Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #617956 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2023-08-16 17:38 -0700 |
| Last post | 2023-08-29 09:45 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 358 — 36 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 17:38 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-08-17 12:05 +1000
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 20:18 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 20:19 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-17 13:24 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-08-19 06:58 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 08:19 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 23:24 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-08-20 07:08 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 22:16 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 23:06 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 23:19 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-17 19:53 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 17:31 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 18:34 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 19:40 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 20:10 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 20:57 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-18 00:19 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 21:34 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 20:08 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-18 15:13 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 11:28 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-19 14:43 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 15:04 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 21:19 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-17 02:05 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 23:17 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 15:32 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-17 20:15 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 11:47 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 20:57 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 12:13 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 12:15 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 12:33 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 16:14 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 13:48 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 13:57 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 14:04 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 14:48 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 15:13 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-17 17:46 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 16:29 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 16:40 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-17 20:06 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 09:20 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 11:23 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 11:34 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-18 15:03 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 13:44 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Mike Fontenot <mlfasf@comcast.net> - 2023-08-17 08:13 -0600
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 12:59 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 13:18 -0700
Cranks Richard Hertz and Laurence Crossen run out of arguments "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 09:37 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-17 20:15 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 11:50 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 12:12 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 12:36 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-17 22:40 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 12:49 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-17 22:40 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 13:43 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-17 23:13 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 14:44 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-18 12:45 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 04:08 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 14:32 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 11:16 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 11:19 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 21:00 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-18 14:54 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 13:48 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-18 16:49 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 16:18 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Ben Harin <ianr@ninrbnnr.nn> - 2023-08-18 23:27 +0000
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Physfitfreak <Physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 15:40 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-19 19:23 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 16:56 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-18 18:18 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 11:19 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 21:04 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 13:46 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-18 14:53 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-20 10:38 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-18 18:21 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Wayne Bereznevich <nwne@czewnebe.ze> - 2023-08-18 22:37 +0000
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-18 18:49 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Elton Vakar <eero@aklenaoo.av> - 2023-08-18 23:07 +0000
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 16:19 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Merlan Bauze <emeu@eabezeel.bn> - 2023-08-19 10:13 +0000
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-18 15:39 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 11:21 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-18 14:56 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-19 10:22 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 11:31 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-19 21:40 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 13:24 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-08-18 10:56 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 11:08 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 11:16 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-08-18 11:36 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-19 10:22 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 11:49 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 08:24 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 08:51 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 18:01 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 09:16 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 18:51 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 10:06 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 10:30 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-20 10:38 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 