistic morons - > > wasn't valid in the time when their idiot guru > > lived and mumbled. Up to 1960 it was ordinary > > 1/86400 of a solar day, also in physics. > > > > Now: an observer moving with c/2 wrt > > solar system is measuring the length > > of solar day. What is the result predicted > > by the Einsteinian physics? > > One prediction is - 99766. From the > > postulates. The second prediction is - > > 86400. From definition. > > And similiarly with the prediction of > > a measurement of a meridian. > > > > Thank you for your attention, poor > > relativistic fanatics, have a nice day. > The definition of the second has no bearing on special relativity. Any of Your precious "experimental evidence" for the above? Or maybe it's nothing but an assertion - after I've proven the opposite?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-12 23:24 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <u8nqos$3hshv$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #615074 |
On 7/12/2023 8:03 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > On Wednesday, 12 July 2023 at 13:57:33 UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote: >> On 11-July-23 1:49 pm, Maciej Wozniak wrote: >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second >>> As seen, the definition of second loved so >>> much to be invoked by relativistic morons - >>> wasn't valid in the time when their idiot guru >>> lived and mumbled. Up to 1960 it was ordinary >>> 1/86400 of a solar day, also in physics. >>> >>> Now: an observer moving with c/2 wrt >>> solar system is measuring the length >>> of solar day. What is the result predicted >>> by the Einsteinian physics? >>> One prediction is - 99766. From the >>> postulates. The second prediction is - >>> 86400. From definition. >>> And similiarly with the prediction of >>> a measurement of a meridian. >>> >>> Thank you for your attention, poor >>> relativistic fanatics, have a nice day. >> The definition of the second has no bearing on special relativity. > > Any of Your precious "experimental evidence" for the above? > Or maybe it's nothing but an assertion - after I've proven the > opposite? > You have proven nothing, janitor. The definition of the second has no bearing on special relativity because the definition of the second is not used in the special relativity papers. It is just "time" being used in the theory.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-12 22:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1ebc976b-3b49-49da-9b70-bc98316fb595n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #615124 |
On Thursday, 13 July 2023 at 05:24:15 UTC+2, Volney wrote: > On 7/12/2023 8:03 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > On Wednesday, 12 July 2023 at 13:57:33 UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote: > >> On 11-July-23 1:49 pm, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second > >>> As seen, the definition of second loved so > >>> much to be invoked by relativistic morons - > >>> wasn't valid in the time when their idiot guru > >>> lived and mumbled. Up to 1960 it was ordinary > >>> 1/86400 of a solar day, also in physics. > >>> > >>> Now: an observer moving with c/2 wrt > >>> solar system is measuring the length > >>> of solar day. What is the result predicted > >>> by the Einsteinian physics? > >>> One prediction is - 99766. From the > >>> postulates. The second prediction is - > >>> 86400. From definition. > >>> And similiarly with the prediction of > >>> a measurement of a meridian. > >>> > >>> Thank you for your attention, poor > >>> relativistic fanatics, have a nice day. > >> The definition of the second has no bearing on special relativity. > > > > Any of Your precious "experimental evidence" for the above? > > Or maybe it's nothing but an assertion - after I've proven the > > opposite? > > > You have proven nothing, janitor. Denying the reality won't make you any good, stupid Mike... > The definition of the second has no bearing on special relativity > because the definition of the second is not used in the special But it has bearing on the physics of your idiot guru and his minions because it was used in the physics of your idiot guru and his minions.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-13 09:40 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <u8ousa$3ll19$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #615138 |
On 7/13/2023 1:29 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > On Thursday, 13 July 2023 at 05:24:15 UTC+2, Volney wrote: >> On 7/12/2023 8:03 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote: >>> On Wednesday, 12 July 2023 at 13:57:33 UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>> On 11-July-23 1:49 pm, Maciej Wozniak wrote: >>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second >>>>> As seen, the definition of second loved so >>>>> much to be invoked by relativistic morons - >>>>> wasn't valid in the time when their idiot guru >>>>> lived and mumbled. Up to 1960 it was ordinary >>>>> 1/86400 of a solar day, also in physics. >>>>> >>>>> Now: an observer moving with c/2 wrt >>>>> solar system is measuring the length >>>>> of solar day. What is the result predicted >>>>> by the Einsteinian physics? >>>>> One prediction is - 99766. From the >>>>> postulates. The second prediction is - >>>>> 86400. From definition. >>>>> And similiarly with the prediction of >>>>> a measurement of a meridian. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you for your attention, poor >>>>> relativistic fanatics, have a nice day. >>>> The definition of the second has no bearing on special relativity. >>> >>> Any of Your precious "experimental evidence" for the above? >>> Or maybe it's nothing but an assertion - after I've proven the >>> opposite? >>> >> You have proven nothing, janitor. > > Denying the reality won't make you any good, stupid Mike... > > >> The definition of the second has no bearing on special relativity >> because the definition of the second is not used in the special relativity papers. > > But it has bearing on the physics of your idiot guru and his minions > because it was used in the physics of your idiot guru and his > minions. No, it is just time. No units referenced or used in the SR papers. It's like with velocity/speed, the concept of faster/slower, acceleration changing speed etc. apply whether the velocity is measured in meters/second, miles/hour, furlongs per fortnight or not at all.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-13 07:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7988d93c-a8f4-4e4f-9c66-209e05207419n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #615152 |
