Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #388381 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-07-25 12:12 -0500 |
| Last post | 2016-08-08 10:16 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 168 — 13 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 12:12 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGW." <hw@....> - 2016-07-28 09:12 +1000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-28 01:44 +0000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge "HGW." <hw@....> - 2016-07-28 19:58 +1000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 09:16 -0500
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-29 02:42 +0000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-07-27 16:38 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 08:55 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGW." <hw@....> - 2016-07-29 08:12 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-28 15:33 -0700
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-29 03:09 +0000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-29 22:35 +1000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-30 06:15 +0000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 09:06 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-30 05:04 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-30 06:22 +0000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-07-30 08:24 +0200
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-29 07:02 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 09:21 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-29 12:45 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 15:19 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-30 06:34 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 16:29 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-31 22:33 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-31 14:10 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-07-30 06:45 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-30 06:22 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-08-06 05:15 -0700
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-06 14:00 +0000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-08-06 07:43 -0700
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-06 08:38 -0700
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-08-06 09:44 -0700
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-06 12:27 -0700
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-08-06 22:04 +0200
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-08-06 14:58 -0700
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-08-07 10:11 +0200
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-08-07 06:25 -0700
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-07 09:41 -0500
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-08 06:44 +1000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-08-10 14:49 -0700
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-12 09:58 +1000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-08-13 08:25 -0700
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-06 15:54 -0500
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-06 23:37 +0000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-08-07 05:44 -0700
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 08:58 -0500
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-07 09:46 -0500
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-08 06:58 +1000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-07 23:54 +0000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-09 10:45 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-08-12 06:39 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 10:45 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-13 08:50 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 18:15 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-13 10:02 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-12 20:59 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-14 06:16 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-13 23:48 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-14 20:03 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-14 05:58 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-15 05:00 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-14 15:37 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-13 11:41 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-14 05:50 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 09:01 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-07-28 11:27 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGW." <hw@....> - 2016-07-29 09:09 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-07-29 09:04 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-30 05:16 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-30 06:28 +0000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-07-30 01:47 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-07-30 04:46 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-07-30 08:39 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-31 22:14 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-30 12:15 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-30 17:56 +0000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-30 13:07 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-08-07 11:27 +0200
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-08 07:13 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-07 21:56 +0000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-08 10:10 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-08 10:09 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-09 01:46 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-08 10:52 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-09 22:38 +1000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-09 14:25 +0000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-10 08:52 +1000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-10 04:21 +0000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-08-10 00:19 -0700
