Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #380588 > unrolled thread
| Started by | HGW <hw@...> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-04-01 11:06 +1100 |
| Last post | 2016-06-04 04:06 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 209 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-01 11:06 +1100
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-31 18:46 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-04-01 13:04 +1100
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 07:35 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-09 13:15 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-10 04:06 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-11 04:28 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-11 17:28 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-11 11:33 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-11 20:17 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-11 12:10 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 14:18 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-11 20:28 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-11 12:17 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-11 20:32 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-24 20:13 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 09:03 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 11:58 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-14 10:03 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-14 15:52 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-24 20:07 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 08:53 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 08:26 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-11 04:35 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 07:44 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-11 06:26 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 09:01 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-11 07:28 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 10:52 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Jack Chardy <jackc@outlool.org> - 2016-07-11 16:19 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-11 17:43 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-11 11:29 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 13:43 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-11 12:01 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 14:09 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-11 08:28 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-11 17:52 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-11 17:37 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-04-02 08:42 +1100
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-04-02 16:43 +1100
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-02 19:23 +1100
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-04-02 19:40 +1100
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@home.com> - 2016-04-02 22:09 +1100
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-02 12:20 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-02 19:58 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Bimpy <pimp@pimp.com> - 2016-04-02 18:22 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-04-03 07:53 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-03 11:10 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@home.com> - 2016-04-03 21:13 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-03 06:04 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-03 15:14 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Bimpy <pimp@pimp.com> - 2016-04-03 15:10 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Bimpy <pimp@pimp.com> - 2016-04-03 15:20 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2016-04-16 07:12 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-16 07:52 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2016-04-16 09:31 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-16 15:16 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2016-04-16 20:15 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-17 04:37 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2016-04-17 06:41 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-17 10:34 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2016-04-17 10:38 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-17 15:56 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-18 08:21 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-18 08:19 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 16:51 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 08:36 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-06-01 00:30 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 20:18 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-01 20:39 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-03 10:52 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-03 18:24 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-03 09:46 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-03 19:15 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-03 11:54 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-03 21:04 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-03 15:44 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-04 09:10 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-04 05:17 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-06-04 18:49 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-04 11:23 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-03 15:28 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@home.com> - 2016-04-04 03:35 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-03 18:40 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 06:07 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Apollo <nowhere@def.com> - 2016-04-04 07:28 -0600
