Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #402911 > unrolled thread
| Started by | HGW <hw@....> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-12-24 19:02 +1100 |
| Last post | 2016-12-30 08:16 +1100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 390 — 17 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-24 19:02 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-24 01:34 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-24 01:40 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-25 08:39 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-24 14:37 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-25 18:29 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-25 01:30 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-26 05:23 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? bartekltg@gmail.com - 2016-12-25 12:29 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-26 08:08 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? bartekltg@gmail.com - 2016-12-25 13:40 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-12-27 11:08 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? bartekltg@gmail.com - 2016-12-27 05:23 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-28 11:22 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-25 12:39 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-26 08:17 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-24 22:38 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-25 08:11 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-24 06:53 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-25 08:16 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-25 08:28 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-26 05:25 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-25 10:57 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-26 08:12 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-25 19:21 -0600
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-26 03:40 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-28 11:26 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-26 09:24 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-28 11:28 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-28 09:56 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-29 06:37 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-29 11:18 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-30 08:03 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-29 14:10 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-30 11:23 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-30 11:52 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-31 07:31 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Eckard B <eckard.blumschein@arcor.de> - 2017-01-04 03:51 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2017-01-05 08:32 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-24 16:35 +0000
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-25 08:17 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-25 05:19 +0000
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-25 18:32 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-25 15:38 +0000
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2016-12-24 16:07 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-24 20:33 -0600
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-24 18:43 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2016-12-25 08:25 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-26 05:37 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-26 04:59 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2016-12-27 00:09 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-28 11:46 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2016-12-27 19:05 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-28 18:53 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-28 16:54 +0000
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-29 06:03 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-29 02:43 +0000
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-30 08:06 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-29 22:25 +0000
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-30 11:26 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-30 01:06 +0000
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-30 14:28 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? bartekltg@gmail.com - 2016-12-25 07:35 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-26 07:53 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-28 09:47 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-28 15:08 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-28 11:27 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-28 15:45 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-30 08:01 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-29 14:53 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-30 11:19 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-29 06:32 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-12-28 22:26 +0100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-29 07:45 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-30 08:27 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-29 13:55 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-30 10:52 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-30 03:47 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-31 07:34 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-30 14:20 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-30 14:50 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2017-01-02 06:27 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-02 01:10 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? alsor@interia.pl - 2017-01-02 09:31 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2017-01-03 13:03 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-02 18:14 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2017-01-04 03:52 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-04 10:45 +0100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2017-01-05 08:22 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-05 11:19 +0100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2017-01-06 08:54 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 14:28 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2017-01-06 15:53 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 03:12 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2017-01-07 05:44 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 14:34 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-06 15:16 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 15:56 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-06 17:25 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 20:38 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 20:50 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 20:57 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-06 21:05 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-06 21:04 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 21:20 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-06 21:23 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-06 22:08 