11:21 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-20 12:56 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 07:02 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 16:49 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 07:57 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-20 18:35 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 09:43 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-20 18:35 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 08:13 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 08:26 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-20 18:13 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 09:27 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-20 18:56 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 10:04 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-20 19:49 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 11:07 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 11:29 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-20 20:30 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 12:05 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 23:15 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 23:28 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-21 10:36 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 06:21 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 06:40 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 07:11 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 07:29 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 08:13 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 10:49 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 10:58 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-26 07:53 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-21 18:03 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 10:50 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-21 23:21 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-21 23:21 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 00:38 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 01:02 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-22 11:54 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 03:05 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-08-22 09:38 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-22 20:05 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-08-22 19:52 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-23 11:08 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-23 13:15 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-08-23 15:52 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-24 11:07 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-24 14:39 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-09-03 17:48 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 12:19 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-22 22:58 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-22 21:41 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-23 11:08 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-23 22:36 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-24 01:01 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-22 11:54 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 23:06 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 23:23 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-23 12:01 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-23 03:10 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-23 04:22 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-23 13:55 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-23 05:08 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Prokaryotic Capase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2023-08-23 15:56 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-24 14:02 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-24 05:53 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-23 13:31 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 11:36 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Delmer Tupalo <rptm@lmlelodl.el> - 2023-08-20 18:44 +0000
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-21 19:29 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Travis Bazili <aail@ttttviat.sv> - 2023-08-23 09:38 +0000
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Physfitfreak <Physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-23 05:48 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Clarence Talkovsky <nskl@eccaryec.kv> - 2023-08-23 11:53 +0000
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 12:11 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-21 23:21 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 07:04 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 07:10 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-20 18:13 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 09:23 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 18:26 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-20 18:56 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 10:07 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 09:32 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-20 18:56 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-23 15:10 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-24 14:02 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-24 11:36 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-25 21:45 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-19 11:22 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 20:10 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 22:15 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-20 11:52 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Brett Harkharov <aaah@rthtrath.rk> - 2023-08-19 17:12 +0000
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Physfitfreak <Physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 08:08 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 22:34 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-19 02:50 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Chico Patsalo <tpac@slsialct.ac> - 2023-08-19 10:41 +0000
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Physfitfreak <Physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 12:22 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-23 14:45 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 03:56 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-19 08:36 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 07:09 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 07:43 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-19 19:18 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 17:01 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-20 12:13 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-19 17:52 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 13:47 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 13:55 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 14:40 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 09:12 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 00:32 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 11:24 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 14:31 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 14:46 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 12:52 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-17 22:40 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 15:06 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 06:17 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 11:14 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-18 18:40 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Shon Babukh <koun@bnbuboab.ob> - 2023-08-18 23:38 +0000