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 08:42 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 07:43 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 11:08 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-04 17:09 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-05 07:20 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-05 16:03 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@home.com> - 2016-04-06 03:46 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-09 03:28 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-12 08:27 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-12 09:50 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-13 08:17 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 17:57 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-13 11:29 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 23:08 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-13 19:23 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 09:48 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-14 07:34 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-13 17:44 -0400
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-14 09:02 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-12 15:02 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-13 08:04 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-13 09:23 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-13 19:35 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-13 23:16 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-14 07:49 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-14 10:39 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-14 21:29 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-14 15:13 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-15 14:19 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-15 21:48 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-16 10:31 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-16 15:13 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-17 09:10 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-16 22:19 -0400
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-17 18:45 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-17 04:58 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-16 20:25 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-17 09:16 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-17 18:47 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-13 14:49 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-14 08:12 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-14 13:57 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-15 14:26 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-15 14:54 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-16 04:29 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-18 03:48 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-18 14:40 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-18 14:50 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-04-18 18:18 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-19 04:44 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-19 21:23 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-19 20:22 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-19 14:04 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-19 12:04 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-20 08:43 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-21 11:50 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-21 12:09 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-22 09:39 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-22 09:21 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-25 23:27 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@....> - 2016-04-27 05:25 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-27 22:08 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-28 08:02 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-28 15:07 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@....> - 2016-04-29 06:37 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-05-01 14:45 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-04 14:39 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-03 21:14 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-04-04 10:23 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 06:17 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 08:44 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 07:52 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 11:10 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-04 12:47 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-04-05 07:43 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-05 06:20 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@home.com> - 2016-04-05 21:20 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-05 15:02 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-05 09:15 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@home.com> - 2016-04-06 04:14 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-05 07:00 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 17:10 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-06 13:32 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 08:25 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-08 07:01 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 09:11 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-07 03:50 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 08:27 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-08 04:31 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 07:26 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-08 20:54 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 14:17 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-09 00:18 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-10 15:41 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-17 17:38 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-19 11:57 -0500