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 02:28 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 04:01 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 05:26 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-07 08:02 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 09:42 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-07 09:53 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 16:21 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-07 16:33 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-07 17:06 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 17:37 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-07 17:43 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 19:58 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-07 21:23 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-07 21:41 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 00:36 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-08 07:14 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-07 21:56 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 01:08 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-08 07:18 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 17:44 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-08 17:53 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-08 18:00 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-08 18:09 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 01:14 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 01:23 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-09 06:44 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-09 06:49 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 08:12 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-09 08:16 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 16:14 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 16:18 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-09 17:27 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 19:00 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-09 19:10 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 00:44 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-10 00:51 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-10 07:48 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 07:58 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-10 08:06 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-09 10:32 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-08 12:22 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-08 13:05 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-08 15:23 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-08 15:46 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-08 16:23 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-08 16:45 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-08 17:09 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-08 17:19 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-08 17:53 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-08 17:59 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-08 17:04 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-08 17:26 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-08 17:32 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-08 18:09 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-08 18:12 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-08 20:40 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-08 22:39 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-09 00:08 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-09 06:43 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-09 19:01 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-09 19:18 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-09 19:30 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-09 19:36 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-09 19:41 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-09 19:51 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-09 20:00 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-09 20:32 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-09 21:05 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-09 21:26 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-09 21:30 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-11 18:26 -0600
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-11 19:31 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-11 19:55 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 01:56 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 06:32 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? alsor@interia.pl - 2017-01-12 09:20 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 09:22 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? alsor@interia.pl - 2017-01-12 09:49 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-12 07:14 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 08:04 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-12 08:44 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 09:07 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-12 10:13 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 11:56 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-12 12:06 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 12:18 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-12 12:30 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 13:06 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-12 15:11 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 15:22 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-12 15:25 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 01:58 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-14 17:50 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 02:06 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-17 07:39 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? alsor@interia.pl - 2017-01-12 15:45 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-14 09:53 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-14 18:04 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-14 18:43 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-14 18:57 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-14 20:08 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-14 20:23 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-14 21:02 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-15 10:45 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-15 18:23 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-15 22:08 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-16 19:53 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-16 20:20 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-16 20:49 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-16 22:51 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-17 07:28 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-17 08:18 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-17 08:30 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-17 08:54 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-17 09:21 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-17 09:39 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-17 11:05 