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-11 06:39 +1000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-10 08:33 -0500
Einstein and quantum entanglement (was: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-08-10 20:04 +0200
Re: Einstein and quantum entanglement Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-10 13:15 -0500
Re: Einstein and quantum entanglement "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-11 06:39 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-07-28 19:33 +0200
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGW." <hw@....> - 2016-07-29 08:24 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-28 15:46 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-29 22:17 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-29 07:32 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-30 05:30 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-29 15:19 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-31 22:18 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-02 11:43 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-07-30 08:22 +0200
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-07-31 22:57 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-07-31 07:18 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-01 06:37 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-31 23:05 +0000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-08-01 09:39 +0200
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-02 21:41 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-08-03 15:39 +0200
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-05 06:52 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-04 14:08 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-05 19:45 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-05 06:43 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-06 06:41 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-05 14:16 -0700
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-04 21:54 +0000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-08-05 20:33 +0200
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-06 07:17 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 16:27 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-05 15:12 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-07 06:46 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-08-06 21:50 +0200
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-07 07:22 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-08-07 10:44 +0200
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-08 06:36 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-08-08 15:50 +0200
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-09 01:23 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-08-08 21:59 +0200
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-09 22:33 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-08-09 21:52 +0200
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-09 15:41 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-10 08:48 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-10 08:46 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-08-10 09:50 +0200
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-11 06:34 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-10 08:30 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-11 06:21 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-10 15:42 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-12 09:44 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 19:16 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-12 04:39 +0000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-13 08:28 +1000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 17:40 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-11 12:22 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-08-11 19:42 +0200
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-11 17:55 +0000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-11 12:00 -0700
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-12 09:50 +1000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-12 04:32 +0000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-13 08:41 +1000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-12 16:17 -0700
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-14 05:41 +1000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-13 13:19 -0700
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-14 06:44 +1000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-13 15:07 -0700
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-14 00:33 +0000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-13 02:35 +0000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-08-14 05:39 +1000
Re: For Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Poor, pitiable Ralph Rabbidge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-14 00:05 +0000
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-08-06 22:43 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-08-07 10:05 +0200
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 22:46 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-08-06 22:26 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 08:55 -0500
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 22:25 -0700
Re: For Henry Wilson. Poor, pitiable Henry Wilson Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-08 10:16 -0500