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-19 20:04 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-18 13:34 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 15:10 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-19 20:04 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 16:06 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 16:37 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 17:21 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 11:30 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 12:28 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 13:05 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 16:47 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-08-20 01:55 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-19 19:19 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 15:43 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 16:15 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 18:09 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 18:20 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 19:11 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 22:02 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-08-20 07:07 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-19 14:59 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 16:53 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-20 10:38 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-20 12:39 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 19:25 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 19:55 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 20:56 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 21:09 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 22:03 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 22:17 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 22:38 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 11:30 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 11:30 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-21 00:35 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 21:52 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-21 10:36 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 22:46 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-21 10:03 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 13:30 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-21 19:50 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 17:09 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-22 01:34 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 22:42 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-22 15:30 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 20:12 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 20:18 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 13:38 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 14:05 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-21 19:41 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 16:48 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-08-21 19:11 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 18:56 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-08-21 23:33 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 21:52 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 20:07 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 20:13 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-21 22:24 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 20:34 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 21:41 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 21:53 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-22 09:58 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-22 01:19 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 22:25 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 10:47 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 11:28 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-22 14:06 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-22 22:17 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 20:07 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 20:09 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-08-22 23:20 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 21:49 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-23 10:46 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-24 00:44 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Colby Zolotar <bolr@obzooota.yr> - 2023-08-24 09:32 +0000
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-24 10:50 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-24 14:28 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 21:50 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-24 06:58 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-22 01:26 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 10:41 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-22 22:21 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 20:10 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-23 01:24 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 22:59 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-08-21 23:58 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-08-22 15:19 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-08-22 17:49 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 20:06 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Evenezer Peltser <etpv@pverreet.zz> - 2023-08-23 11:04 +0000
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 20:04 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 14:09 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-21 21:25 +0000
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 14:18 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 16:43 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-19 00:13 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 08:15 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-20 10:38 +0200
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-18 18:43 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 16:52 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 11:30 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-19 14:51 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 16:50 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-21 19:01 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 16:06 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 16:07 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 16:10 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 16:17 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 16:26 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-22 01:31 -0400
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 01:00 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Williard Bah <rhab@ihdiadrd.lw> - 2023-08-23 10:30 +0000
