Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #616141 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2023-07-27 19:27 +0200 |
| Last post | 2023-08-23 09:01 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 392 — 27 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Dunning-Kruger examples Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-27 19:27 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-27 11:53 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2023-07-27 12:35 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-27 21:36 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-27 23:11 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-28 00:26 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2023-07-28 07:01 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-28 08:13 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-27 13:53 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-07-28 09:47 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-07-27 22:59 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-07-27 16:20 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-07-28 13:33 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-07-28 05:02 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-07-29 10:37 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-07-29 02:10 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-29 11:23 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-07-29 04:53 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-07-29 12:39 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-07-29 05:03 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-07-29 21:55 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-30 09:36 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-30 02:36 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-31 09:18 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 06:25 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-07-31 15:55 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 16:13 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-01 05:09 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 05:22 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-01 05:58 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 06:04 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 06:13 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-01 06:44 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 07:02 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-01 09:44 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 12:41 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-01 19:03 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 06:46 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-01 10:04 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 12:03 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-01 19:42 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 21:03 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 21:44 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-02 01:03 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 04:46 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 05:15 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 06:36 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-02 10:36 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 12:26 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-03 04:14 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-03 04:42 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 05:10 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 06:33 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-03 08:45 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 12:05 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-03 13:21 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 16:19 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-03 18:19 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 19:16 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-04 03:14 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 03:30 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-04 06:22 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 14:24 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-04 06:25 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 06:34 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 06:53 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-04 10:52 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 11:58 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-04 12:39 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-08-04 12:59 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 15:02 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 21:38 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 16:02 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2023-08-04 16:28 +0300
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-07 09:42 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 12:12 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-07 23:38 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-08 07:22 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-08-08 13:44 -0500
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2023-08-08 20:11 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-08 21:39 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-09 06:06 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-09 22:56 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 00:05 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-10 02:00 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 18:03 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2023-07-29 20:06 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-14 09:23 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-14 12:46 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-15 11:20 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 18:43 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-16 15:17 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-17 09:45 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 00:53 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-18 13:09 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-20 10:38 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-24 12:44 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-24 23:41 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-07-30 20:57 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-07-31 02:31 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-07-31 02:44 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 04:22 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-07-31 06:06 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-31 09:48 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-07-31 06:58 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-07-31 07:03 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-31 23:37 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 22:08 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 03:17 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 04:03 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-01 05:17 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-01 22:06 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 15:23 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-02 11:51 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 09:10 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 09:50 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 10:28 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-03 12:50 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-08-02 12:08 -0500