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-17 11:41 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-17 12:50 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-17 13:45 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-17 14:23 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-17 14:48 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-17 15:12 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-17 17:09 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-17 18:30 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-17 18:44 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 17:44 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 17:52 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 18:00 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-18 19:23 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 20:44 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-18 21:05 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-19 04:04 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-19 05:22 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-19 07:55 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? crisdunbar@gmail.com - 2017-01-19 11:20 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-19 11:40 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? crisdunbar@gmail.com - 2017-01-19 12:23 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-19 15:24 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? crisdunbar@gmail.com - 2017-01-19 16:38 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-19 17:01 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? crisdunbar@gmail.com - 2017-01-19 17:37 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-19 18:49 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-19 07:46 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-18 21:06 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-19 01:51 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-18 21:32 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-18 21:49 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-18 22:16 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-18 22:28 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-18 23:00 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-19 07:40 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-19 17:37 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-19 18:44 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-19 19:41 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-19 20:29 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-19 22:37 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-19 22:51 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-20 01:22 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-20 01:59 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-20 06:34 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-20 06:30 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-20 06:34 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-20 09:38 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-20 09:55 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-20 10:48 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-20 11:24 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-20 11:49 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-20 12:23 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-20 13:04 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-20 15:26 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-20 16:27 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-20 12:41 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-20 20:23 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-20 20:40 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-20 22:37 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-21 13:35 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-21 15:24 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-21 16:23 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-21 16:45 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-21 18:13 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-21 19:34 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-21 20:48 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-21 20:57 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-21 22:07 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-21 22:14 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-21 22:18 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-21 22:21 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-21 22:41 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-21 23:07 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-22 02:34 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-22 08:12 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-22 08:24 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-22 08:31 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-22 08:42 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-22 09:04 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-22 09:22 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-22 09:29 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-22 10:57 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-22 15:36 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-21 22:22 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-21 23:06 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-22 08:36 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-22 09:01 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-22 10:56 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-22 11:20 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-22 11:39 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-22 11:50 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-22 15:23 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-22 15:29 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-22 15:42 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-22 17:03 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-22 17:46 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-22 18:03 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-22 18:47 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-22 19:23 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-22 19:38 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-22 20:36 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-22 22:03 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-22 23:03 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 05:44 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-23 07:55 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 08:28 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-23 08:30 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-23 12:19 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-23 14:01 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-23 16:24 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-23 17:35 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-23 18:42 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-23 20:06 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-23 22:17 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-23 22:40 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 