Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #402686 > unrolled thread
| Started by | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-12-22 00:39 -0800 |
| Last post | 2017-01-05 06:16 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 215 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-22 00:39 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 02:05 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-22 02:52 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-22 05:58 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 09:34 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-22 10:10 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-24 06:44 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-24 06:57 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-25 05:55 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-25 07:43 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-26 11:08 -0800
utter cretin Jay Moseley insists "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-26 14:34 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-25 19:46 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-26 03:45 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-26 04:22 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-26 04:51 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-26 05:19 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-26 05:53 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-26 06:26 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Demetrice Barren <teercere@tmerunin.tme> - 2016-12-26 16:06 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation jaymoseley@hotmail.com - 2016-12-26 11:12 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 13:42 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2016-12-25 11:00 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-25 13:34 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation bartekltg@gmail.com - 2016-12-25 13:57 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2016-12-26 08:16 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Demetrice Barren <teercere@tmerunin.tme> - 2016-12-26 16:53 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-26 19:21 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation Demetrice Barren <teercere@tmerunin.tme> - 2016-12-26 21:49 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-27 03:29 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-26 23:34 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Demetrice Barren <teercere@tmerunin.tme> - 2016-12-27 20:33 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-30 01:24 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation bartekltg@gmail.com - 2016-12-27 11:05 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Demetrice Barren <teercere@tmerunin.tme> - 2016-12-27 20:43 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2016-12-27 13:30 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-12-26 10:00 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Demetrice Barren <teercere@tmerunin.tme> - 2016-12-26 18:06 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-26 11:48 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2016-12-26 13:28 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-26 14:20 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-12-26 15:33 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-26 23:29 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-27 04:36 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-27 05:27 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-27 07:27 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-27 06:28 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-27 07:04 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-27 15:37 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-27 08:45 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-27 18:17 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-27 10:25 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-28 09:20 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-29 03:04 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-28 23:19 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-29 08:12 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-30 00:29 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation Demetrice Barren <teercere@tmerunin.tme> - 2016-12-30 00:43 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-30 01:28 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-29 23:10 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-30 06:36 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-31 21:39 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-31 14:44 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-03 14:02 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-03 13:30 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-04 06:13 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 09:36 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-04 07:43 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 10:33 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-04 13:07 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 15:21 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-04 14:12 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 16:18 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-06 06:46 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 09:09 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-05 17:11 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-04 12:48 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 15:00 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-04 13:11 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 15:29 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-04 14:07 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 16:17 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-06 06:28 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-05 17:26 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-05 17:07 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-04 13:46 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-05 17:28 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-05 09:46 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-05 17:00 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-06 07:02 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 09:12 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-06 07:37 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Aubrey Primmer <myr@ejmr.info> - 2017-01-06 15:52 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 10:13 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-06 18:21 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 13:39 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-07 13:26 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-08 06:48 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 12:56 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-09 12:21 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 15:33 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-09 23:33 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-10 10:02 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 08:54 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-11 09:01 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 17:35 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-12 05:27 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 08:27 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-12 11:24 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 14:08 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-13 12:56 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 15:33 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-14 04:57 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-14 05:43 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 14:24 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-15 06:15 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-15 13:54 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-15 12:31 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Reid