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 10:38 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-03 12:50 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 04:45 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 07:40 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-03 17:55 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 10:08 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-03 19:44 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 08:44 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-03 19:28 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 11:21 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 11:37 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-03 14:56 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-03 22:15 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 13:25 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-04 21:50 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 14:59 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-08-03 13:38 -0500
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 11:39 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-03 21:12 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 22:51 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 22:52 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2023-08-05 10:18 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2023-08-05 21:48 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-03 12:50 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-08-03 15:05 -0500
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 13:16 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-03 23:17 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-02 23:24 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 16:54 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-03 12:50 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2023-08-03 21:16 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 13:06 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-03 22:15 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 22:02 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 12:46 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Mechael Hazeev <llee@hmelvave.ah> - 2023-07-31 20:23 +0000
From Russia With (was Re: Dunning-Kruger examples) whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-01 18:38 -0500
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 13:38 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 14:51 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-01 11:07 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 02:24 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-01 11:59 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 08:29 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 08:50 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 15:24 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 16:19 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-05 01:03 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-05 01:50 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-05 09:45 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-05 10:49 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-05 12:21 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-05 21:23 +0000
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-05 21:38 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-06 05:26 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-06 07:57 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-06 21:17 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2023-08-06 14:39 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-07 10:29 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 01:39 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-07 12:02 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 20:03 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-07 09:32 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-12 10:52 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-12 17:36 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-13 02:41 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-12 17:56 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-12 21:13 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-13 01:31 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-13 08:11 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-13 11:23 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-13 08:33 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-13 09:05 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-13 10:21 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-14 05:08 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-14 08:27 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-14 09:16 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-14 11:49 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-14 12:30 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-14 16:13 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-14 19:06 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-14 21:28 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-15 02:20 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 12:21 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-15 12:36 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 16:34 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-16 02:05 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 12:04 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-17 02:09 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 11:55 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-14 22:28 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-15 02:34 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 05:18 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-15 05:32 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 06:53 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-16 10:28 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-16 17:13 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 22:08 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-17 05:28 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 12:37 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-17 22:40 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 19:11 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-18 10:53 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-18 01:34 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-18 17:46 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-19 01:04 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 04:20 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-19 04:35 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-19 12:31 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-19 21:35 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-20 04:35 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 10:27 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-21 05:02 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 06:17 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-21 09:12 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 11:53 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-22 06:10 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 16:38 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 16:01 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-22 05:48 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 23:54 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-23 07:17 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 18:14 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-22 05:56 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-23 00:27 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-23 11:08 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-23 06:53 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-23 16:19 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-23 08:06 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-23 10:18 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-08-23 16:40 -0500