17:57 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-24 19:57 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 21:45 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-25 08:01 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? crisdunbar@gmail.com - 2017-01-25 08:28 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-25 08:51 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? crisdunbar@gmail.com - 2017-01-25 09:58 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-25 10:35 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-25 10:30 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-25 10:41 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-25 11:35 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-25 12:03 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-26 01:35 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-26 02:05 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-26 15:39 +0100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-01-27 20:33 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-24 22:23 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-25 08:06 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? crisdunbar@gmail.com - 2017-01-23 13:19 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-23 13:54 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 14:01 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-23 14:24 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 16:17 -0600
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-23 14:23 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-23 14:34 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-23 14:39 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-24 13:25 -0600
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 01:02 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-12 01:37 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-22 14:42 -0600
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-22 15:14 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-09 06:56 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-09 21:32 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 01:39 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-09 06:45 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-07 08:00 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 05:17 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? alsor@interia.pl - 2017-01-07 11:48 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2017-01-08 10:37 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 17:25 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2017-01-08 15:42 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-08 05:51 +0000
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2017-01-09 04:56 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-08 19:31 +0000
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2017-01-09 08:06 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 17:26 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2017-01-06 08:17 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2017-01-04 09:21 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2017-01-01 13:00 +1100
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-29 12:28 -0800
Re: Why Do SR and BaTh Both Give the Right Answer for a Sagnac Ring Gyro? HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-30 08:16 +1100
Page 3 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 20 Next page →
| From | HGW <hw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 08:17 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <o3mom5$rvn$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #402932 |
On 25/12/16 03:35, Michael Moron-y reminded the scientific world that he is a genuine idiot.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 05:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <o3nksj$rgh$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #402938 |
HGW <hw@....> writes: >On 25/12/16 03:35, Michael Moron-y reminded the scientific world that he >is a genuine idiot. What's the matter, Ralph? You don't like it when I point out that nobody cares about your Dirty BaThWater beause your Dirty BaThWater is a oomplete, total failure? Well maybe a "History of Science" may care about failed theories for historic value such as the aether, but for them to even notice in the first place, it would have to be believed by someone first.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <hw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 18:32 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <o3nsli$582$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #402948 |
On 25/12/16 16:19, Michael Moroney wrote: > HGW <hw@....> writes: > >> On 25/12/16 03:35, Michael Moron-y reminded the scientific world that he >> is a genuine idiot. > > What's the matter, Henry? You don't like it when I point out that nobody > cares about your Dirty BaThWater beause your Dirty BaThWater is a oomplete, > total failure? Well maybe a "History of Science" may care about failed > theories for historic value such as the aether, but for them to even > notice in the first place, it would have to be believed by someone first. ...and Einstein's aether theory will soon be another one to hit the dust... --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 15:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <o3op56$no7$3@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #402954 |
HGW <hw@....> writes: >On 25/12/16 16:19, Michael Moroney wrote: >> HGW <hw@....> writes: >> >>> On 25/12/16 03:35, Michael Moron-y reminded the scientific world that he >>> is a genuine idiot. >> >> What's the matter, Henry? You don't like it when I point out that nobody >> cares about your Dirty BaThWater beause your Dirty BaThWater is a oomplete, >> total failure? Well maybe a "History of Science" may care about failed >> theories for historic value such as the aether, but for them to even >> notice in the first place, it would have to be believed by someone first. >...and Einstein's aether theory will soon be another one to hit the dust... Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge, that would be true, Ralph, if Einstein had ever come up with an aether theory, Ralph Rabbidge. Ralph Malcolm, as you know, Ralph, Einstein disavowed the aether in his SR paper, Ralph. Ralph, as you know, Ralph, he never used it again, Ralph M. Rabbidge, other than to mention an aether with no properties of motion may exist, Ralph Rabbidge. So Ralph, there never was an Einstein aether theory to bite the dust, Ralph.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dancouriann@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-24 16:07 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <95fc7b56-feae-4a32-836f-9379f019a782@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #402911 |