Page 4 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 Next page →
| From | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-15 05:00 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <noqf3k$1h88$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #389973 |
On 14/08/16 22:58, Gary Harnagel virtually admitted that he has the brain of a weasel.....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-14 15:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c5a6e9a2-81da-4270-a29d-05db1e04e1f0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #389985 |
On Sunday, August 14, 2016 at 1:00:08 PM UTC-6, HGWilson, DSc. wrote: > > On 14/08/16 22:58, Gary Harnagel virtually admitted that he has the > brain of a weasel..... Nope, lying weasel, YOU do. And by ignoring the meat of my answers, you just admitted that you were wrong when you claimed 1) The sun doesn't vary in brightness 2) Nobody knows why stars vary in brightness 3) Light has only one reference, it's source 4) You have an undiagnosed mental disease. Go see a psychiatrist.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-13 11:41 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nonik4$1kg7$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #389895 |
On 8/12/2016 7:02 PM, HGWilson, DSc. wrote: > On 13/08/16 09:15, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 8/12/2016 5:50 PM, HGWilson, DSc. wrote: > >>> Bodkin, if the speed of light is not source dependent, why did your >>> idol go to all the trouble of redefining clock synchronization so that >>> it could never appear to be otherwise? It looks to me as though somebody >>> told him it was source dependent and so, in desperation, he concocted a >>> quite amusing cover up!...and lots of idiots still haven't seen his >>> joke... >> >> You can certainly redefine clock synchronization a bunch of different >> ways. I'm not aware of any scheme of clock synch that will ensure that >> the speed of light will be c+v or c-v from a source moving at arbitrary >> choice of speed v, and which is consistent with experimental data. I >> fully support your intention to write up said scheme and your proposal >> to test by experiment that under such a scheme, light behaves >> ballistically. > > Nah! I don't attempt to MEASURE OWLS. I COMPARE light speeds from > differently moving sources. No clocks are needed.... > Such experiments show conclusively that light speed is source dependent. And therefore a clock synchronization scheme has nothing to do with it. Counter to your earlier assertion. Thanks. > >> Likewise, you could redefine the standard meter in such a way that >> antigravity is proven possible, if you'd like. >> >>> >>> >>>>>> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-14 05:50 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <nontls$50m$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #389925 |
On 14/08/16 02:41, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 8/12/2016 7:02 PM, HGWilson, DSc. wrote: >>> You can certainly redefine clock synchronization a bunch of >>> different ways. I'm not aware of any scheme of clock synch that >>> will ensure that the speed of light will be c+v or c-v from a >>> source moving at arbitrary choice of speed v, and which is >>> consistent with experimental data. I fully support your intention >>> to write up said scheme and your proposal to test by experiment >>> that under such a scheme, light behaves ballistically. >> >> Nah! I don't attempt to MEASURE OWLS. I COMPARE light speeds from >> differently moving sources. No clocks are needed.... Such >> experiments show conclusively that light speed is source >> dependent. > > And therefore a clock synchronization scheme has nothing to do with > it. Counter to your earlier assertion. Thanks. That's silly...and you probably know why. Einstein knew that OWLS from a moving source was impossible in 1905 so his clock synch definition was a great way to fool both his critics and supporters.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-28 09:01 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nnd38k$3pc$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #388543 |
On 7/27/2016 6:12 PM, HGW. wrote: > I appears to me that there are far more Einstein skeptics than > supporters in the world. But Henry, since you don't get out of the house much, isn't it plain that when you're only counting to 1, then 1 is going to be far more than 0? -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-28 11:27 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <1uudnZTuvYfyrwfKnZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #388543 |
On 7/27/16 7/27/16 6:12 PM, HGW. wrote: > Einstein's whole theory is based > on the existence of one universal light carrying medium that is supposed to > unify the speed of light from all sources... commonly referred to as the aether. This is just plain not true. This is apparently part of the complex FANTASY world that Wilson has concocted for himself. It is completely unrelated to the real world, the one we all inhabit. > I appears to me that there are far more Einstein skeptics than supporters in the > world. In Wilson's FANTASY world, sure (one, HGW, is indeed "far more" than zero). In the world we inhabit, this is just plain not true; not even close. There are on the order of a hundred thousand physicists in the world, and essentially NONE of them could be classed as EITHER "Einstein skeptics" or "Einstein supporters". But essentially all of them respect the man and use his theories (which I suppose could loosely be termed "supporting" in this bass-ackwards way of looking at it). In science, one does not "support" a man or his theories. But one might well honor a man and use/apply a given theory. Einstein Skeptics certainly outnumber