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-08-23 16:55 -0500
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-23 15:25 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-08-23 20:08 -0500
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-24 01:03 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-24 13:38 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-24 11:29 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-08-24 15:02 -0500
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-24 20:16 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-24 22:30 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-24 22:58 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-24 20:24 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-25 15:58 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-25 15:18 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-25 16:07 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-26 02:20 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-26 02:22 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-26 02:25 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-26 04:18 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-26 14:41 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-26 04:04 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-26 04:50 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-26 05:28 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-26 06:36 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-26 06:44 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-26 12:55 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-27 05:01 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-27 01:43 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-26 11:18 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-26 09:09 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-26 22:19 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-26 11:10 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-27 01:58 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-25 15:52 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-26 11:40 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-27 02:18 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-25 22:24 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Edgardo Yudelevich <edal@ouoygerr.cu> - 2023-08-26 21:41 +0000
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-23 20:59 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-24 13:46 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-24 20:20 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-24 14:32 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-24 23:42 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-24 23:04 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-25 21:45 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-26 11:41 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-24 11:26 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-08-24 15:37 -0500
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-24 13:44 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-24 23:06 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-24 23:42 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-17 22:33 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 19:50 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-18 10:53 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-18 02:18 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-18 12:45 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 04:10 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-18 04:25 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 21:12 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-18 10:53 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-18 02:03 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-19 00:02 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-18 04:49 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 06:36 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-18 12:36 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 19:10 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-19 00:57 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 01:56 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger exampleshn Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-19 04:50 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger exampleshn Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 09:28 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger exampleshn Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 22:00 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger exampleshn Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-22 15:40 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger exampleshn nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-22 22:58 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-19 00:22 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-19 00:39 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-23 01:47 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Brouce Vil <ibiu@bculrlcu.oc> - 2023-08-23 21:55 +0000
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Physfitfreak <Physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-23 17:33 -0500
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Mechael Pazi <pphe@lmhecacz.ha> - 2023-08-19 14:01 +0000
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Osvani Dobronos <dsio@iaboroor.ov> - 2023-08-18 22:07 +0000
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 17:03 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-17 10:26 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 07:58 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 09:34 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 09:55 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-15 11:58 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 12:05 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-15 12:10 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 12:20 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-16 10:28 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 01:54 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-15 05:23 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-15 11:52 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 15:57 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 21:57 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 22:44 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-16 01:43 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-16 02:58 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 03:23 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 03:41 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-16 04:07 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-16 04:15 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 04:26 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-16 05:21 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-16 15:28 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 16:46 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-18 15:35 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 15:59 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 17:09 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-19 12:03 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 12:40 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 17:50 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 17:54 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-20 04:48 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 10:11 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-21 04:22 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Bill <davos2329@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 10:37 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-23 14:13 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-24 04:18 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2023-08-24 17:26 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2023-08-07 13:50 +0300