Schaffner <dnfoonio@acdnfni.info> - 2017-01-15 20:36 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-15 17:11 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-16 06:59 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 09:50 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-18 18:05 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-15 22:30 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-15 07:36 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-12 16:38 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-12 08:50 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-12 11:26 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-13 03:09 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-12 23:59 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-13 05:37 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-14 07:27 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-14 01:59 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-14 05:20 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-14 19:47 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-15 06:29 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-16 00:10 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-16 06:49 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 09:46 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-18 17:58 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 12:09 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 12:45 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-17 06:45 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-17 06:38 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 10:39 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-17 09:30 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-11 16:23 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-09 23:31 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-06 10:32 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Aubrey Primmer <myr@ejmr.info> - 2017-01-06 18:41 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-06 11:51 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-06 16:37 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-06 18:23 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-07 21:27 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-08 06:44 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-08 16:08 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation bartekltg@gmail.com - 2016-12-27 11:24 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-27 11:33 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation bartekltg@gmail.com - 2016-12-27 12:15 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-12-27 12:11 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation bartekltg@gmail.com - 2016-12-27 12:29 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-27 09:23 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2016-12-27 07:54 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-12-27 09:22 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2016-12-27 09:33 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-12-27 10:36 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2016-12-27 13:19 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-12-27 14:58 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2016-12-28 08:13 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-12-28 08:33 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-28 10:27 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2016-12-28 13:29 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-28 13:35 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-28 17:33 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2016-12-29 00:39 +0100
Re: Detecting time dilation Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2016-12-29 01:23 +0100
Re: Detecting time dilation RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-05 09:48 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-01-05 21:28 +0100
Re: Detecting time dilation Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-28 17:27 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-28 15:42 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-29 07:50 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-03 13:58 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-04 06:10 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 09:39 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-04 07:54 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 10:36 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-04 13:02 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 15:05 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-04 13:13 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 15:30 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-04 14:14 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 16:24 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-05 06:30 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 10:11 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-06 07:00 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 09:11 -0600
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-05 17:36 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-28 23:13 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-27 13:48 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-03 13:34 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-12-27 12:55 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2016-12-27 13:37 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-12-29 15:09 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation bartekltg@gmail.com - 2016-12-27 10:46 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-27 11:20 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation bartekltg@gmail.com - 2016-12-27 12:08 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-27 12:43 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-26 08:53 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Demetrice Barren <teercere@tmerunin.tme> - 2016-12-26 17:25 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-26 09:56 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-26 19:34 +0000
Re: Detecting time dilation mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-26 14:23 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2016-12-26 13:40 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-28 14:31 -0800
Re: Detecting time dilation kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-05 06:16 -0800
Page 4 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 11 Next page →
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-30 06:36 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <78a44d9c-20c3-47bd-854e-7edc0032aba3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #403405 |
On Thursday, December 29, 2016 at 7:29:37 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote: > kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: > > >On Wednesday, December 28, 2016 at 10:04:38 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote: > > >> >Moron a second of proper time at the GPS location does not correspond to a > >> >second of proper time on the ground. > > >> Stupid Ken, if you say something like that, it must mean that you don't > >> even know what "proper time" is. =20 > > >Hey moron....it is you who don't know what proper time is. > > Stupid Ken, I am using the definition used by science. If you disagree, it > is because you are wrong. Hey moron, then why did you disagreed that a proper second on any clock is when the clock shows 9,192,631,770 periods of Cs 133 radiation at its rest frame? > > >A proper second on an "A" clock is a second at the location of that clock > >and a proper second on a "B" clock is a second at the location of that > >clock. The relationship between the A clock and B clock according to SR > >and LET math are as follows: > > >"A" predicts > > Stupid Ken, nobody cares what any fortune teller predicts. What matters is > what A and B actually measure. Hey moron, no such measurement ever been performed.....in fact it is impossible to do so. That's why we have the LT to predict the