On Saturday, December 24, 2016 at 12:02:32 AM UTC-8, HGW wrote: > SR says light is a simple oscillator... BaTh says light does > not oscillate during travel... Special relativity does not say that light oscillates during travel. To the contrary, according to special relativity the phase of a photon does not advance during transit. In classical terms each wavecrest propagates at the phase velocity. By definition, the phase of a wavecrest doesn't change during transit. You say "light does not oscillate during travel", so you're in agreement with special relativity about this. > SR says both beams move at c in the non-rotating frame and have > different travel times... Yes. In order for there to be a phase difference, the time for a wavecrest (or photon) to travel around the loop in the two directions must differ. This is true by definition. The same applies to a sequence of ballistic particles. This is why a ballistic theory predicts no Sagnac effect, because according to any coherent ballistic theory the time for a wavecrest or light particle to traverse the two directions is the same. >Bath says the travel times are the same. Right. Since it is a ballistic theory, the travel times for wavecrests moving in opposite directions are the same, and so there is no phase difference on arrival, i.e., no Sagnac effect. > BaTh says both travel times are: t = 2piR/c Right, this is the time for wavecrests to traverse the loop in opposite directions. Since the travel times are the same (according to any rationally coherent ballistic theory), the wavecrests arrive at the same time, so there is no phase difference. > ...the path lengths are (c+v)t and (c-v)t. Right, according to ballistic theory a photon representing a particular phase from the source takes the same time to reach the receiver in either direction. It travels further in the forward direction, but is moving faster, so they arrive at the same time, i.e., in phase. That's why ballistic theory predicts no Sagnac effect. > Therefore the difference in path lengths is 4piRv/c. Right. > Since lambda is constant, the phase difference = 4Aw/(c.lambda) > as before. No, since two wavecrests (or photons with the same phase) take the same time to reach the receiver, they arrive simultaneously, and there is no phase difference, by definition. > So how can two diametrically opposed theories produce the > same correct answer? In this case, they don't. Any rationally coherent ballistic theory predicts no Sagnac effect, but you aren't describing a rationally coherent ballistic theory. Your reasoning tacitly concedes that the phase velocity of light in vacuum is always c in terms of any inertial coordinates, in agreement with special relativity. You merely claim that the "true" metaphysical velocity of light is c+-v, but your metaphysical velocity has no observable effects. (It isn't the group velocity either.) The observable phase difference demonstrates that the phases take different amounts of time to travel the loop, proportional to the different path lengths with equal phase velocities.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-24 20:33 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <0Jedndzx6cN2ssLFnZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #402945 |
On 12/24/16 12/24/16 6:07 PM, dancouriann@gmail.com wrote: > On Saturday, December 24, 2016 at 12:02:32 AM UTC-8, HGW wrote: >> ["BaTh" prediction for Sagnac] > Any rationally coherent ballistic theory predicts no Sagnac effect, Yes. All you say is correct. It's just that "BaTh" is neither rational nor coherent nor actually a ballistic theory of light. Instead it is a bunch of fantasies of Wilson's that he changes at whim so he can claim that "BaTh" works. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-24 18:43 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2391a3b0-1763-42fb-92cc-ad67e3462fda@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #402945 |
On Saturday, December 24, 2016 at 6:07:14 PM UTC-6, danco...@gmail.com wrote: > In this case, they don't. Any rationally coherent ballistic theory predicts > no Sagnac effect That is actually not quite true. *Most* rationally coherent emission theories would predict no Sagnac effect. But there was one emission theory, that of Ritz, that did. Ritz' theory was constructed such that all optical phenomena occurred as though light propagated through an aether stationary with respect to the original source. http://authors.library.caltech.edu/6213/1/TOLpr12.pdf 1) While traveling in a straight line, light retains the component of velocity that it obtained from its source. 2) After reflection from a non-specular object, light spreads out from any point of that object around a center which moves with the same velocity as the original source. 3) After reflection from a mirror, light continues to move at c relative to a point moving with the same velocity as the emitter. 4) In summary, light retains the memory of its origin after reflection. In 1924, Miller and Tomaschek both conducted repeats of the MMX experiment with extraterrestrial sources of light. Miller used sunlight, while Tomaschek tested sunlight, starlight, and Jupiter light. Miller and Tomaschek's results both firmly refuted the Ritz variant of emission theory.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dancouriann@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 08:25 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <31f67568-0df0-4dca-9e89-069fdeada139@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #402947 |
On Saturday, December 24, 2016 Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > On Saturday, December 24, 2016 danco...@gmail.com wrote: >> Any rationally coherent ballistic theory predicts >> no Sagnac effect. > > That is actually not quite true. *Most* rationally coherent > emission theories would predict no Sagnac effect. But there > was one emission theory, that of Ritz, that did. You changed ballistic to emission. Ritz's idea is classified as an emission theory, but it was not at all a ballistic theory, i.e., Ritz's light does not behave like individual ballistic corpuscles, which would conserve momentum in their interactions with matter, reflect off mirrors at equal speeds relative to the mirror, etc. So it isn't a counter-example to the statement that any rationally coherent ballistic theory predicts zero Sagnac effect. Needless to say, Ritz's (frankly absurd) conception of light had its own well-known problems (having no clear and self-consistent account of emission, let alone of the interference effects associated with reflection, refraction, or diffraction), but I don't think those are relevant to the OP's ideas.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <hw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-26 05:37 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <o3p3l6$1o6e$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #402963 |