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-10 19:02 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-03 15:21 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-03 15:05 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@home.com> - 2016-04-04 03:43 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-03 21:47 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-04-04 10:26 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-04 23:00 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-03 05:57 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <HGW@home.com> - 2016-04-04 04:07 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-03 11:26 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-04-04 10:29 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-03 19:53 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <hgw@...> - 2016-04-04 14:02 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-04 12:46 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-01 19:25 +0200
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Bimpy <pimp@pimp.com> - 2016-04-01 17:28 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-04-02 08:36 +1100
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-04-02 15:46 +0200
This is How it Happened...Summary PD <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 06:58 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Bimpy <pimp@pimp.com> - 2016-04-02 14:07 +0000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary HGW <xxx@....> - 2016-04-03 08:00 +1000
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-03 08:33 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-04-17 16:47 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Carl Susumu <numbernumber1212@gmail.com> - 2016-04-17 16:54 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-17 18:35 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary nero <oldogf@yahoo.it> - 2016-06-03 07:51 -0700
Re: This is How it Happened...Summary nero <oldogf@yahoo.it> - 2016-06-04 04:06 -0700
Page 4 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 11 Next page →
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-17 10:34 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <Z6idnZ5V2uBjMY7KnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #381801 |
On 4/16/16 4/16/16 10:15 PM, John Heath wrote: > [... much confusion] It makes no sense to attempt to discuss "movement relative to vacuum". What you are missing is that SR describes motion relative to INERTIAL FRAMES. When gravitation is present, one must apply GR, in which inertial frames are valid only locally. Near earth, locally inertial frames fall under the influence of gravity at 9.8 m/s^2; they also do not rotate. This insight shows that SR can be accurately applied to essentially all tabletop optical experiments, and to all elementary particle experiments -- such experiments have a duration ~ 300 ns or less, and during that time a truly inertial frame initially at rest wrt the lab will fall less than a picometer (1E-12 meter) -- FAR below measurement resolution. So the lab can be considered to be inertial with negligible error, and SR can be used. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-17 10:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <50854c96-da83-4833-9c7f-5f410483350b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #381829 |
On Sunday, April 17, 2016 at 11:34:24 AM UTC-4, tjrob137 wrote: > On 4/16/16 4/16/16 10:15 PM, John Heath wrote: > > [... much confusion] > > It makes no sense to attempt to discuss "movement relative to vacuum". > > What you are missing is that SR describes motion relative to INERTIAL FRAMES. > When gravitation is present, one must apply GR, in which inertial frames are > valid only locally. Near earth, locally inertial frames fall under the influence > of gravity at 9.8 m/s^2; they also do not rotate. > > This insight shows that SR can be accurately applied to essentially all tabletop > optical experiments, and to all elementary particle experiments -- such > experiments have a duration ~ 300 ns or less, and during that time a truly > inertial frame initially at rest wrt the lab will fall less than a picometer > (1E-12 meter) -- FAR below measurement resolution. So the lab can be considered > to be inertial with negligible error, and SR can be used. > > > Tom Roberts Yes SR is fine inside a lab as the laws of physics are the same for all FoR provided you do not move or look out the window as that is not your FoR. Granted in a realistic sense these small changes are far below measurement I will make a grand generalization that movement causes time to dilate for reasons unknown. Wiggle around or move in a straight line it does not matter. If you move you lose period. From my equator lab I send atomic clocks around the equator at 1000 MPH east and west. When the clocks return to the lab on the equator one is fast and the other slow. The grand generalization that movement causes time to dilate is not panning out. This begs the question movement relative to what in the larger picture causes time to dilate? We will append to the generalization to say movement relative the my lab on the equator but my lab on the equator is moving 1000 MPH east relative to the Mach stars in the sky or the spinning pail of water analogy. Close but still no cigar. Movement relative to mass weighted by the amount of mass divided by the square of the distance from that mass. That one is very close to known empirical evidence and is starting to sound like movement through a gravitational field causes time to dilate proportional to the density of the field. As gravity is a property of a vacuum then movement through the properties of a vacuum. Not movement through a vacuum but movement through the properties of gravity in the vacuum. I realize that sounds like word salad but in makes sense to me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-17 15:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <QpKdnQJ9EagWZY7KnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #381831 |
On 4/17/16 4/17/16 12:38 PM, John Heath wrote: > I will make a grand generalization that movement causes time to dilate for reasons unknown. Unknown to you, perhaps, but not to physics. It is just simple, basic geometry in spacetime. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <hw@...> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-18 08:21 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <nf1296$a2c$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #381839 |