On Thursday, 13 July 2023 at 15:40:29 UTC+2, Volney wrote: > On 7/13/2023 1:29 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > On Thursday, 13 July 2023 at 05:24:15 UTC+2, Volney wrote: > >> On 7/12/2023 8:03 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, 12 July 2023 at 13:57:33 UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote: > >>>> On 11-July-23 1:49 pm, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > >>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second > >>>>> As seen, the definition of second loved so > >>>>> much to be invoked by relativistic morons - > >>>>> wasn't valid in the time when their idiot guru > >>>>> lived and mumbled. Up to 1960 it was ordinary > >>>>> 1/86400 of a solar day, also in physics. > >>>>> > >>>>> Now: an observer moving with c/2 wrt > >>>>> solar system is measuring the length > >>>>> of solar day. What is the result predicted > >>>>> by the Einsteinian physics? > >>>>> One prediction is - 99766. From the > >>>>> postulates. The second prediction is - > >>>>> 86400. From definition. > >>>>> And similiarly with the prediction of > >>>>> a measurement of a meridian. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thank you for your attention, poor > >>>>> relativistic fanatics, have a nice day. > >>>> The definition of the second has no bearing on special relativity. > >>> > >>> Any of Your precious "experimental evidence" for the above? > >>> Or maybe it's nothing but an assertion - after I've proven the > >>> opposite? > >>> > >> You have proven nothing, janitor. > > > > Denying the reality won't make you any good, stupid Mike... > > > > > >> The definition of the second has no bearing on special relativity > >> because the definition of the second is not used in the special relativity papers. > > > > But it has bearing on the physics of your idiot guru and his minions > > because it was used in the physics of your idiot guru and his > > minions. > No, it is just time. No units referenced or used in the SR papers. So, if anyone asked your idiot guru > >>>>> Now: an observer moving with c/2 wrt > >>>>> solar system is measuring the length > >>>>> of solar day. What is the result? poor halfbrain wouldn't be able to answer, right, stupid Mike?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Curtiss Strilakos <scss@urriourr.os> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-13 17:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <u8pd1d$1o245$1@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #615152 |
foot in the mouth Volney wrote: > No, it is just time. No units referenced or used in the SR papers. > It's like with velocity/speed, the concept of faster/slower, > acceleration changing speed etc. apply whether the velocity is measured > in meters/second, miles/hour, furlongs per fortnight or not at all. watch this, my friend. And get the foot out of your mouth. Roseanne tells Piers Morgan that *_her_whole_family_was_murdered_by_Ukrainian_Nazis_* https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/jUne8XcdgSRr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-14 07:13 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <khc3pvFltu6U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #615152 |
Am 13.07.2023 um 15:40 schrieb Volney: >>> The definition of the second has no bearing on special relativity >>> because the definition of the second is not used in the special >>> relativity papers. >> >> But it has bearing on the physics of your idiot guru and his minions >> because it was used in the physics of your idiot guru and his >> minions. > > No, it is just time. No units referenced or used in the SR papers. No, actually Einstein used two numerical values with a unit in 'On the electrodynamics of moving bodies': 1 cm 1 dyne (Both in the same line) No other values with a unit were mentioned. ... TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-13 22:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <cc6d38e7-2fed-47d8-9450-c9f81c14a8f9n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #615221 |
On Friday, 14 July 2023 at 07:12:37 UTC+2, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 13.07.2023 um 15:40 schrieb Volney: > > >>> The definition of the second has no bearing on special relativity > >>> because the definition of the second is not used in the special > >>> relativity papers. > >> > >> But it has bearing on the physics of your idiot guru and his minions > >> because it was used in the physics of your idiot guru and his > >> minions. > > > > No, it is just time. No units referenced or used in the SR papers. > No, actually Einstein used two numerical values with a unit in 'On the > electrodynamics of moving bodies': > > 1 cm > 1 dyne > > (Both in the same line) > > No other values with a unit were mentioned. But "a clock" is mentioned there, isn't it? What is a clock?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-14 15:07 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <u8s6dq$3q9f$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #615222 |
On 7/14/2023 1:16 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > On Friday, 14 July 2023 at 07:12:37 UTC+2, Thomas Heger wrote: >> Am 13.07.2023 um 15:40 schrieb Volney: >> >>>>> The definition of the second has no bearing on special relativity >>>>> because the definition of the second is not used in the special >>>>> relativity papers. >>>> >>>> But it has bearing on the physics of your idiot guru and his minions >>>> because it was used in the physics of your idiot guru and his >>>> minions. >>> >>> No, it is just time. No units referenced or used in the SR papers. >> No, actually Einstein used two numerical values with a unit in 'On the >> electrodynamics of moving bodies': >> >> 1 cm >> 1 dyne >> >> (Both in the same line) >> >> No other values with a unit were mentioned. > > But "a clock" is mentioned there, isn't it? > What is a clock? What units did the clock use, janitor? State the units used in the paper, don't say "people back then used time units defined as..." The best you can do is the natural units where c=1. There's no time unit that comes from that nor a length unit, just that the units are interconnected. Like the modern definition of meter, now defined in terms of the second and a fixed constant which defines the meter in terms of the second. Janitor, you keep whining about the old definition of the second, valid in 1905, being relevant somehow. Since the SR paper doesn't use the second itself, just time abstractly, the second's definition is irrelevant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web