On 26/12/16 03:25, dancouriann@gmail.com wrote: > On Saturday, December 24, 2016 Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: >> On Saturday, December 24, 2016 danco...@gmail.com wrote: >>> Any rationally coherent ballistic theory predicts no Sagnac >>> effect. >> >> That is actually not quite true. *Most* rationally coherent >> emission theories would predict no Sagnac effect. But there was one >> emission theory, that of Ritz, that did. > > You changed ballistic to emission. Ritz's idea is classified as an > emission theory, but it was not at all a ballistic theory, i.e., > Ritz's light does not behave like individual ballistic corpuscles, > which would conserve momentum in their interactions with matter, > reflect off mirrors at equal speeds relative to the mirror, etc. So > it isn't a counter-example to the statement that any rationally > coherent ballistic theory predicts zero Sagnac effect. Needless to > say, Ritz's (frankly absurd) conception of light had its own > well-known problems (having no clear and self-consistent account of > emission, let alone of the interference effects associated with > reflection, refraction, or diffraction), but I don't think those are > relevant to the OP's ideas. Ritz's theory was quite primitive at the time..but so was just about every theory in physics. I'm sure that Ritz would have discovered the same amendments that I have if he had not died prematurely. As I have now pointed out, no reported experiment claiming to refute BaTh is worth the paper it is written on. For instance, the spinning mirror experiments of Majorama and Brecher, etc....They use interferometry, which, according to BaTh, is not sensitive to the speeds of the two rays at all. The number of wavelengths in each path does not change no matter what rotation speed is used...so the null result fully supports BaTh. As with Sagnac, those experiments wrongly assumed light behaves like a simple oscillator with a time dependent phase. --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <hw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-26 04:59 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <o3p1eo$1kjf$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #402945 |
On 25/12/16 11:07, dancouriann@gmail.com wrote: > On Saturday, December 24, 2016 at 12:02:32 AM UTC-8, HGW wrote: >> SR says light is a simple oscillator... BaTh says light does not >> oscillate during travel... > > Special relativity does not say that light oscillates during travel. > To the contrary, according to special relativity the phase of a > photon does not advance during transit. In classical terms each > wavecrest propagates at the phase velocity. By definition, the phase > of a wavecrest doesn't change during transit. You say "light does > not oscillate during travel", so you're in agreement with special > relativity about this. > >> SR says both beams move at c in the non-rotating frame and have >> different travel times... > > Yes. In order for there to be a phase difference, the time for a > wavecrest (or photon) to travel around the loop in the two directions > must differ. This is true by definition. Gawd! You just said light does not oscillate during travel and now you say it has a periodicity, the phase of which is time dependent BY DEFINITION. That IS a frequency. You have immediately contradicted yourself. ...Make up your mind, will you! The same applies to a > sequence of ballistic particles. This is why a ballistic theory > predicts no Sagnac effect, because according to any coherent > ballistic theory the time for a wavecrest or light particle to > traverse the two directions is the same. That does not mean there is no phase difference, you poor idiot. Both rays take the same time to travel to the detector but since more wavelengths exist in one ray than the other, they are not in phase when they re-uinite. >> Bath says the travel times are the same. > > Right. Since it is a ballistic theory, the travel times for > wavecrests moving in opposite directions are the same, and so there > is no phase difference on arrival, i.e., no Sagnac effect. No you are again saying light oscillates... Look, if you want to talk science, you should learn something about it first. Otherwise you will just make a fool of yourself like you are now. >> BaTh says both travel times are: t = 2piR/c > > Right, this is the time for wavecrests to traverse the loop in > opposite directions. Since the travel times are the same (according > to any rationally coherent ballistic theory), the wavecrests arrive > at the same time, so there is no phase difference. Poor fool! When the ring has an angular velocity, there are already more waves in one path than the other. So during the time a particular photon travels from the source to receiver, a different number of waves arrive at the receiver in each path. Can I be more explicit than that? >> ...the path lengths are (c+v)t and (c-v)t. > > Right, according to ballistic theory a photon representing a > particular phase from the source takes the same time to reach the > receiver in either direction. It travels further in the forward > direction, but is moving faster, so they arrive at the same time, > i.e., in phase. That's why ballistic theory predicts no Sagnac > effect. You keep repeating the same nonsense. You are assuming light behaves like a simple oscillator even though you previously said it did not. I cannot see any point in arguing with aperson who says one thing then immediately contradicts himself. Even Tom Roberts is obviously so embarrassed by the stupidity of one of his fellow conspirators that he has chipped in with a few insults towards me, apparently quite aware that I am right ans his whole life has been wasted backing a loser. <more idiocy snipped>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dancouriann@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-27 00:09 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <62fc4bae-4c59-49cf-a676-4444aafddadb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #402967 |
On Sunday, December 25, 2016 HGW wrote: > Both rays take the same time to travel to the detector > but since more wavelengths exist in one ray than the > other, they are not in phase when they re-uinite. The Sagnac effect doesn't rely on a continuous beam or "ray", it even exists with just a single momentary pulse. For example, suppose a single electromagnetic pulse of light is split in Singapore and sent in two directions around the Earth at the equator. Since the Earth is rotating, the pulse in the counter-rotating direction will arrive back at Singapore sooner than the pulse in the co-rotating direction, and this time difference IS the Sagnac effect. This time difference is a first-order effect, that can be measured with an ordinary clock, and it shows up in the timing of GPS signals circling the Earth in opposite directions, etc. Note that we don't have to measure "phase" differences, we can actually measure the difference between the arrival times of individual pulses going around in opposite directions. Now, if the two pulses arrived simultaneously, as they would according to your theory, there would be no Sagnac effect, by definition. But we know from experience that the Sagnac effect exists, i.e., there IS a time difference, so your theory is falsified.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <hw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-28 11:46 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <o3v21t$e82$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #403070 |