On 18/04/16 06:56, Tom Roberts wrote: > On 4/17/16 4/17/16 12:38 PM, John Heath wrote: >> I will make a grand generalization that movement causes time to dilate >> for reasons unknown. > > Unknown to you, perhaps, but not to physics. It is just simple, basic > geometry in spacetime. Only in Einstein's fairytale version of spacetime, which is based on constant light speed. > Tom Roberts >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <hw@...> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-18 08:19 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <nf1258$a2c$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #381831 |
On 18/04/16 03:38, John Heath wrote: > On Sunday, April 17, 2016 at 11:34:24 AM UTC-4, tjrob137 wrote: >> This insight shows that SR can be accurately applied to essentially >> all tabletop optical experiments, and to all elementary particle >> experiments -- such experiments have a duration ~ 300 ns or less, >> and during that time a truly inertial frame initially at rest wrt >> the lab will fall less than a picometer (1E-12 meter) -- FAR below >> measurement resolution. So the lab can be considered to be inertial >> with negligible error, and SR can be used. > I will make a grand generalization that movement causes time to > dilate for reasons unknown. Time cannot be a function of movement because that would imply time is a function of itself. T= f(L/T)....! Ridiculous! To understand the known reason for this fallacy, you have to go back to the light clock principle. Theoretically, if an aether medium existed, the beam of a light clock would have to be tilted at arctan(v/c) to make it return to the source. (v is the clock's absolute speed). At low speeds, there is enough dispersion in a normal beam to make tilting unnecesary. A laser beam, on the other hand, would not return to the detector without tilting if the speed was above a certain level. Consequently, according to LET, the period of such a clock would be dependent on its absolute speed, slowing by 1/gamma due to the increase in path length...but it is not the same clock because of the tilting. According to Einstein's silly theory, there is supposedly no aether and there is never any diagonal light beam, even though its adherents are too dumb to understand why that is the case. There is just a sideways moving, vertical beam...and there is no earthly reason why the time it takes to go up and down should be dependent on the clock's relative movement. So in both theories, the whole idea of time dilation is pure nonsense. Time and space are totally unrelated except in the minds of SciFi addicts.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-31 16:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d53e5699-766d-4025-a8d1-e8bac5b09cb4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #381829 |
On Sunday, April 17, 2016 at 11:34:24 AM UTC-4, tjrob137 wrote: > On 4/16/16 4/16/16 10:15 PM, John Heath wrote: > > [... much confusion] > > It makes no sense to attempt to discuss "movement relative to vacuum". > > What you are missing is that SR describes motion relative to INERTIAL FRAMES. > When gravitation is present, one must apply GR, in which inertial frames are > valid only locally. Near earth, locally inertial frames fall under the influence > of gravity at 9.8 m/s^2; they also do not rotate. > > This insight shows that SR can be accurately applied to essentially all tabletop > optical experiments, and to all elementary particle experiments -- such > experiments have a duration ~ 300 ns or less, and during that time a truly > inertial frame initially at rest wrt the lab will fall less than a picometer > (1E-12 meter) -- FAR below measurement resolution. So the lab can be considered > to be inertial with negligible error, and SR can be used. > > > Tom Roberts You are outside of known empirical evidence therefore speculating. For myself to say SR is movement relative to a gravity field weighted by / distance ^2 times mass in that area is within known empirical evidence. I realize this is an unconventional view but did you think I would make such a statement without first checking to make sure it is within known empirical evidence? You have a whole web site full of tests done to confirm relativity. Find one test that says my statement must be false because of this or that test.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-01 08:36 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nilvq1$n19$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #384713 |
Dne 01/06/2016 v 01:51 John Heath napsal(a): > > .....For myself to say SR is movement relative to a gravity field weighted by / distance ^2 times ... SR is not movement.. :-) -- Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer ) Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-01 00:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <37ae8442-8dcd-4d9d-b94a-5038ca4ba073@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #384739 |
W dniu środa, 1 czerwca 2016 08:36:50 UTC+2 użytkownik Poutnik napisał: > Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant. Relativistic moron has no knowledge, but is arrogant anyway.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-01 20:18 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nin8sq$73j$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #384742 |
Dne 01/06/2016 v 09:30 mlwozniak@wp.pl napsal(a): > W dniu środa, 1 czerwca 2016 08:36:50 UTC+2 użytkownik Poutnik napisał: > >> Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant. > > Relativistic moron has no knowledge, but is arrogant anyway. > The loudest goose is the shot one. -- Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer ) Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-01 20:39 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nina46$63v$1@node2.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #384768 |