knowledgeable people AROUND HERE. But this atypical microcosm is not at all indicative of the world at large. There are perhaps a few dozen such skeptics in the world, compared to MILLIONS who recognize Einstein's contributions. Even Time Magazine recognized Einstein's greatness, naming him the Person of the Century (1900-1999). > Fortunately, none of Einstein's silly theory has any relevance in the daily > lives of the majority of physicists and most research work can go ahead without > incurring the errors that its inclusion would cause. Again, in Wilson's FANTASY world this may be true; but in the world we inhabit it is also just plain wrong. Essentially all of modern physics is based on Einstein's work, in one way or another -- that's why he holds such an honored place in the physics community (of which Wilson is clearly NOT a member). Certainly the >10,000 particle physicists use SR daily, and the thousands of physicists working in modern cosmology and astrophysics use GR daily. The thousands of atomic and molecular physicists use his contributions to QED and QM daily. And of course the thousands of theorists use his approach based on symmetry daily. > Einstein was a very confused man. The confusion is all Wilson's. He is continually unable to distinguish his personal FANTASIES from what actually happens in the world we inhabit. So sad.... He is more to be pitied than censured. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW." <hw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-29 09:09 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <nne3am$1jpc$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #388605 |
On 29/07/16 02:27, Tom Roberts wrote: > On 7/27/16 7/27/16 6:12 PM, HGW. wrote: >> Einstein's whole theory is based >> on the existence of one universal light carrying medium that is >> supposed to >> unify the speed of light from all sources... commonly referred to as >> the aether. > > This is just plain not true. > > This is apparently part of the complex FANTASY world that Wilson has > concocted for himself. It is completely unrelated to the real world, the > one we all inhabit. Tom, are you aware of Poincare's relativity. It is identical to Einstein's except that Poincare was honest enough to admit his belief in the aether. The theory only worked IF the absolute light carrying medium existed, in which case all observers would MEASURE OWLS to be c, because of the bogus LTs . Einstein's masterstroke was to realize that since the existence of the aether could never be detected with light and because it played no part in Poincare's equations, it could be declared SUPERFLUOUS. In other words, it did not matter if it was mentioned or not. For that blatant piece of plagiarism, he became famous in the minds of many early SciFi fanatics. The aether's principle role was to unify the speeds of all light from all sources. Einstein merely replaced that function with his P2. The LTs accounted for its independence of observer speeds. This should all be obvious to a person of your acclaimed calibre. If you know of any other mechanism that could unify all light speeds then y0ou should share it with the rest of the world......and please don't just say it comes from 'spacetime geometry'. Your version of spacetime is BASED ON the assumption that all light speeds are unified already. > Certainly the >10,000 particle physicists use SR daily, and > the thousands of physicists working in modern cosmology and > astrophysics use GR daily. There are not. The thousands of atomic and molecular > physicists use his contributions to QED and QM daily. And > of course the thousands of theorists use his approach based on > symmetry daily. They never use Einstein's theory unless they want a wrong answer. > > Tom Roberts --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-29 09:04 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <dPSdnZUeSIIe_wbKnZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #388626 |
On 7/28/16 7/28/16 - 6:09 PM, HGW. wrote: > On 29/07/16 02:27, Tom Roberts wrote: >> On 7/27/16 7/27/16 6:12 PM, HGW. wrote: >>> Einstein's whole theory is based >>> on the existence of one universal light carrying medium that is >>> supposed to >>> unify the speed of light from all sources... commonly referred to as >>> the aether. >> >> This is just plain not true. >> >> This is apparently part of the complex FANTASY world that Wilson has >> concocted for himself. It is completely unrelated to the real world, the >> one we all inhabit. > > [... HGW just describes his fantasy that SR is based on aether] > > If you know of any other mechanism that could unify all light speeds then y0ou > should share it with the rest of the world......and please don't just say it > comes from 'spacetime geometry'. Your version of spacetime is BASED ON the > assumption that all light speeds are unified already. The vacuum speed of light is c relative to any (locally) inertial frame because of an internal symmetry of spacetime. This geometry is NOT AT ALL "BASED ON the assumption that all light speeds are unified already", as it can be derived and defined independent of all electrodynamics. Due to historical accident, Einstein in 1905 based his derivation on the assumption that the speed of light is independent of the motion of its source. Today we don't need that assumption to derive the Lorentz transforms, we use SYMMETRY instead. >> Certainly the >10,000 particle physicists use SR daily, and >> the thousands of physicists working in modern cosmology and >> astrophysics use GR daily. > > There are not. Nonsense. You just display your personal ignorance. AGAIN. There most definitely are > 10,000 particle physicists in the world, and we do use SR daily in our work. There are indeed thousands of physicists working in cosmology and astrophysics who use GR daily. But I am discussing the real world we inhabit, not your personal fantasy world. So YOU probably won't understand (because you clearly cannot distinguish between them and think your fantasy is real). Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-30 05:16 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <nnga0j$jde$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #388655 |