On 27/12/16 19:09, dancouriann@gmail.com wrote: > On Sunday, December 25, 2016 HGW wrote: >> Both rays take the same time to travel to the detector but since >> more wavelengths exist in one ray than the other, they are not in >> phase when they re-uinite. > > The Sagnac effect doesn't rely on a continuous beam or "ray", it even > exists with just a single momentary pulse. For example, suppose a > single electromagnetic pulse of light is split in Singapore and sent > in two directions around the Earth at the equator. Since the Earth > is rotating, the pulse in the counter-rotating direction will arrive > back at Singapore sooner than the pulse in the co-rotating direction, > and this time difference IS the Sagnac effect. Ah! I don't think so. It is what dingleberries like you think is the Sagnac effect. In actual fact your pulses would take exactly the same time to go around the Earth in opposite directions, (if the whole atmosphere and ionosphere rotated exactly in sync with the Earth.) > This time difference > is a first-order effect, that can be measured with an ordinary clock, > and it shows up in the timing of GPS signals circling the Earth in > opposite directions, etc. It can be and possibly has been done...and no significant difference was detected. ...and there are plenty of ways the results of such an experiment can be fiddled in order to support Einstein, anyway. ...and how the hell do you send two GPS signals around the Earth in opposite direction and ensure they have the same path length? I think you are just another clueless dingleberry troll. > Note that we don't have to measure "phase" > differences, we can actually measure the difference between the > arrival times of individual pulses going around in opposite > directions. Now, if the two pulses arrived simultaneously, as they > would according to your theory, there would be no Sagnac effect, by > definition. But we know from experience that the Sagnac effect > exists, i.e., there IS a time difference, so your theory is > falsified. The Sagnac effect can only be observed with interferometry. That is the only way the difference in wavelengths can show up. All Sagnac interfeometers use interferometry. Not one uses a clock. --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | dancouriann@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-27 19:05 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a5772ffc-07c5-4237-b2e9-fef2a6b2f182@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #403166 |
On Tuesday, December 27, 2016, HGW wrote: > On 27/12/16 19:09, dan@gmail.com wrote: >> This time difference is a first-order effect, >> that can be measured with an ordinary clock, >> and it shows up in the timing of GPS signals... > > It can be and possibly has been done...and no > significant difference was detected. It has indeed been done... in fact, it is done countless times each day, all around the world, in GPS systems, which must have their time signals corrected for the Sagnac effect. This is a very well-known first-order effect, that amounts to hundreds of nanoseconds (which would result in unacceptable position errors) if not corrected. On Tuesday, December 27, 2016, HGW wrote: > ...and there are plenty of ways the results of > such an experiment can be fiddled in order to > support Einstein, anyway. The people who work on the GPS system are not trying to support any particular person, they are striving to make the system work as accurately as possible, by correcting for every systematic effect that can be identified. The Sagnac effect is a very obvious an unmistakable effect that must be corrected. If some GPS engineer could find evidence that Lorentz invariance is violated, he would gladly collect his Nobel prize. > How the hell do you send two GPS signals around > the Earth in opposite direction and ensure they > have the same path length? It isn't necessary for a signal to have the same path length as some other signal in order to exhibit the Sagnac effect. In general, the Sagnac effect simply represents the fact that, in terms of any system of inertial coordinates, the coordinate time required for a signal to traverse a given path is proportional to the integrated spatial length of that path in terms of that coordinate system. The GPS uses the Earth-Centered Inertial (ECI) coordinate system for its clocks. > The Sagnac effect can only be observed with > interferometry. Not true. It's observed continually by clocks in the GPS system. Your theory is as thoroughly and unequivocally falsified as it is humanly possible for any theory to ever be falsified.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <hw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-28 18:53 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <o3vr1j$1coq$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #403171 |
On 28/12/16 14:05, dancouriann@gmail.com wrote: > On Tuesday, December 27, 2016, HGW wrote: >> On 27/12/16 19:09, dan@gmail.com wrote: >>> This time difference is a first-order effect, that can be >>> measured with an ordinary clock, and it shows up in the timing of >>> GPS signals... >> >> It can be and possibly has been done...and no significant >> difference was detected. > > It has indeed been done... in fact, it is done countless times each > day, all around the world, in GPS systems, which must have their time > signals corrected for the Sagnac effect. This is a very well-known > first-order effect, that amounts to hundreds of nanoseconds (which > would result in unacceptable position errors) if not corrected. Crap. What they call the Sagnac correction is really a correction for c+v. > On Tuesday, December 27, 2016, HGW wrote: >> ...and there are plenty of ways the results of such an experiment >> can be fiddled in order to support Einstein, anyway. > > The people who work on the GPS system are not trying to support any > particular person, they are striving to make the system work as > accurately as possible, by correcting for every systematic effect > that can be identified. The Sagnac effect is a very obvious an > unmistakable effect that must be corrected. If some GPS engineer > could find evidence that Lorentz invariance is violated, he would > gladly collect his Nobel prize. The people who work on GPS don't give a fuck about Einstein or anything his theory said. >> How the hell do you send two GPS signals around the Earth in >> opposite direction and ensure they have the same path length? > > It isn't necessary for a signal to have the same path length as some > other signal in order to exhibit the Sagnac effect. In general, the > Sagnac effect simply represents the fact that, in terms of any system > of inertial coordinates, the coordinate time required for a signal to > traverse a given path is proportional to the integrated spatial > length of that path in terms of that coordinate system. The GPS uses > the Earth-Centered Inertial (ECI) coordinate system for its clocks. Typical dingleberry crap... The Earth isn't surrounded by Einstein's imaginary aether. All GPS signals move at c relative to their source. There is no other speed reference. >> The Sagnac effect can only be observed with interferometry. > > Not true. It's observed continually by clocks in the GPS system. bullshit...typical dingleberry bullshit... We don't take any notice of your crappy claims any more. > Your theory is as thoroughly and unequivocally falsified as it is > humanly possible for any theory to ever be falsified. BaTh has never been falsified. Einstein's aether theory that he plagiarized almost word for word from Poincare, cannot exist without an aether...and there isn't one. --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-28 16:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <o40qns$8nk$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #403181 |