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Physfitfreak <Physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-23 05:57 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Basil Hariton <athi@iaribinh.bo> - 2023-08-23 11:51 +0000
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Physfitfreak <Physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-23 07:48 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-21 20:07 -0500
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 17:21 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 17:41 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 18:07 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 19:52 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 19:58 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 11:30 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 11:30 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-28 08:51 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-28 09:55 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-08-28 15:20 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-29 06:09 -0700
Re: List of Critics of Relativity: The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-08-29 09:45 -0700
Page 14 of 18 — ← Prev page 1 … 12 13 [14] 15 16 … 18 Next page →
| From | Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-18 22:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <77826c0e-68cb-4b82-bb13-cd9346567e17n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #618225 |
On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 10:03:11 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > On Saturday, August 19, 2023 at 1:09:50 AM UTC-3, Paul Alsing wrote: > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 8:57:00 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > <snip> > > > > And yet, so far, there is zero evidence to support Tesla's claim that space cannot be curved... unless you can provide it... and good luck with that! > > > > > Provide EVIDENCE that space can be CURVED or shut the fuck up, cynic charlatan! > > > And don't dare to come with formulae. You can shove them deep into your ass. > > > Provide EXACT EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE about this fantastic and centenary fairy tale, which you worship like a gullible imbecile. > > > > I asked you for evidence first, so go stuff it where the sun don't shine. > > > > The mainstream physics, as claimed in textbooks and research papers worldwide, says that space is curved. It is NOT my theory and I am no expert. If you think that mainstream physics is incorrect, then all you need to do is provide evidence to support your position, at which time you will receive a Noble Prize. > > > > Pretty simple, eh? > Of course that's pretty simple: you are a RETARDED PARROT that follows the herd, without knowing where it's going, what is the > purpose and how the cattle is so submissive. Just obey and repeat. > > You have NO LINKS TO EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE ABOUT SPACE BEING TWISTED AND CURVED BY MASSIVE CELESTIAL BODIES. > > You DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND WHAT THE FUCK A "CURVED SPACE" MEANS and yet you're a supporter of the existence of > gravitational waves, black holes, gravitational redshift and time dilation. This, you being NOBODY, paint you as A COMPLETE IMBECILE. > > What the fuck are you doing here? Just defending Einstein because he was a Jew? Is that? > > And your main display of intelligence is to repeat, like a fucking retarded: "You don't know what you don't know", asshole. > > If you don't know shit about this matter, then you move based ON FAITH. And FAITH is the motor of any RELIGION. > > So, you are a religious worshiper of something that you're not qualified to understand but that you support because is MANDATORY > in your pagan religion based on pseudo-science, pseudo-philosophy, sophism, LIES and DECEPTIONS. > > The above describe you as the PERFECT IDIOT that this infamous religion of relativity needs, to continue the spread by indoctrination. > > So, what do you bring to the table: Books, papers, wording of popular self-hyped science MSM anchors, myths, fallacies, paradoxes, > insane proposals like the inflation of the universe one trillion times in 0,000000000000000000000000000000001 seconds, etc. > > Fucking retarded, a disgrace of a human species. You, Dick, are one sick puppy. You get all frustrated because you cannot possibly provide the evidence that I demand to support your position. I don't blame you for being frustrated because you don't have the brains given to a kumquat. Sucks to be you, Dick, but that is just the way the ball bounces. No, really, you absolutely do not know what you do not know. Interacting with you is like shooting fish in a barrel. Child's play. Embarrassing. Evidence rules, Dick, and you have zero evidence to support your very tenuous position. Since I support mainstream physics I have umpteen supporters in the form of tens of thousands of physicists (or maybe even more) worldwide. How many do you have? 2 or 3? Perhaps underwater basket weaving would be a more appropriate hobby for you. I'm pretty sure that you do not have many fans here, if any at all... Evidence rules, Dick... got any?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-18 22:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <93382879-4a46-4a50-8975-ef604844a483n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #618226 |
On Saturday, 19 August 2023 at 07:17:02 UTC+2, Paul Alsing wrote: > Evidence rules, Dick No, it doesn't, Al, it's only making idiots like you spitting with Polish jokes.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-19 11:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <707a7f10-af8c-48c9-ac27-5c1752215641n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #618220 |
On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 9:09:50 PM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote: > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 8:57:00 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 11:55:28 PM UTC-3, Paul Alsing wrote: > > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:26:01 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > > > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 8:37:28 PM UTC-3, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > > > > > > > > > The relativists here continue as bottom feeders attacking the worst critics because they can't handle the best. > > > > Tesla, the great: "I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties". > > > > And yet, so far, there is zero evidence to support Tesla's claim that space cannot be curved... unless you can provide it... and good luck with that! > > > Provide EVIDENCE that space can be CURVED or shut the fuck up, cynic charlatan! > > > > And don't dare to come with formulae. You can shove them deep into your ass. > > > > Provide EXACT EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE about this fantastic and centenary fairy tale, which you worship like a gullible imbecile. > I asked you for evidence first, so go stuff it where the sun don't shine. > > The mainstream physics, as claimed in textbooks and research papers worldwide, says that space is curved. It is NOT my theory and I am no expert. If you think that mainstream physics is incorrect, then all you need to do is provide evidence to support your position, at which time you will receive a Noble Prize. > > Pretty simple, eh? > > Here, I will start you off... > > https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_42.html#:~:text=If%20we%20lay%20out%20a,more%20complicated%20than%20in%20two. > > ... all you need to do now is show me where Feynman has made a mistake... and once again, good luck with that! > > You don't know what you don't know and that is not likely to change anytime soon. You and your silly appeals to authority. Here's one in return: Feynman said the geometrical interpretation of gravity is neither essential nor necessary for physics. So much for curved space.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-19 11:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <af85ccd0-9f1e-4af9-9a5d-916031ebf227n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #618216 |