Użytkownik "Poutnik" napisał w wiadomości grup dyskusyjnych:nin8sq$73j$1@dont-email.me... Dne 01/06/2016 v 09:30 mlwozniak@wp.pl napsal(a): > W dniu środa, 1 czerwca 2016 08:36:50 UTC+2 użytkownik Poutnik napisał: > >> Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant. > > Relativistic moron has no knowledge, but is arrogant anyway. > |The loudest goose is the shot one. Seems I hit, then.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-03 10:52 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <fc2dnYKoc5VTOszKnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #384713 |
On 5/31/16 5/31/16 - 6:51 PM, John Heath wrote: > On Sunday, April 17, 2016 at 11:34:24 AM UTC-4, tjrob137 wrote: >> On 4/16/16 4/16/16 10:15 PM, John Heath wrote: >>> [... much confusion] >> >> It makes no sense to attempt to discuss "movement relative to vacuum". >> >> What you are missing is that SR describes motion relative to INERTIAL >> FRAMES. When gravitation is present, one must apply GR, in which inertial >> frames are valid only locally. Near earth, locally inertial frames fall >> under the influence of gravity at 9.8 m/s^2; they also do not rotate. >> >> This insight shows that SR can be accurately applied to essentially all >> tabletop optical experiments, and to all elementary particle experiments -- >> such experiments have a duration ~ 300 ns or less, and during that time a >> truly inertial frame initially at rest wrt the lab will fall less than a >> picometer (1E-12 meter) -- FAR below measurement resolution. So the lab can >> be considered to be inertial with negligible error, and SR can be used. >> >> >> Tom Roberts > > You are outside of known empirical evidence therefore speculating. This is just plain not true. No "speculation" here -- I am describing the mathematics of SR and GR, and how they relate, and then applying that to the physical situation near earth's surface. For the experiments described, SR can be used with negligible error, even though the apparatus is not really at rest in an inertial frame. READ WHAT I SAID to understand why this is so. Empirically, literally ZILLIONS of experiments have been analyzed successfully using SR, for apparatus here on earth. All are within the constraints described above, so this is no surprise. > [... further nonsense] You could discuss motion relative to a MASS or relative to an OBJECT. But a field pervades all of spacetime and "motion relative to a field" makes no sense. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-03 18:24 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nisavv$48c$1@node2.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #384906 |
Użytkownik "Tom Roberts" napisał w wiadomości grup dyskusyjnych:fc2dnYKoc5VTOszKnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com... |This is just plain not true. No "speculation" here -- I am describing the |mathematics of SR and GR When talking about mathematics, it's always good to remind, that your brilliant Shit rejected the oldest, important part of it. |Empirically, literally ZILLIONS of experiments have been analyzed successfully Empirically, clocks of GPS are indicating t'=t, what makes time (as defined by your idiot guru) galilean.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-03 09:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <bbdd0a7d-0200-4fd4-baa1-eaecd3c8166e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #384911 |
On Friday, June 3, 2016 at 10:24:33 AM UTC-6, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > > Użytkownik "Tom Roberts" napisał w wiadomości grup > dyskusyjnych:fc2dnYKoc5VTOszKnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com... > > > > This is just plain not true. No "speculation" here -- I am describing the > > mathematics of SR and GR > > When talking about mathematics, it's always good to remind, > that your brilliant Shit rejected the oldest, important part of it. Maciej can't post without talking about what comes out of his mouth. > > Empirically, literally ZILLIONS of experiments have been analyzed > > successfully > > Empirically, clocks of GPS are indicating t'=t, what makes time (as defined > by your idiot guru) galilean. More proof of Maciej's abysmal ignorance (or just plain lying). I wrote on another thread: "Since Maciej is less knowledgeable and less intelligent than average, it is still much more than he can handle, as his abysmally-stupid rebuttal about pendulum clocks proves :-)" He constantly mixes up irrelevant points with reality.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-03 19:15 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nise0d$qlj$1@node1.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #384914 |
Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel" napisał w wiadomości grup dyskusyjnych:bbdd0a7d-0200-4fd4-baa1-eaecd3c8166e@googlegroups.com... > When talking about mathematics, it's always good to remind, > that your brilliant Shit rejected the oldest, important part of it. |Maciej can't post without talking about what comes out of his mouth. Rave, moron, and spit. What else can a moron do, when confronted with facts.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-03 11:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b79fb61f-bd86-4eeb-ad7c-5f8c1b67bdb2@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #384921 |
On Friday, June 3, 2016 at 11:15:59 AM UTC-6, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > > Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel" napisał w wiadomości grup > dyskusyjnych:bbdd0a7d-0200-4fd4-baa1-eaecd3c8166e@googlegroups.com... > > > > When talking about mathematics, it's always good to remind, > > that your brilliant Shit rejected the oldest, important part of it. > > |Maciej can't post without talking about what comes out of his mouth. > > Rave, moron, and spit. What else can a moron do, when > confronted with facts. This idiot has never posted a fact in his life :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-03 21:04 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <niskbi$1hi$1@node1.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #384931 |
Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel" napisał w wiadomości grup dyskusyjnych:b79fb61f-bd86-4eeb-ad7c-5f8c1b67bdb2@googlegroups.com... On Friday, June 3, 2016 at 11:15:59 AM UTC-6, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > > Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel" napisał w wiadomości grup > dyskusyjnych:bbdd0a7d-0200-4fd4-baa1-eaecd3c8166e@googlegroups.com... > > > > When talking about mathematics, it's always good to remind, > > that your brilliant Shit rejected the oldest, important part of it. > > |Maciej can't post without talking about what comes out of his mouth. > > Rave, moron, and spit. What else can a moron do, when > confronted with facts. |This idiot has never posted a fact in his life :-) Your Shit has rejected euclidean geometry. The oldest and very important path of mathemaics. This is the fact. And all you can do about it, is yelling, spitting and waving arms, together with your fellow idiots.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-03 15:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <55520790-ec32-4b19-b830-dcb2dff287e0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #384932 |
On Friday, June 3, 2016 at 1:04:20 PM UTC-6, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > > Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel" napisał w wiadomości grup > dyskusyjnych:b79fb61f-bd86-4eeb-ad7c-5f8c1b67bdb2@googlegroups.com... > > > > On Friday, June 3, 2016 at 11:15:59 AM UTC-6, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > > > > > > Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel" napisał w wiadomości grup > > > dyskusyjnych:bbdd0a7d-0200-4fd4-baa1-eaecd3c8166e@googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > When talking about mathematics, it's always good to remind, > > > > that your brilliant Shit rejected the oldest, important part of it. > > > > > > Maciej can't post without talking about what comes out of his mouth. > > > > Rave, moron, and spit. What else can a moron do, when > > confronted with facts. > > > > This idiot has never posted a fact in his life :-) > > Your Shit has rejected euclidean geometry. I reject my shit every day. You must keep yours internalized for nostalgia. > The oldest and very important path of mathemaics. Nobody rejects Euclidean geometry, moron. > This is the fact. Yes, it is a fact, but that fact is completely trivial. > And all you can do about it, is yelling, spitting and waving arms, > together with your fellow idiots. You are the idiot here, spouting trivialities and vituperation. Are you really so stupid as to claim there is no other geometry? Are you so stupid as to reject spherical geometry, too? Moron!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-04 09:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nitutv$k6l$1@node2.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #384936 |
Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel" napisał w wiadomości grup dyskusyjnych:55520790-ec32-4b19-b830-dcb2dff287e0@googlegroups.com... > The oldest and very important path of mathemaics. |Nobody rejects Euclidean geometry, moron. Your idiot guru did, you do. This is a fact, and all you can do about it is yelling, spitting and waving arms, together with your fellow idiots. > And all you can do about it, is yelling, spitting and waving arms, > together with your fellow idiots. |You are the idiot here, spouting trivialities and vituperation. Decide, poor idiot. Either rejecting EG by your bunch of idiots is a triviality - as you said above, or noone of your bunch of idiots do it - as you also said above.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-04 05:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a61a40a3-af0f-42d2-932f-a4abd2937ecb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #384948 |
On Saturday, June 4, 2016 at 1:10:57 AM UTC-6, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > > Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel" napisał w wiadomości grup > dyskusyjnych:55520790-ec32-4b19-b830-dcb2dff287e0@googlegroups.com... > > > > > The oldest and very important path of mathemaics. > > > > Nobody rejects Euclidean geometry, moron. > > Your idiot guru did, you do. This is a fact, and > all you can do about it is yelling, spitting and > waving arms, together with your fellow idiots. Nope. Your stupid ranting is tantamount to saying that anyone who accepts spherical geometry rejects Eclidean geometry. Now isn't that just plain nuts? YOU are the REAL idiot here and you have just proven it. > > > And all you can do about it, is yelling, spitting and waving arms, > > > together with your fellow idiots. > > > You are the idiot here, spouting trivialities and vituperation. > > Decide, poor idiot. Either rejecting EG by your bunch of > idiots is a triviality - as you said above, or noone of your > bunch of idiots do it - as you also said above. Decide, poor idiot, whether or not you're ever going to get a brain.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-04 18:49 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <niv0q5$mi2$1@node2.news.atman.pl> |
| In reply to | #384956 |
Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel" napisał w wiadomości grup dyskusyjnych:a61a40a3-af0f-42d2-932f-a4abd2937ecb@googlegroups.com... On Saturday, June 4, 2016 at 1:10:57 AM UTC-6, Maciej Woźniak wrote: > > Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel" napisał w wiadomości grup > dyskusyjnych:55520790-ec32-4b19-b830-dcb2dff287e0@googlegroups.com... > > > > > The oldest and very important path of mathemaics. > > > > Nobody rejects Euclidean geometry, moron. > > Your idiot guru did, you do. This is a fact, and > all you can do about it is yelling, spitting and > waving arms, together with your fellow idiots. |Nope. Your stupid ranting is tantamount to saying that anyone who accepts |spherical geometry rejects Eclidean geometry. You've probably heard that noneuclidean axioms are inconsistent with euclidean, have you, poor idiot? Yes, accepting one set you're rejecting the other. Of course, to know that you'd have to think. So? rejecting EG by your bunch of idiots is a triviality - as you said above, or noone of your bunch of idiots do it - as you also said above?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web