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-08-01 04:37 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-07-31 06:50 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 03:01 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-07-31 09:37 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 13:01 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-02 15:50 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 17:05 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-04 16:23 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 17:35 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-28 01:10 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Hershel Awtomovitch <ecwt@timhaheo.et> - 2023-07-28 12:38 +0000
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-07-28 13:14 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-07-29 10:37 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-29 11:00 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-07-29 12:39 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-29 05:13 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-07-29 15:21 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-29 15:33 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-07-29 11:08 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-22 22:08 -0400
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 21:48 -0700
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-23 08:42 +0200
Re: Dunning-Kruger examples Stefhen Hanok <ttsk@asskohan.fn> - 2023-08-23 09:01 +0000
Page 8 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 20 Next page →
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-05 10:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1933588b-702f-4aa5-8f7f-73d06b77decdn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616752 |
On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 10:52:46 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote: > On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 10:51:06 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote: > > On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 12:12:08 PM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > Tom Roberts <tjobe...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On 8/3/23 5:50 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > > > Dono. <eggy20...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >> So, [Alvaeger et al] assumes OWLS isotropy. Thank you for clarifying. > > > > > > > > > > Nonsense, > > > > > > > > No, he just misspoke slightly. Alvaeger et al assumes the signal speed > > > > in their cables is isotropic. > > > Yes, of course. > > > A forteriori, they assume that the CERN proton synchrotron works. > > > Their whole experimental setup depends on the timing of it, > > > > > > Jan > > Furthermore it all results from electron physics. > Which is not a continuum mechanics, .... A mathematical continuum or linear continuum is a usual concept, in the unbounded it has bounds and in the infinite-divisible it has bounds, but it's both unbounded and infinitely-divisible. The "individuation" is a sort of act, as from a continuum its individua, that at once a continuum has continua, that ultimately a continuum has invididua. The "individuation" of a continuum isn't really an accessible act, to the usual finite senses, indeed it makes for an "object sense" after a "number sense" a "continuum sense", these senses that result after reason and otherwise the limits of our physical senses, that the limits of our physical senses are senses themselves. The "individuation" of a continuum, like a point as from a line, here often "quantization", has that the quantum theory is much about the individuation of continua, mathematically, and about what aspects mathematically, result from the act or being of individuation. So, "electron physics", after Rayleigh and the "ultraviolet catastrophe", is part of a framework of conceptual individuation. It's similar with "atomic physics" and later "superstring theory", about the a-tomic or in-dividual, then about what really results from the observer/sampling/measurement, in effects, about the configuration and energy of experiments, that result quantum quantities (or quantum properties), on a continuous manifold of space-time. So, the real mathematical "effects" of individuation, sort of result doubling-spaces. Here it's after, for example Vitali, and Vitali-Hausdorff, and Banach-Tarski, though it's found already in various derivations of linear path elements, when there's "1/2" or "2" added as constants arbitrarily different than "1", that aren't necessarily so derived as defined, but would be better derived, from mathematics of continuum mechanics, that explain why the "doubling-spaces" or "halving-spaces" result why identifying a point, on a line, gives it an analytical character, that's the result of the configuration and energy of the experiment. So, "electron physics" is a great thing, and all sorts of physics is build on it the quantities, but, really it's just an incomplete setting of quantum mechanics after continuum mechanics. Now, if you ask a modern physicist these days, "what are running constants", and they say, "I don't know", you know, they don't. (Others, "modern physicists", do, ....) That though is mostly about configuration and energy of experiment. The particular aspect of how that applies to the atomic which is as well part of the molecular and macromolecular, and the "superstrings" as simply another grainy backing of a continuum, makes for that the continuum mechanics and individuation and quantization therein, has that most people have only entirely the concept of "particle physics", when really the "particles" only arise as form aggregates and finally from particular configuration of detectors and their interference. So, mathematics "owes" physics a proper mathematics for continuum mechanics.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-05 21:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f822499c-8993-4695-813e-37651bd360cdn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616862 |
On Saturday, August 5, 2023 at 10:18:41 AM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote: > On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 10:52:46 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote: > > On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 10:51:06 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote: > > > On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 12:12:08 PM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > > Tom Roberts <tjobe...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 8/3/23 5:50 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > > > > Dono. <eggy20...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >> So, [Alvaeger et al] assumes OWLS isotropy. Thank you for clarifying. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nonsense, > > > > > > > > > > No, he just misspoke slightly. Alvaeger et al assumes the signal speed > > > > > in their cables is isotropic. > > > > Yes, of course. > > > > A forteriori, they assume that the CERN proton synchrotron works. > > > > Their whole experimental setup depends on the timing of it, > > > > > > > > Jan > > > Furthermore it all results from electron physics. > > Which is not a continuum mechanics, .... > A mathematical continuum or linear continuum is a usual concept, > in the unbounded it has bounds and in the infinite-divisible it has bounds, > but it's both unbounded and infinitely-divisible. > > The "individuation" is a sort of act, as from a continuum its individua, that > at once a continuum has continua, that ultimately a continuum has invididua. > > The "individuation" of a continuum isn't really an accessible act, to the usual > finite senses, indeed it makes for an "object sense" after a "number sense" a > "continuum sense", these senses that result after reason and otherwise the > limits of our physical senses, that the limits of our physical senses are senses > themselves. > > The "individuation" of a continuum, like a point as from a line, here often "quantization", > has that the quantum theory is much about the individuation of continua, mathematically, > and about what aspects mathematically, result from the act or being of individuation. > > So, "electron physics", after Rayleigh and the "ultraviolet catastrophe", is part of > a framework of conceptual individuation. > > It's similar with "atomic physics" and later "superstring theory", about the a-tomic > or in-dividual, then about what really results from the observer/sampling/measurement, > in effects, about the configuration and energy of experiments, that result quantum > quantities (or quantum properties), on a continuous manifold of space-time. > > So, the real mathematical "effects" of individuation, sort of result doubling-spaces. > Here it's after, for example Vitali, and Vitali-Hausdorff, and Banach-Tarski, though > it's found already in various derivations of linear path elements, when there's > "1/2" or "2" added as constants arbitrarily different than "1", that aren't necessarily > so derived as defined, but would be better derived, from mathematics of continuum > mechanics, that explain why the "doubling-spaces" or "halving-spaces" result why > identifying a point, on a line, gives it an analytical character, that's the result of > the configuration and energy of the experiment. > > So, "electron physics" is a great thing, and all sorts of physics is build on it the quantities, > but, really it's just an incomplete setting of quantum mechanics after continuum mechanics. > > > Now, if you ask a modern physicist these days, "what are running constants", and they > say, "I don't know", you know, they don't. (Others, "modern physicists", do, ....) That > though is mostly about configuration and energy of experiment. The particular aspect > of how that applies to the atomic which is as well part of the molecular and macromolecular, > and the "superstrings" as simply another grainy backing of a continuum, makes for that > the continuum mechanics and individuation and quantization therein, has that most people > have only entirely the concept of "particle physics", when really the "particles" only arise > as form aggregates and finally from particular configuration of detectors and their interference. > > So, mathematics "owes" physics a proper mathematics for continuum mechanics. There's FitzGerald to consider, also Einstein in his "Out of My Later Years" makes it clear that "inertial systems" have that "SR is local" and attached to the geodesy (or GR's contents) whatever it is, and how it is when it is, in terms of the coordinate systems inside and outside, as those are. Einstein's "Space-Time" as he puts it (space-time, and its contents) is nowhere really curved, just, everywhere curving, the geodesy's always instantaneous, and the inertial systems reflect translational and rotational mass-energy equivalency variously, i.e. translational or rotational, and Einstein doesn't say not so. (And he specifically says "I do not say not so, only these particular attachments what's so".) So, modern physicsts who know this of course would know this and know that after the course of his studies and research and application, that Einstein arrived at a particular definition and interpretation of his principles and theories, for his model philosopher and model physicist, and about why it's a differential system (parameterized by a "the time") and about what results the dynamics of rest and motion, where Einstein was most interested at that point in the physics of Newton and rest and motion. Then for quantum mechanics, there's that it's a continuum mechanics, ..., so, lots of modern physicists would sort of be "particularly applied technicians". I.e. it's not necessarily wrong to not know these things, but, it'd be sort of inflated not to. Or, you know, Dunning-Kruger, ....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 12:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1qevug5.ru0cat1rivdgcN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #616612 |
Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > On 8/2/23 11:10 AM, Dono. wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 2:51:12?AM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder > > wrote: > >> Since the photon speed measurements were done by a direct and one > >> way time of flight measurement these experiments are hard to argue > >> with, > >> > > I could only find a cryptic reference to a 1964 experiment at CERN > > on photons emitted from pions moving at very high speed. Do you have > > an exact reference? > > Alvaeger F.J.M. Farley, J. Kjellman and I Wallin, Physics Letters 12, > 260 (1964). Also: Arkiv foer Fysik, Vol 31, pg 145 (1965). > Measured the speed of gamma rays from the decay of > fast π0 (~0.99975 c) to be c with a resolution of > 400 parts per million. Optical extinction is not > a problem for such high-energy gamma rays. The > speed of the π0 is not measured, but is assumed to > be similar to that measured for π+ and π?. > > > it is known that OWLS cannot be measured [...] > > That is just plain not true. With modern instrumentation it is easy to > measure OWLS. But the result does depend on one's method of clock > synchronization -- any sensible experimenter would synchronize their > clocks in the locally-inertial frame of their lab, making sure that each > measurement lasts less than a few hundred nanoseconds so the difference > between the lab and a truly inertial frame is much smaller than their > measurement resolution. You have misunderstood the set-up of the experiment. There are no clocks to be synchronised, there is only one clock. (the master clock for the timing the synchrotron) If you start assuming crazy effects on transmission times of pulses in cables your whole understanding of how the synchrotron actually works falls apart, Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 15:05 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <2LydncI6BOEdlVH5nZ2dnZfqlJ9j4p2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #616665 |
On 8/3/23 5:50 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote: > Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> wrote: >> Alvaeger F.J.M. Farley, J. Kjellman and I Wallin, Physics Letters >> 12, 260 (1964). Also: Arkiv foer Fysik, Vol 31, pg 145 (1965). >> [...] With modern instrumentation it is easy to measure OWLS. But >> the result does depend on one's method of clock synchronization -- >> any sensible experimenter would synchronize their clocks in the >> locally-inertial frame of their lab, making sure that each >> measurement lasts less than a few hundred nanoseconds so the >> difference between the lab and a truly inertial frame is much >> smaller than their measurement resolution. > > You have misunderstood the set-up of the experiment. No, you misunderstood what I wrote. > There are no clocks to be synchronised, there is only one clock. Yes, AS I SAID (in the post to which you are responding): "They did not synchronize two clocks. Instead they used a proton detector just in front of their target to start a timer [#], and a gamma-ray detector downstream to stop the timer, with equal-length cables to the timer." So for their experiment, "clock synchronization" is replaced by presuming that the one-way signal speeds in their cables are equal (i.e. isotropic). > (the master clock for the timing the synchrotron) Actually, their timer used its own clock, not one from the synchrotron. I don't know how they calibrated it, but that is surely included in their quoted errorbar of 400 ppm. > If you start assuming crazy effects on transmission times of pulses > in cables your whole understanding of how the synchrotron actually > works falls apart, Hmmmm. This depends in detail on what you assume and how any anisotropy happens. Some would prevent the synchrotron from operating and can be dismissed; some won't and can't. But SR predicts isotropy, and that is the theoretical context of the experiment. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 13:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fe385770-a0e6-486d-862a-bf1f88127c8en@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616724 |