On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:55:28 PM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote: > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:26:01 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 8:37:28 PM UTC-3, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > > > > > The relativists here continue as bottom feeders attacking the worst critics because they can't handle the best. > > Tesla, the great: "I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties". > And yet, so far, there is zero evidence to support Tesla's claim that space cannot be curved... unless you can provide it... and good luck with that! Elementary logic is sufficient to know space is not curved since that idea involves reification fallacy and time is not a spatial dimension.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-21 00:35 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ubupjh$1ot38$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #618296 |
On 8/19/2023 2:30 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:55:28 PM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote: >> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:26:01 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: >>> Tesla, the great: "I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties". >> And yet, so far, there is zero evidence to support Tesla's claim that space cannot be curved... unless you can provide it... and good luck with that! > Elementary logic is sufficient to know No, it is not. Science demands scientific observations/experimental evidence to disprove a theory. Not "elementary logic" like Newton's bishops had, or which Copernicus' critics had. However, you need just ONE such observation/experiment to disprove relativity. Not 100 authors writing or "1,500 accomplished scientists" who just "know" relativity is "wrong". ONE experimental result. I also doubt these "1,500 accomplished scientists" are actually scientists. Either they aren't, or their words are taken out of context, or they have PhDs in the 'science' of underwater basketweaving, or they are 95 years old and demented to the point that they yell at the moon or something. No REAL physicist would just "know" relativity is wrong, since they would know that "knowing" relativity is wrong without evidence isn't science. Religion, maybe, but not science. And again, after 100+ years, there is NO such scientific observations or experimental evidence discovered. None.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-20 21:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fb5e8fa7-0460-43a0-8f50-28777a3605d5n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #618431 |
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:36:04 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: > On 8/19/2023 2:30 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:55:28 PM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote: > >> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:26:01 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > > >>> Tesla, the great: "I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties". > > >> And yet, so far, there is zero evidence to support Tesla's claim that space cannot be curved... unless you can provide it... and good luck with that! > > > Elementary logic is sufficient to know > > No, it is not. Science demands scientific observations/experimental > evidence to disprove a theory. Not "elementary logic" like Newton's > bishops had, or which Copernicus' critics had. > > However, you need just ONE such observation/experiment to disprove > relativity. Not 100 authors writing or "1,500 accomplished scientists" > who just "know" relativity is "wrong". ONE experimental result. I also > doubt these "1,500 accomplished scientists" are actually scientists. > Either they aren't, or their words are taken out of context, or they > have PhDs in the 'science' of underwater basketweaving, or they are 95 > years old and demented to the point that they yell at the moon or > something. No REAL physicist would just "know" relativity is wrong, > since they would know that "knowing" relativity is wrong without > evidence isn't science. Religion, maybe, but not science. > > And again, after 100+ years, there is NO such scientific observations or > experimental evidence discovered. None. Hey, underwater basket weaving is an honorable profession... assuming that this is all you are qualified to do...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-21 10:36 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1qft592.1u4kqwqamdslkN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #618432 |
Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:36:04?PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: > > No, it is not. Science demands scientific observations/experimental > > evidence to disprove a theory. Not "elementary logic" like Newton's > > bishops had, or which Copernicus' critics had. > > > > However, you need just ONE such observation/experiment to disprove > > relativity. Not 100 authors writing or "1,500 accomplished scientists" > > who just "know" relativity is "wrong". ONE experimental result. I also > > doubt these "1,500 accomplished scientists" are actually scientists. > > Either they aren't, or their words are taken out of context, or they > > have PhDs in the 'science' of underwater basketweaving, or they are 95 > > years old and demented to the point that they yell at the moon or > > something. No REAL physicist would just "know" relativity is wrong, > > since they would know that "knowing" relativity is wrong without > > evidence isn't science. Religion, maybe, but not science. > > > > And again, after 100+ years, there is NO such scientific observations or > > experimental evidence discovered. None. > > Hey, underwater basket weaving is an honorable profession... assuming that > this is all you are qualified to do... You are right. 'Majoring in fly casting at Oregon with a Ph.D. in game-fish at Florida' is the canonical reference, Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-20 22:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <83e84fb7-4810-49d8-9253-0b05097125fan@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #618431 |