On 30/07/16 00:04, Tom Roberts wrote: > On 7/28/16 7/28/16 - 6:09 PM, HGW. wrote: >> If you know of any other mechanism that could unify all light speeds >> then y0ou >> should share it with the rest of the world......and please don't just >> say it >> comes from 'spacetime geometry'. Your version of spacetime is BASED ON >> the >> assumption that all light speeds are unified already. > > The vacuum speed of light is c relative to any (locally) inertial frame > because of an internal symmetry of spacetime. This geometry is NOT AT > ALL "BASED ON the assumption that all light speeds are unified already", > as it can be derived and defined independent of all electrodynamics. There you go again....using circular logic. You are talking about the geometry of Minkowski spacetime which is based entirely on what you are trying to prove. Can't you see how silly you are? Newtonian spacetime...ie., true realativity... applies to electrodynamics. > Due to historical accident, Einstein in 1905 based his > derivation on the assumption that the speed of light is > independent of the motion of its source. Today we don't > need that assumption to derive the Lorentz transforms, > we use SYMMETRY instead. Bullshit. Your 'symmetry' is based on Einstein's second postulate. ..circular logic again. Without an aether, where is the physical mechanism that unifies light speeds? >>> Certainly the >10,000 particle physicists use SR daily, and >>> the thousands of physicists working in modern cosmology and >>> astrophysics use GR daily. >> >> There are not. > > Nonsense. You just display your personal ignorance. AGAIN. There most > definitely are > 10,000 particle physicists in the world, and we do use > SR daily in our work. There are indeed thousands of physicists working > in cosmology and astrophysics who use GR daily. ...and fortunately, the resulting errors are too small to do any irreparable damage. > But I am discussing the real world we inhabit, not your > personal fantasy world. So YOU probably won't understand > (because you clearly cannot distinguish between them and > think your fantasy is real). Well I worked in six physics research labs and I never heard the name of Einstein being used by anyone. > Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-30 06:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nnhhf7$35s$4@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #388710 |
"HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> writes: >On 30/07/16 00:04, Tom Roberts wrote: >> Nonsense. You just display your personal ignorance. AGAIN. There most >> definitely are > 10,000 particle physicists in the world, and we do use >> SR daily in our work. "We", Tom? Cool, tell us what you do. >Well I worked in six physics research labs and I never heard the name of >Einstein being used by anyone. So Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge, you were the janitor for a research lab building, Ralph?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-30 01:47 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <784bf96f-83d6-44a6-87b8-40c2a0a41ffe@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #388759 |
On Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 1:29:49 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote: > "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> writes: > >Well I worked in six physics research labs and I never heard the name of > >Einstein being used by anyone. > > So Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge, you were the janitor for a research lab > building, Ralph? So far as his *published* work goes, it mostly seems to revolve around various aspects of soil chemistry. But some years ago I seem to recollect seeing his name associated with a solar observatory or something??? https://dl.sciencesocieties.org/publications/sssaj/abstracts/33/2/SS0330020196 http://www.astm.org/DIGITAL_LIBRARY/JOURNALS/GEOTECH/PAGES/GTJ100731.htm https://www.google.ch/patents/US3455147 https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US3455147.pdf Peck, A. J., and R. M. Rabbidge. "l966." The population composition of a spider community in west central Missouri. Amer. Midi. Nat 76: 150-l67. Rabbidge, R. M. The Effects of Shading Devices on Internal Illumination. Commonwealth Experimental Building Station, 1965. Peck, A. J., and R. M. Rabbidge. 1966. Soil-water potential: direct measurement by a new technique. Science 151(3716) 1385-1386
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-30 04:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0dfdc5c6-5aad-4bbd-98a9-d47cdbf99ae8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #388761 |
On Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 3:47:53 AM UTC-5, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > On Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 1:29:49 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote: > > "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> writes: > > > >Well I worked in six physics research labs and I never heard the name of > > >Einstein being used by anyone. > > > > So Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge, you were the janitor for a research lab > > building, Ralph? > > So far as his *published* work goes, it mostly seems to revolve around various > aspects of soil chemistry. But some years ago I seem to recollect seeing his > name associated with a solar observatory or something??? > > https://dl.sciencesocieties.org/publications/sssaj/abstracts/33/2/SS0330020196 > > http://www.astm.org/DIGITAL_LIBRARY/JOURNALS/GEOTECH/PAGES/GTJ100731.htm > > https://www.google.ch/patents/US3455147 > > https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US3455147.pdf > > Peck, A. J., and R. M. Rabbidge. "l966." The population composition of a spider community in west central Missouri. Amer. Midi. Nat 76: 150-l67. > > Rabbidge, R. M. The Effects of Shading Devices on Internal Illumination. Commonwealth Experimental Building Station, 1965. > > Peck, A. J., and R. M. Rabbidge. 1966. Soil-water potential: direct measurement > by a new technique. Science 151(3716) 1385-1386 Publication: The Brandon Sun Location: Brandon, Canada Issue Date: Tuesday, February 8, 1966 Page: Page 8 CANBERRA (Reuters) A research physicist employed by the Australian government claims to have invented a flying saucer and believes he has beaten a California professor in patenting it. R. M. Rabbidge, a research officer with the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial . Organization, said his invention was brought to light after a newspaper reported that Prof. Paul S. Moller of the University of California was building a flying saucer. "It's highly embarrassing to say that you have invented a flying saucer," the physicist said. "People think you are a nut." He said he took out a provisional patent on the flying saucer after a series of experiments with small models. "My invention is similar to a saucer spinning upside down with air drawn in through a hole at the top, spun to the sides over a stationary cabin in the middle, and forced out at the bottom. "The principle is similar to that of "a plate sent spinning through the air."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-30 08:39 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <HvCdnRPqwaGbMwHKnZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #388759 |
On 7/30/16 7/30/16 1:28 AM, Michael Moroney wrote: >>> There most >>> definitely are > 10,000 particle physicists in the world, and we do use >>> SR daily in our work. > > "We", Tom? Cool, tell us what you do. I am the author of the particle simulation program G4beamline, which is used by >500 physicists for designing and evaluating beam lines and related systems, especially ones using muons. I am a particle physicist with interest in muon colliders, neutrino factories, and other muon physics; I am a member of the Fermilab Mu2E experiment. My interest is moving toward accelerator driven subcritical reactors, as they offer the best approach to nuclear safety and the only sensible approach to handling nuclear waste (which they turn into fuel and burn, rather than store for 100,000 years). I am on the faculty of IIT and am part of a team developing an experiment to measure the gravitational interaction of antimatter, specifically muonium. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-31 22:14 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <nnkq2d$agt$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #388770 |
On 30/07/16 23:39, Tom Roberts wrote: > On 7/30/16 7/30/16 1:28 AM, Michael Moroney wrote: >>>> There most >>>> definitely are > 10,000 particle physicists in the world, and we do use >>>> SR daily in our work. >> >> "We", Tom? Cool, tell us what you do. > > I am the author of the particle simulation program G4beamline, which is > used by >500 physicists for designing and evaluating beam lines and > related systems, especially ones using muons. I am a particle physicist > with interest in muon colliders, neutrino factories, and other muon > physics; I am a member of the Fermilab Mu2E experiment. My interest is > moving toward accelerator driven subcritical reactors, as they offer the > best approach to nuclear safety and the only sensible approach to > handling nuclear waste (which they turn into fuel and burn, rather than > store for 100,000 years). I am on the faculty of IIT and am part of a > team developing an experiment to measure the gravitational interaction > of antimatter, specifically muonium. Tom, you forgot to mention that you are a senior publicity agents of the conspiracy to keep the name Einstein on top of the world's intellectual ladder. > Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-30 12:15 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nninbe$1lal$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #388759 |
On 7/30/2016 1:28 AM, Michael Moroney wrote: >> Well I worked in six physics research labs and I never heard the name of >> >Einstein being used by anyone. > So Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge, you were the janitor for a research lab > building, Ralph? All you have to do is Google Ralph M Rabbidge to find out the kind of physics he was involved with. And then it's pretty clear why the work would not involve Einstein. I'm pretty sure the paint R&D department at Sherwin Williams doesn't mention Einstein either. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-30 17:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nnipnh$iks$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #388784 |
Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> writes: >On 7/30/2016 1:28 AM, Michael Moroney wrote: >>> Well I worked in six physics research labs and I never heard the name of >>> >Einstein being used by anyone. >> So Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge, you were the janitor for a research lab >> building, Ralph? >All you have to do is Google Ralph M Rabbidge to find out the kind of >physics he was involved with. And then it's pretty clear why the work >would not involve Einstein. I'm pretty sure the paint R&D department at >Sherwin Williams doesn't mention Einstein either. Interesting. Of note that even if Ralph was in a related field, the name of Einstein wouldn't come up much. Scientists simply would use SR or GR without naming names. Consider an electrical engineer or something. The _names_ of the physicists that developed electrical theory (referring to the people, Volta, Faraday etc.) very rarely come up. Of course the units named for those people (volt, farad etc.) come up all the time. But there is no unit called the einstein. Perhaps we can create the einstein unit, as a unit of the kookiness of physics cranks? For example, we measure Valev as 7.3 einsteins of kookiness but Rabbidge only measures 4.9 einsteins of kookiness.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-30 13:07 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nniqdf$1qv7$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #388790 |
On 7/30/2016 12:56 PM, Michael Moroney wrote: > > Interesting. Of note that even if Ralph was in a related field, the name > of Einstein wouldn't come up much. Scientists simply would use SR or GR > without naming names. Consider an electrical engineer or something. The > _names_ of the physicists that developed electrical theory (referring to > the people, Volta, Faraday etc.) very rarely come up. Of course the units > named for those people (volt, farad etc.) come up all the time. But there > is no unit called the einstein. Perhaps we can create the einstein unit, > as a unit of the kookiness of physics cranks? For example, we measure > Valev as 7.3 einsteins of kookiness but Rabbidge only measures 4.9 > einsteins of kookiness. > I would think the unit of kookiness would be the dingle. There's a question of establishing scale and the unit. With the obvious convention, then Valev and Rabbidge would be in the vicinity of a few hundred kilodingles. Seto is well over a Md, as is Wozniak and McGinn, which is why they aren't allowed in public. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-07 11:27 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <3679210.5rOvnWvm3C@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #388790 |
Michael Moroney wrote: > Perhaps we can create the einstein unit, as a unit of the kookiness of > physics cranks? For example, we measure Valev as 7.3 einsteins of > kookiness but Rabbidge only measures 4.9 einsteins of kookiness. You want to reconsider. There is no reason to insult the man posthumously (even more than he and we already must suffer from crackpots) by naming what is essentially a unit of *stupidity* after *him*. If anything, crackpots should measure *negative* einsteins: the more in denial of experimentally confirmed theory, the less the value (so Valev could have −7.3 einsteins and Rabbidge −4.9). Albert Einstein would measure, of course, 1.0 einsteins on that scale. But please note that we already have a good measure for stupidity in sci.physics.ALL, John Baez’ “Crackpot Index”: <http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html> -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-08 07:13 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <no88ai$7pu$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #389369 |
On 07/08/16 19:27, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > Michael Moroney wrote: > >> Perhaps we can create the einstein unit, as a unit of the kookiness of >> physics cranks? For example, we measure Valev as 7.3 einsteins of >> kookiness but Wilson only measures 4.9 einsteins of kookiness. > > You want to reconsider. There is no reason to insult the man posthumously > (even more than he and we already must suffer from crackpots) by naming what > is essentially a unit of *stupidity* after *him*. This NG already has a stupidity index. Its unit is the 'geese' named after the infamous dingleberry irritant Eric Geese (or Gisse), who was incapable of learning anything and who was eventually jailed, probably for being such an embarrassment to the Einstein conspiracy. They had to shut him up somehow. I expect Gary Harnagel would be high on their list right now...he rates about 9.999 geese out of 10....with Moron-y not far behind.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-07 21:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <no8apr$se6$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #389409 |
"HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> writes: >On 07/08/16 19:27, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >> Michael Moroney wrote: >> >>> Perhaps we can create the einstein unit, as a unit of the kookiness of >>> physics cranks? For example, we measure Valev as 7.3 einsteins of >>> kookiness but Wilson only measures 4.9 einsteins of kookiness. >> >> You want to reconsider. There is no reason to insult the man posthumously >> (even more than he and we already must suffer from crackpots) by naming what >> is essentially a unit of *stupidity* after *him*. >This NG already has a stupidity index. Yes it does. I now have to agree with Thomas Lahn that there is no need to insult Einstein by naming the unit after him. I propose that it be called the "Rabbidge" instead. Also for multiplying factors, instead of kilo- or mega-, I propose that for this unit only, we call these two multipliers the "Ralph" and the "RalphMalcolm" respectively. That way we can state that Henry Wilson measures exactly 1.0 RalphMalcolm Rabbidge worth of stupidity. Its unit is the 'geese' named >after the infamous dingleberry irritant Eric Geese (or Gisse), who was >incapable of learning anything and who was eventually jailed, probably >for being such an embarrassment to the Einstein conspiracy. They had to >shut him up somehow. >I expect Gary Harnagel would be high on their list right now...he rates >about 9.999 geese out of 10....with Moron-y not far behind. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web