HGW <hw@....> writes: >On 28/12/16 14:05, dancouriann@gmail.com wrote: >> On Tuesday, December 27, 2016, HGW wrote: >>> On 27/12/16 19:09, dan@gmail.com wrote: >>>> This time difference is a first-order effect, that can be >>>> measured with an ordinary clock, and it shows up in the timing of >>>> GPS signals... >>> >>> It can be and possibly has been done...and no significant >>> difference was detected. Ralph, you write "It can be and possibly has been done" but then you write "no significant difference was detected" ? The first part states that something is possible and may have been done but implies that you don't know whether it has been done or not -- but then you have the result! How can you have the results of something that you don't even know if it has been done or not??? I know, it's because you made up that answer, just like you make up just about everything else in DirtyBaThWater. >> It has indeed been done... in fact, it is done countless times each >> day, all around the world, in GPS systems, which must have their time >> signals corrected for the Sagnac effect. This is a very well-known >> first-order effect, that amounts to hundreds of nanoseconds (which >> would result in unacceptable position errors) if not corrected. >Crap. What they call the Sagnac correction is really a correction for c+v. And now we find out that it has been done, and you are wrong about your made-up answer "no significant difference was detected", and all you can do is bury your head and call it crap. >> On Tuesday, December 27, 2016, HGW wrote: >>> ...and there are plenty of ways the results of such an experiment >>> can be fiddled in order to support Einstein, anyway. >> >> The people who work on the GPS system are not trying to support any >> particular person, they are striving to make the system work as >> accurately as possible, by correcting for every systematic effect >> that can be identified. The Sagnac effect is a very obvious an >> unmistakable effect that must be corrected. If some GPS engineer >> could find evidence that Lorentz invariance is violated, he would >> gladly collect his Nobel prize. >The people who work on GPS don't give a fuck about Einstein or anything >his theory said. They may or may not care whether it was Einstein who came up with the theories behind the GPS but from the often-posted specs for the GPS it is quite obvious his theories are followed. >Typical dingleberry crap... Yes, what you post is quite in line what well-known relativity kook Herbert Dingleberry wrote about. >The Earth isn't surrounded by Einstein's imaginary aether. Since Einstein said the aether was irrelevant for his theories, you are certainly correct here! > All GPS >signals move at c relative to their source. And relative to their destination, and relative to you, and to me,... > There is no other speed >reference. Yup, light always moves at c relative to everything inertial. >bullshit...typical dingleberry bullshit... >We don't take any notice of your crappy claims any more. "We", Ralph? You and who else? A mouse in your pocket? Herbert Dingle? >> Your theory is as thoroughly and unequivocally falsified as it is >> humanly possible for any theory to ever be falsified. >BaTh has never been falsified. But it has been. Repeatedly. > Einstein's aether theory Since Einstein never had an aether theory, who knows what you are babbling about here. > that he >plagiarized almost word for word from Poincare, cannot exist without an >aether...and there isn't one.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <hw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-29 06:03 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <o4129b$1fvf$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #403206 |
On 29/12/16 03:54, Michael Moron-y wrote his typical religious nonsense:
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-29 02:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <o41t84$1e2$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #403224 |
HGW <hw@....> writes:
>On 29/12/16 03:54, Michael Moron-y wrote his typical religious nonsense:
What's the matter, Ralph? Mad that I caught you stating the answer
("no significant difference was detected") to a timing difference that
"can be and possibly has been done" ? Why not explain how you just knew
that answer ("no significant difference") if you didn't know if that
timing difference had even been done? Especially when that timing
difference has been measured and actually is significant, enough so that
the GPS system has to compensate for it, Ralph?
Or maybe you don't like it when I point out that Einstein had no use for
the aether and none of his theories depended on it?
Or when I commented how "dingleberry" is an insulting term for followers
of your fellow kook Herbert Dingle?
Or your attempted use of the Royal "We"?
Or how DirtyBaThWater is repeatedly falsified?
Or.... ?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <hw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-30 08:06 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <o43ts1$1p5o$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #403236 |
On 29/12/16 13:43, Michael Moron- admitted he knows nothing about science and that is why he never mentions it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-29 22:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <o442gr$gil$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #403373 |
HGW <hw@....> writes: >On 29/12/16 13:43, Michael Moron- admitted he knows nothing about >science and that is why he never mentions it. Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge, I see you really are pissed at the fact I called you out for first wondering whether the Sagnac timing difference test could be "and possibly has been done", but then, somehow, you, Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge, just knew the answer, "no significant difference" was detected! Ralph, tell us, how you knew that as an experimental result if you didn't even know whether the actual test had even been done? Ralph, can you do that again? What are the numbers that will be drawn for tomorrow's lottery, Ralph? Or tell me which stock will be the biggest gainer for all of 2017, Ralph?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <hw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-30 11:26 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <o449iq$b3a$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #403391 |
On 30/12/16 09:25, Michael Moroney wrote: > HGW <hw@....> writes: > >> On 29/12/16 13:43, Michael Moron- admitted he knows nothing about >> science and that is why he never mentions it. > > HGW, I see you really are pissed at the fact I called you out for > first wondering whether the Sagnac timing difference test could be > "and possibly has been done", but then, somehow, you, HGW, just knew > the answer, "no significant difference" was detected! HGW, tell us, > how you knew that as an experimental result if you didn't even know > whether the actual test had even been done? HGW, can you do that > again? What are the numbers that will be drawn for tomorrow's > lottery, HGW? Or tell me which stock will be the biggest gainer for > all of 2017, HGW? Hey shithead, tell me how you would send a two GPS signals around the Earth in opposite directions. --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 20 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web