On Monday, 21 August 2023 at 06:36:04 UTC+2, Volney wrote: > No, it is not. Science demands scientific observations/experimental > evidence to disprove a theory. Only such an agnorant idiot can believe such a nonsensical lie, stupid Mike. And the mumble of your idiot guru was not even consistent.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-21 10:03 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <kkhcl6F47gcU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #618431 |
On 8/20/2023 11:35 PM, Volney wrote: > On 8/19/2023 2:30 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: >> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:55:28 PM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote: >>> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:26:01 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > >>>> Tesla, the great: "I hold that space cannot be curved, for the >>>> simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be >>>> said that God has properties". > >>> And yet, so far, there is zero evidence to support Tesla's claim that >>> space cannot be curved... unless you can provide it... and good luck >>> with that! > >> Elementary logic is sufficient to know > > No, it is not. Science demands scientific observations/experimental > evidence to disprove a theory. Not "elementary logic" like Newton's > bishops had, or which Copernicus' critics had. > > However, you need just ONE such observation/experiment to disprove > relativity. Not 100 authors writing or "1,500 accomplished scientists" > who just "know" relativity is "wrong". ONE experimental result. I also > doubt these "1,500 accomplished scientists" are actually scientists. > Either they aren't, or their words are taken out of context, or they > have PhDs in the 'science' of underwater basketweaving, or they are 95 > years old and demented to the point that they yell at the moon or > something. No REAL physicist would just "know" relativity is wrong, > since they would know that "knowing" relativity is wrong without > evidence isn't science. Religion, maybe, but not science. > > And again, after 100+ years, there is NO such scientific observations or > experimental evidence discovered. None. The Irish have an adage that does a good job of explaining Laurence's dilemma. "Eager eyes see far." This, naturally, includes things that nobody can possibly see, but they're so very eager. The first, and only, time I went deer hunting was in my 20's and I got out to the meadow where I had seen deer earlier shortly before dawn. I could make out deer at the far end of the meadow moving around grazing and I wondered why they were staying so far away. As it slowly became lighter I finally understood, what I saw as deer in the distance was actually mounds of dirt. I was so disgusted with myself I never went deer hunting again. That is my most extreme example but it explains many things clearly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-21 13:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <66f38dc1-3824-4ddc-9a41-1db7b7e2a9a2n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #618431 |
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:36:04 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: > On 8/19/2023 2:30 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:55:28 PM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote: > >> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:26:01 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > > >>> Tesla, the great: "I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties". > > >> And yet, so far, there is zero evidence to support Tesla's claim that space cannot be curved... unless you can provide it... and good luck with that! > > > Elementary logic is sufficient to know > > No, it is not. Science demands scientific observations/experimental > evidence to disprove a theory. Not "elementary logic" like Newton's > bishops had, or which Copernicus' critics had. > > However, you need just ONE such observation/experiment to disprove > relativity. Not 100 authors writing or "1,500 accomplished scientists" > who just "know" relativity is "wrong". ONE experimental result. I also > doubt these "1,500 accomplished scientists" are actually scientists. > Either they aren't, or their words are taken out of context, or they > have PhDs in the 'science' of underwater basketweaving, or they are 95 > years old and demented to the point that they yell at the moon or > something. No REAL physicist would just "know" relativity is wrong, > since they would know that "knowing" relativity is wrong without > evidence isn't science. Religion, maybe, but not science. > > And again, after 100+ years, there is NO such scientific observations or > experimental evidence discovered. None. I have mentioned before that an illogical theory does not have predictive value so you are incorrect. BTW this is why Dingle remains absolutely correct and why his refutation of special relativity is eternally true.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-21 19:50 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <uc0t7a$231l8$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #618492 |
On 8/21/2023 4:30 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:36:04 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: >> On 8/19/2023 2:30 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: >>> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:55:28 PM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote: >>>> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:26:01 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: >> >>>>> Tesla, the great: "I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties". >> >>>> And yet, so far, there is zero evidence to support Tesla's claim that space cannot be curved... unless you can provide it... and good luck with that! >> >>> Elementary logic is sufficient to know >> >> No, it is not. Science demands scientific observations/experimental >> evidence to disprove a theory. Not "elementary logic" like Newton's >> bishops had, or which Copernicus' critics had. >> >> However, you need just ONE such observation/experiment to disprove >> relativity. Not 100 authors writing or "1,500 accomplished scientists" >> who just "know" relativity is "wrong". ONE experimental result. I also >> doubt these "1,500 accomplished scientists" are actually scientists. >> Either they aren't, or their words are taken out of context, or they >> have PhDs in the 'science' of underwater basketweaving, or they are 95 >> years old and demented to the point that they yell at the moon or >> something. No REAL physicist would just "know" relativity is wrong, >> since they would know that "knowing" relativity is wrong without >> evidence isn't science. Religion, maybe, but not science. >> >> And again, after 100+ years, there is NO such scientific observations or >> experimental evidence discovered. None. > I have mentioned before that an illogical theory does not have predictive value so you are incorrect. It *does* have predictive values, of course. I can do the twin paradox with specific speeds and distances and relativity predicts the age difference. This is done all the time with muon storage rings etc. But once again, if you want to prove relativity wrong, you have to create an experiment which specifically contradicts a prediction of relativity. 100+ years so far and it has never happened. > BTW this is why Dingle remains absolutely correct and why his refutation of special relativity is eternally true. Dingle was wrong because he got the problem wrong.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-21 17:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <15cfa48d-c392-4ee4-a072-3f518f73f98bn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #618514 |