On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 22:05:32 UTC+2, Tom Roberts wrote: > On 8/3/23 5:50 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > Tom Roberts <tjobe...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > >> Alvaeger F.J.M. Farley, J. Kjellman and I Wallin, Physics Letters > >> 12, 260 (1964). Also: Arkiv foer Fysik, Vol 31, pg 145 (1965). > >> [...] With modern instrumentation it is easy to measure OWLS. But > >> the result does depend on one's method of clock synchronization -- > >> any sensible experimenter would synchronize their clocks in the > >> locally-inertial frame of their lab, making sure that each > >> measurement lasts less than a few hundred nanoseconds so the > >> difference between the lab and a truly inertial frame is much > >> smaller than their measurement resolution. > > > > You have misunderstood the set-up of the experiment. > No, you misunderstood what I wrote. And you didn't understand that we're FORCED!! To THE BEST WAY!!!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 23:17 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1qews7b.4kcqhpfbj1xmN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #616724 |
Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > On 8/3/23 5:50 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > >> Alvaeger F.J.M. Farley, J. Kjellman and I Wallin, Physics Letters > >> 12, 260 (1964). Also: Arkiv foer Fysik, Vol 31, pg 145 (1965). > >> [...] With modern instrumentation it is easy to measure OWLS. But > >> the result does depend on one's method of clock synchronization -- > >> any sensible experimenter would synchronize their clocks in the > >> locally-inertial frame of their lab, making sure that each > >> measurement lasts less than a few hundred nanoseconds so the > >> difference between the lab and a truly inertial frame is much > >> smaller than their measurement resolution. > > > > You have misunderstood the set-up of the experiment. > > No, you misunderstood what I wrote. Guess that works both ways. > > There are no clocks to be synchronised, there is only one clock. > > Yes, AS I SAID (in the post to which you are responding): "They did not > synchronize two clocks. Indeed, AS I SAID. (right from the start) Let's not argue about who said it first, and in what subthread. > Instead they used a proton detector just in > front of their target to start a timer [#], and a gamma-ray detector > downstream to stop the timer, with equal-length cables to the timer." Yes, that establishes their timebase wrt to the synchrotron timing. Just a convenient way of doing it. > So for their experiment, "clock synchronization" is replaced by > presuming that the one-way signal speeds in their cables are equal (i.e. > isotropic). > > > (the master clock for the timing the synchrotron) > > Actually, their timer used its own clock, not one from the synchrotron. > I don't know how they calibrated it, but that is surely included in > their quoted errorbar of 400 ppm. Now we are descending into (not very relevant) technicalities. Their experiment made clever use of the fact that the protons from the synchrotron come in periodic nanosecond sized bunches. They made the photon travel time coincide with the bunch separation. Their timing was not independent of the synchrotron timing. > > If you start assuming crazy effects on transmission times of pulses > > in cables your whole understanding of how the synchrotron actually > > works falls apart, > > Hmmmm. This depends in detail on what you assume and how any anisotropy > happens. Some would prevent the synchrotron from operating and can be > dismissed; some won't and can't. But SR predicts isotropy, and that is > the theoretical context of the experiment. Yes, of course. Special relativity isn't science to be tested anymore, at this level. It has become applied science, aka engineering. [1] Next assuming SR, you can look for tiny deviations. And not even that, really. It was a demonstration experiment. If the result had not turned out to be c they would have looked for timing errors in their setup rather than claim relativity violation. (compare the disgrace at the CERN-GranSasso neutrino speed experiment) Jan [1] Most people don't realise what an intricate lot of machinery that synchrotron is, where everything has to be synchronised and tuned just right to make it work at all. All of it relativistic of course. You cannot tamper with some aspects of it just to please yourself.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-02 23:24 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1qeuzbb.h89kx8tfk976N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #616608 |
Dono. <eggy20011951@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 2:51:12?AM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > Since the photon speed measurements were done by a direct and one way > > time of flight measurement these experiments are hard to argue with, > > > I could only find a cryptic reference to a 1964 experiment at CERN on > photons emitted from pions moving at very high speed. Do you have an exact > reference? What puzzles me is that it is known that OWLS cannot be > measured due to the circular dependency between OWLS measurement being > dependent on clock synchronization and clock synchronization being > dependent on OWLS being isotropic . Tests that constrain OWLS anisotropy > are dependent on.....clock synchronization conventions (see the > Mansouri-Sexl theory or the Standard Model Extension). You -can- argue that clock synchronisation is involved, but there really is only one clock involved. It is all about signals in wiring. The clock merely measures the time intervals between the arrival of pulses. If you would insist on making two-way arguments you would have to make some very pecular assumptions about the propagation of pulses in coaxial cables depending on.... Yes, on what? Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-02 16:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8f702a2c-1d99-4f02-83b6-6119543da47bn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616624 |
On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 2:24:59 PM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote: > Dono. <eggy20...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 2:51:12?AM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > > > Since the photon speed measurements were done by a direct and one way > > > time of flight measurement these experiments are hard to argue with, > > > > > I could only find a cryptic reference to a 1964 experiment at CERN on > > photons emitted from pions moving at very high speed. Do you have an exact > > reference? What puzzles me is that it is known that OWLS cannot be > > measured due to the circular dependency between OWLS measurement being > > dependent on clock synchronization and clock synchronization being > > dependent on OWLS being isotropic . Tests that constrain OWLS anisotropy > > are dependent on.....clock synchronization conventions (see the > > Mansouri-Sexl theory or the Standard Model Extension). > You -can- argue that clock synchronisation is involved, > but there really is only one clock involved. > It is all about signals in wiring. > The clock merely measures the time intervals > between the arrival of pulses. > > If you would insist on making two-way arguments > you would have to make some very pecular assumptions > about the propagation of pulses in coaxial cables > depending on.... Yes, on what? > > Jan See my answer to Tom.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 12:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1qevu9u.1bew6eoq9gstrN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #616635 |
Dono. <eggy20011951@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 2:24:59?PM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > Dono. <eggy20...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 2:51:12?AM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > > > > > Since the photon speed measurements were done by a direct and one way > > > > time of flight measurement these experiments are hard to argue with, > > > > > > > I could only find a cryptic reference to a 1964 experiment at CERN on > > > photons emitted from pions moving at very high speed. Do you have an exact > > > reference? What puzzles me is that it is known that OWLS cannot be > > > measured due to the circular dependency between OWLS measurement being > > > dependent on clock synchronization and clock synchronization being > > > dependent on OWLS being isotropic . Tests that constrain OWLS anisotropy > > > are dependent on.....clock synchronization conventions (see the > > > Mansouri-Sexl theory or the Standard Model Extension). > > You -can- argue that clock synchronisation is involved, > > but there really is only one clock involved. > > It is all about signals in wiring. > > The clock merely measures the time intervals > > between the arrival of pulses. > > > > If you would insist on making two-way arguments > > you would have to make some very pecular assumptions > > about the propagation of pulses in coaxial cables > > depending on.... Yes, on what? > > > > Jan > See my answer to Tom. Seen, and it is nonsense, Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 21:16 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uagufc$slps$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #616608 |
Den 02.08.2023 18:10, skrev Dono.: > On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 2:51:12 AM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote: > >> Since the photon speed measurements were done by a direct and one way >> time of flight measurement these experiments are hard to argue with, >> > I could only find a cryptic reference to a 1964 experiment at CERN on photons emitted from pions moving at very high speed. Do you have an exact reference? > What puzzles me is that it is known that OWLS cannot be measured due to the circular dependency between OWLS measurement being dependent on clock synchronization and clock synchronization being dependent on OWLS being isotropic . Tests that constrain OWLS anisotropy are dependent on.....clock synchronization conventions (see the Mansouri-Sexl theory or the Standard Model Extension). https://paulba.no/paper/Alvager_et_al.pdf -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 13:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <157c6026-7f76-4282-99c0-7d23dc6dfac4n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616713 |
On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 12:17:04 PM UTC-7, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > Den 02.08.2023 18:10, skrev Dono.: > > On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 2:51:12 AM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > >> Since the photon speed measurements were done by a direct and one way > >> time of flight measurement these experiments are hard to argue with, > >> > > I could only find a cryptic reference to a 1964 experiment at CERN on photons emitted from pions moving at very high speed. Do you have an exact reference? > > What puzzles me is that it is known that OWLS cannot be measured due to the circular dependency between OWLS measurement being dependent on clock synchronization and clock synchronization being dependent on OWLS being isotropic . Tests that constrain OWLS anisotropy are dependent on.....clock synchronization conventions (see the Mansouri-Sexl theory or the Standard Model Extension). > https://paulba.no/paper/Alvager_et_al.pdf > > -- > Paul > > https://paulba.no/ Thank you, got it earlier. This is not a OWLS measurement, can you explain this to JJ? He seems to be of the opinion that he;s right and everybody else is wrong.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 22:15 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1qewqij.1h3tx2d1l8kawhN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #616713 |
Paul B. Andersen <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> wrote: > Den 02.08.2023 18:10, skrev Dono.: > > On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 2:51:12?AM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote: > > > >> Since the photon speed measurements were done by a direct and one way > >> time of flight measurement these experiments are hard to argue with, > >> > > I could only find a cryptic reference to a 1964 experiment at CERN on > > photons emitted from pions moving at very high speed. Do you have an > > exact reference? What puzzles me is that it is known that OWLS cannot be > > measured due to the circular dependency between OWLS measurement being > > dependent on clock synchronization and clock synchronization being > > dependent on OWLS being isotropic . Tests that constrain OWLS anisotropy > > are dependent on.....clock synchronization conventions (see the > > Mansouri-Sexl theory or the Standard Model Extension). > https://paulba.no/paper/Alvager_et_al.pdf That's it, It is also readily found in open access on the net. Note on spelling (not for you): you can find it as Alvager, as Alvager with some curious Swedish A with a dot or circle on top, or in German style as Alvaeger. All the same guy of course, Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-01 22:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <94ad7e29-0f2b-4b70-8471-01b0d5bc33adn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616535 |
On Tuesday, 1 August 2023 at 22:06:20 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote: > Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.c...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 9:03:05?AM UTC-5, Lou wrote: > > > On Monday, 31 July 2023 at 14:48:19 UTC+1, Volney wrote: > > > > On 7/31/2023 9:06 AM, Lou wrote: > > > And incidentally, not only does Ritz's undulatory model have light at > > > c always in the source frame....this prediction is confirmed by MmX. > > > Notice MMx showed that no matter what the motion of the source relative > > > to any other reference frame in the universe was, light always travels at > > > a constant speed in the source frame. > > > > Apparently you believe that Ritz's theory predicts > > something like this: > > > > (on mobile phones, you may need to download a > > local copy to get the animation to work) > > > > https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RoYFuXeFTslkbX9rsw0PCn2rwWPyfAum/view?usp=sha > ring > > > > Ritz was an extremely intelligent physicist. He was > > not insane. > Certainly not. Ritz and Einstein even wrote a paper together. > (in which they agreed to disagree) So, cooperating with your insane guru means no insanity?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-31 12:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b8f6e6be-0051-4e61-af69-025bcb23f4ben@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616397 |