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 8:50:05 PM UTC-3, Volney wrote: <snip> > Dingle was wrong because he got the problem wrong. And you, Mr. Nobody, pretend to be smarter than Dingle? BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Demented cretin.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-22 01:34 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <uc1hdc$2968k$8@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #618516 |
On 8/21/2023 8:09 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: > On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 8:50:05 PM UTC-3, Volney wrote: > > <snip> > >> Dingle was wrong because he got the problem wrong. > > And you, Mr. Nobody, pretend to be smarter than Dingle? > I didn't get the SR time dilation formula wrong. Dingle did. > > Demented cretin. Nice signature, Dick.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-21 22:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ea6ff8af-1bfd-426a-9f49-12b5d2d41a21n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #618545 |
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 2:34:40 AM UTC-3, Volney wrote: > On 8/21/2023 8:09 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: <snip> > > Demented cretin. > > Nice signature, Dick. How sad. The cretin Einstein plagiarized Lorentz and Poincaré. You plagiarize Dono.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-22 15:30 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <uc32db$2hha5$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #618546 |
On 8/22/2023 1:42 AM, Richard Hertz wrote: > On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 2:34:40 AM UTC-3, Volney wrote: >> On 8/21/2023 8:09 PM, Richard Hertz wrote: > > <snip> > >>> Demented cretin. >> >> Nice signature, Dick. > > How sad. The cretin Einstein plagiarized Lorentz and Poincaré. > > You plagiarize Dono. I have noticed people (typically cranks) creating perfect .sig files for themselves and commented on it many times in the past, and it wasn't copying Dono. Just because both Dono and myself notice the obvious signatures you and others create doesn't mean one of us copied from the other. I mean phrases like "Demented cretin" describe yourself perfectly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-21 20:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <70fa2985-be18-48aa-8a71-0e07415169c7n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #618514 |
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 4:50:05 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: > On 8/21/2023 4:30 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > > On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:36:04 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: > >> On 8/19/2023 2:30 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > >>> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:55:28 PM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote: > >>>> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:26:01 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > >> > >>>>> Tesla, the great: "I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties". > >> > >>>> And yet, so far, there is zero evidence to support Tesla's claim that space cannot be curved... unless you can provide it... and good luck with that! > >> > >>> Elementary logic is sufficient to know > >> > >> No, it is not. Science demands scientific observations/experimental > >> evidence to disprove a theory. Not "elementary logic" like Newton's > >> bishops had, or which Copernicus' critics had. > >> > >> However, you need just ONE such observation/experiment to disprove > >> relativity. Not 100 authors writing or "1,500 accomplished scientists" > >> who just "know" relativity is "wrong". ONE experimental result. I also > >> doubt these "1,500 accomplished scientists" are actually scientists. > >> Either they aren't, or their words are taken out of context, or they > >> have PhDs in the 'science' of underwater basketweaving, or they are 95 > >> years old and demented to the point that they yell at the moon or > >> something. No REAL physicist would just "know" relativity is wrong, > >> since they would know that "knowing" relativity is wrong without > >> evidence isn't science. Religion, maybe, but not science. > >> > >> And again, after 100+ years, there is NO such scientific observations or > >> experimental evidence discovered. None. > > > I have mentioned before that an illogical theory does not have predictive value so you are incorrect. > It *does* have predictive values, of course. I can do the twin paradox > with specific speeds and distances and relativity predicts the age > difference. This is done all the time with muon storage rings etc. > > But once again, if you want to prove relativity wrong, you have to > create an experiment which specifically contradicts a prediction of > relativity. 100+ years so far and it has never happened. > > BTW this is why Dingle remains absolutely correct and why his refutation of special relativity is eternally true. > Dingle was wrong because he got the problem wrong. I see you are ignorant of the early history of special relativity's claims about time dilation because Dingle correctly criticized that sufficiently to refute it. You are also unaware that GR was invoked to save SR's time dilation nonsense by more nonsense. You also have failed to give a cause but only mutter ambiguously about accelerations. Are you really claiming accelerations and turnarounds cause time dilation?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-21 20:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <46fcb0cc-1e87-450b-bffb-0e3d380201c2n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #618524 |
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 8:12:12 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 4:50:05 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: > > On 8/21/2023 4:30 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > > > On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:36:04 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: > > >> On 8/19/2023 2:30 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > > >>> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:55:28 PM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote: > > >>>> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:26:01 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > > >> > > >>>>> Tesla, the great: "I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties". > > >> > > >>>> And yet, so far, there is zero evidence to support Tesla's claim that space cannot be curved... unless you can provide it... and good luck with that! > > >> > > >>> Elementary logic is sufficient to know > > >> > > >> No, it is not. Science demands scientific observations/experimental > > >> evidence to disprove a theory. Not "elementary logic" like Newton's > > >> bishops had, or which Copernicus' critics had. > > >> > > >> However, you need just ONE such observation/experiment to disprove > > >> relativity. Not 100 authors writing or "1,500 accomplished scientists" > > >> who just "know" relativity is "wrong". ONE experimental