On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 8:48:19 AM UTC-5, Volney wrote: > On 7/31/2023 9:06 AM, Lou wrote: > > > But all you use are words. The only graphic I see is the wiki deSitter > > version. Which as I’ve said to you repeatedly...has light travelling > > at a variable speed relative to the stellar source. Which is not compatible > > with any emission theory. At least not with Ritz’s 1908 version. > > I’ve even told you how to check it visually. Screen grab enough frames > > from it. All you need are 3 or 4 in a row. Print them out. > > And measure the distance from the same point in the wave train to > > the source. You will get various lengths that do not increase with > > the same amount of distance for each. > > Which as any mathematician must know, means a variable speed > > relative to the source. > Are you claiming that if a star emits light and continues to orbit the > other star, the light moves at c relative to the /new/ position of the > star later in its orbit? That is apparently what he claims. He apparently imagines that the orbiting star drags its coordinate system around, and all light emitted from the star is dragged along with the star. That is totally crazy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mechael Hazeev <llee@hmelvave.ah> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-31 20:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ua958d$17ui2$1@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #616429 |
Prokaryotic Capase Homolog wrote: > On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 8:48:19 AM UTC-5, Volney wrote: >> Are you claiming that if a star emits light and continues to orbit the >> other star, the light moves at c relative to the /new/ position of the >> star later in its orbit? > > That is apparently what he claims. > He apparently imagines that the orbiting star drags its coordinate > system around, and all light emitted from the star is dragged along with > the star. That is totally crazy. volney, aka Morony, aka Kibo Pari, is gay. You can't drag coordinates, you retards. You don't know what coordinates are. One more proof, the 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘀𝘁_𝗰𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲_𝘄𝗲𝘀𝘁 is a lying son of a bitch. the fucking France is gonna bomb Niger. About 50% of their uranium comes from Niger. These stinking sacks of subhumans excrement. Can't forget 𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗴𝗮𝘆_𝗠𝗮𝗰𝗿𝗼𝗻_𝘀𝗺𝗶𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 when the president of Russian Federation, Putin, 𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗲𝗱_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗽𝗲𝗮𝗰𝗲_𝗮𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁_𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵_𝘂𝗸𝘂𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗮_2014. What a disgusting sack of shit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-01 18:38 -0500 |
| Subject | From Russia With (was Re: Dunning-Kruger examples) |
| Message-ID | <kitjchFnibeU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #616432 |
Our nymshifter Russian propagandist(s?) only has a very short while remaining to think he is effective, Here is an interesting link discussing his masters: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcxywIF4YUg On 7/31/2023 3:23 PM, Mechael Hazeev wrote: <...> > the fucking France is gonna bomb Niger. About 50% of their uranium comes > from Niger. These stinking sacks of subhumans excrement. Can't forget > 𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗴𝗮𝘆_𝗠𝗮𝗰𝗿𝗼𝗻_𝘀𝗺𝗶𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 when the president of Russian Federation, Putin, > 𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗲𝗱_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗽𝗲𝗮𝗰𝗲_𝗮𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁_𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵_𝘂𝗸𝘂𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗮_2014. What a disgusting sack of shit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-31 13:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <43fa9cb0-9c8a-4866-9d4f-42decfc44540n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616429 |
On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 12:46:40 PM UTC-7, Prokaryotic Capase Homolog wrote: > He apparently imagines that the orbiting star drags its coordinate > system around, and all light emitted from the star is dragged > along with the star. That is totally crazy. Actually, it DOES. But not to the extent he's claiming. See Lense - Thirring effect (frame dragging)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-31 14:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ec3cf6c4-c23a-4820-9abe-469bf4b3a058n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616434 |
On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 3:38:40 PM UTC-5, Dono. wrote: > On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 12:46:40 PM UTC-7, Prokaryotic Capase Homolog wrote: > > > He apparently imagines that the orbiting star drags its coordinate > > system around, and all light emitted from the star is dragged > > along with the star. That is totally crazy. > Actually, it DOES. But not to the extent he's claiming. See Lense - Thirring effect (frame dragging) OK, OK, you got me on a technical point. :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-01 11:07 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1qes2sz.f6mvt11818jtjN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #616434 |
Dono. <eggy20011951@gmail.com> wrote: > On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 12:46:40?PM UTC-7, Prokaryotic Capase Homolog: > > > He apparently imagines that the orbiting star drags its coordinate > > system around, and all light emitted from the star is dragged > > along with the star. That is totally crazy. > > Actually, it DOES. But not to the extent he's claiming. See Lense - > Thirring effect (frame dragging) Eh? Not really. Any physical effects of shaking that star propagate outward at c too. Frame dragging is not action at a distance, and already emitted light will not be influenced by it. All you can change at a distance is coordinates, Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-01 02:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ab167375-5992-46cb-aca1-1e64229bf049n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616484 |
On Tuesday, August 1, 2023 at 2:07:18 AM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote: > Dono. <eggy20...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Monday, July 31, 2023 at 12:46:40?PM UTC-7, Prokaryotic Capase Homolog: > > > > > He apparently imagines that the orbiting star drags its coordinate > > > system around, and all light emitted from the star is dragged > > > along with the star. That is totally crazy. > > > > Actually, it DOES. But not to the extent he's claiming. See Lense - > > Thirring effect (frame dragging) > Eh? Not really. > Any physical effects of shaking that star propagate outward at c too. > Frame dragging is not action at a distance, > and already emitted light will not be influenced by it. > All you can change at a distance is coordinates, > > Jan Dunning-Kruger is Dunning-Kruger, that the inexpert wrongly aggrandize, about experts. I.e., on the idiot scale, it's a Feldmann. There are plenty theories where c_g is infinite, and, gravitational waves range over the tachyonic part on down to the bradyonic part. Light in its emission is just c in any space, but, space-contraction is two different things with respect to the linear, moving space through space, and rotational, moving space in space. Einstein makes it clear that "SR is local". Rotating frames are not rotating inside, the coordinates are inside/outside. The blackhole cube wall is a thing, inside/outside. I have about the best theories, there's only one of them. These days I'm trying to figure out the stop-derivative, helping explain the difference between motion and rest. Space-contraction is really a thing. It's a continuum mechanics, ....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 20 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web