result. I also > > >> doubt these "1,500 accomplished scientists" are actually scientists. > > >> Either they aren't, or their words are taken out of context, or they > > >> have PhDs in the 'science' of underwater basketweaving, or they are 95 > > >> years old and demented to the point that they yell at the moon or > > >> something. No REAL physicist would just "know" relativity is wrong, > > >> since they would know that "knowing" relativity is wrong without > > >> evidence isn't science. Religion, maybe, but not science. > > >> > > >> And again, after 100+ years, there is NO such scientific observations or > > >> experimental evidence discovered. None. > > > > > I have mentioned before that an illogical theory does not have predictive value so you are incorrect. > > It *does* have predictive values, of course. I can do the twin paradox > > with specific speeds and distances and relativity predicts the age > > difference. This is done all the time with muon storage rings etc. > > > > But once again, if you want to prove relativity wrong, you have to > > create an experiment which specifically contradicts a prediction of > > relativity. 100+ years so far and it has never happened. > > > BTW this is why Dingle remains absolutely correct and why his refutation of special relativity is eternally true. > > Dingle was wrong because he got the problem wrong. > I see you are ignorant of the early history of special relativity's claims about time dilation because Dingle correctly criticized that sufficiently to refute it. You are also unaware that GR was invoked to save SR's time dilation nonsense by more nonsense. You also have failed to give a cause but only mutter ambiguously about accelerations. Are you really claiming accelerations and turnarounds cause time dilation? https://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath024/kmath024.htm "Thus Dingle’s claim that Einstein never noticed this reciprocity is simply bizarre, as was Dingle’s "proof" of the logical inconsistency of special relativity. His reasoning can just as well be applied to “prove” that Euclidean geometry is logically inconsistent."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-21 13:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f231374a-4859-4754-a67e-a32a1a372a2en@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #618431 |
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:36:04 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: > On 8/19/2023 2:30 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:55:28 PM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote: > >> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:26:01 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > > >>> Tesla, the great: "I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties". > > >> And yet, so far, there is zero evidence to support Tesla's claim that space cannot be curved... unless you can provide it... and good luck with that! > > > Elementary logic is sufficient to know > > No, it is not. Science demands scientific observations/experimental > evidence to disprove a theory. Not "elementary logic" like Newton's > bishops had, or which Copernicus' critics had. > > However, you need just ONE such observation/experiment to disprove > relativity. Not 100 authors writing or "1,500 accomplished scientists" > who just "know" relativity is "wrong". ONE experimental result. I also > doubt these "1,500 accomplished scientists" are actually scientists. > Either they aren't, or their words are taken out of context, or they > have PhDs in the 'science' of underwater basketweaving, or they are 95 > years old and demented to the point that they yell at the moon or > something. No REAL physicist would just "know" relativity is wrong, > since they would know that "knowing" relativity is wrong without > evidence isn't science. Religion, maybe, but not science. > > And again, after 100+ years, there is NO such scientific observations or > experimental evidence discovered. None. To be clear, because special relativity predicts that relative motion causes time dilation, and because both twins are in relative motion, it predicts both twins' time dilates. This is a contradictory and illogical prediction with no predictive value.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-21 14:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <66eb1570-bc52-4316-bcc2-e2f3fccc93ffn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #618431 |
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:36:04 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: > On 8/19/2023 2:30 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:55:28 PM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote: > >> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 7:26:01 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: > > >>> Tesla, the great: "I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties". > > >> And yet, so far, there is zero evidence to support Tesla's claim that space cannot be curved... unless you can provide it... and good luck with that! > > > Elementary logic is sufficient to know > > No, it is not. Science demands scientific observations/experimental > evidence to disprove a theory. Not "elementary logic" like Newton's > bishops had, or which Copernicus' critics had. > > However, you need just ONE such observation/experiment to disprove > relativity. Not 100 authors writing or "1,500 accomplished scientists" > who just "know" relativity is "wrong". ONE experimental result. I also > doubt these "1,500 accomplished scientists" are actually scientists. > Either they aren't, or their words are taken out of context, or they > have PhDs in the 'science' of underwater basketweaving, or they are 95 > years old and demented to the point that they yell at the moon or > something. No REAL physicist would just "know" relativity is wrong, > since they would know that "knowing" relativity is wrong without > evidence isn't science. Religion, maybe, but not science. > > And again, after 100+ years, there is NO such scientific observations or > experimental evidence discovered. None. Please explain which twin is predicted to be time dilated when both are moving relative to the other and time dilation is caused by relative motion.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-21 19:41 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <uc0snk$231l8$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #618495 |
On 8/21/2023 5:05 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:36:04 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: >> And again, after 100+ years, there is NO such scientific observations or >> experimental evidence discovered. None. > Please explain which twin is predicted to be time dilated when both are moving relative to the other and time dilation is caused by relative motion. And again, you don't understand the twin paradox. Time dilation as described in the 1905 paper only applies to inertial motion. And you can apply it to the PORTIONS of the journey where one twin moves at a constant speed relative to the other. However the turnaround event/acceleration causes all of the effects which causes the traveling twin to age less. It is NOT symmetrical.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 14 of 18 — ← Prev page 1 … 12 13 [14] 15 16 … 18 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web