rate of a moving clock accumulating clock seconds. > > > that "B's" proper second is worth: (gamma proper second on his "B" clock). > > But B's clock does not measure proper time for A, since B's clock is not > co-moving with A. Hey moron, B does not measure proper time for A.....he (B) predicts (sing SR or LET math) the rate of A accumulating proper clock seconds at A's rest frame. Gee you are so fucking stupid. > > Plus your lack of knowledge of what proper time is is evident here, since > it is meaningless for A to talk about B's proper second. ROTFLOL.....pot, kettle, black. > > >"B" predicts > > Again, we care what B measures, not if B is a good fortune teller. Hey moron B does not measure.....B predicts using the LT. > > > that "A's" proper second is worth: (gamma proper second on his "B" clock). > > A's clock does not measure proper time for B, since A's clock is not > co-moving with B. Hey moron.....A predicts the rate of B accumulating proper seconds using the SR math. > > >BTW the above SR and LET predictions are not completely fit observations. > > Wrong, Stupid Ken. No prediction of SR has ever been contradicted, in > SR's realm of applicibility. Never. Hey moron when comparing any two clocks in relative motion the possibilities exist are as follows: 1. A accumulating proper clock seconds at a faster rate than B accumulating proper clock seconds. 2. B accumulating proper clock seconds at a faster rate than A accumulating proper clock seconds. 3. A and B accumulating proper clock seconds at the rate rate. In our universe 1 and 2 cannot co-exist simultaneously.....if 1 is true then 2 is wrong and conversely if 2 is is true then 1 is wrong. Item #3 is the case when A and B are at rest in the same frame. Gee you are so fucking stupid. No wonder your name is Moron-y. > > > In real life, either A's prediction is wrong or B's prediction is wrong > > No, Stupid Ken. What A and B measure (not predict) are not the same > thing. In one case, two measurements from Clock A1 are compared to > Clocks B1 and B2. In the other case, two measurements from clock B1 are > compared to Clocks A1 and A2. > > >> So when are you going to actually learn about SR/GR for once? > > We're waiting.....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-31 21:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <o498hv$ncs$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #403475 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >On Thursday, December 29, 2016 at 7:29:37 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote: >> kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >> >> >On Wednesday, December 28, 2016 at 10:04:38 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote: >> >> >> >Moron a second of proper time at the GPS location does not correspond to a >> >> >second of proper time on the ground. >> >> >> Stupid Ken, if you say something like that, it must mean that you don't >> >> even know what "proper time" is. =20 >> >> >Hey moron....it is you who don't know what proper time is. >> >> Stupid Ken, I am using the definition used by science. If you disagree, it >> is because you are wrong. >Hey moron, then why did you disagreed that a proper second on any clock >is when the clock shows 9,192,631,770 periods of Cs 133 radiation at its >rest frame? Stupid Ken, proper time is the time on a clock co-moving with the observer. The second is DEFINED as 9,192,631,770 periods of Cs 133 radiation on a local Cs clock used as a proper clock. >> >A proper second on an "A" clock is a second at the location of that clock >> >and a proper second on a "B" clock is a second at the location of that >> >clock. The relationship between the A clock and B clock according to SR >> >and LET math are as follows: >> >> >"A" predicts >> >> Stupid Ken, nobody cares what any fortune teller predicts. What matters is >> what A and B actually measure. >Hey moron, no such measurement ever been performed.....in fact it is >impossible to do so. Stupid Ken, just because you don't know how to perform such measurements doesn't mean it's impossible. The fact remains that it's what A and B actually measure, not whether A or B are good fortune tellers. >> > that "B's" proper second is worth: (gamma proper second on his "B" clock). >> >> But B's clock does not measure proper time for A, since B's clock is not >> co-moving with A. >Hey moron, B does not measure proper time for A.....he (B) predicts >(sing SR or LET math) the rate of A accumulating proper clock seconds at >A's rest frame. Gee you are so fucking stupid. No, Stupid Ken. B measures A's clock. Again, just because you are too stupid to understand how to perform such measurements doesn't mean it is impossible. >> Plus your lack of knowledge of what proper time is is evident here, since >> it is meaningless for A to talk about B's proper second. >ROTFLOL.....pot, kettle, black. No, Stupid Ken. You have a bad habit of making up your own definitions for words and phrases used by physicists. >> >"B" predicts >> >> Again, we care what B measures, not if B is a good fortune teller. >Hey moron B does not measure.....B predicts using the LT. No, Stupid Ken, as mentioned over and over again to you, B measures. >> > that "A's" proper second is worth: (gamma proper second on his "B" clock). >> >> A's clock does not measure proper time for B, since A's clock is not >> co-moving with B. >Hey moron.....A predicts the rate of B accumulating proper seconds using >the SR math. Once again, you make your ignorance obvious to all. >> >BTW the above SR and LET predictions are not completely fit observations. >> >> Wrong, Stupid Ken. No prediction of SR has ever been contradicted, in >> SR's realm of applicibility. Never. >Hey moron when comparing any two clocks in relative motion the >possibilities exist are as follows: >1. A accumulating proper clock seconds at a faster rate than B accumulating proper clock seconds. >2. B accumulating proper clock seconds at a faster rate than A accumulating proper clock seconds. >3. A and B accumulating proper clock seconds at the rate rate. No, Stupid Ken. A's and B's proper time clocks accumulate time at the normal rate. It is just that each will measure the other's clock as running slow, because to each of them, the other's clock is not a proper clock. And since A and B are measuring different things when they measure each other's clocks, it is not a contradiction that each sees the other's clock as being slow. >> >> So when are you going to actually learn about SR/GR for once? >> >> We're waiting..... > We're still waiting.....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-31 14:44 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <727f293e-c23f-47f7-9fa9-7e0a9fb202d9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #403627 |
W dniu sobota, 31 grudnia 2016 22:39:12 UTC+1 użytkownik Michael Moroney napisał: > Stupid Ken, proper time is the time on a clock co-moving with the > observer. The second is DEFINED as 9,192,631,770 periods of Cs 133 > radiation on a local Cs clock used as a proper clock. A lie, as expected from fanatic trash. The second is DEFINED very differently. > Stupid Ken, just because you don't know how to perform such measurements > doesn't mean it's impossible. The fact remains that it's what A and B > actually measure In the sick dreams of insane idiot. > No, Stupid Ken. You have a bad habit of making up your own definitions > for words and phrases used by physicists. Oppositely. Your bunch of idiots has a bad habit of making your own definitions for words and phrases commonly used. (of course, you're mostly ignoring any definitions, even your own). > No, Stupid Ken, as mentioned over and over again to you, B measures. In the sick dream of a brainwashed moron. > No, Stupid Ken. A's and B's proper time clocks accumulate time at the > normal rate. And if GPS engineers traeted your "proper" idiocies seriously and used them, GPS couldn't work.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-03 14:02 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o4gvvp$17v3$4@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #403294 |
On 12/29/2016 10:12 AM, kenseto wrote: > A proper second on an "A" clock is a second at the location of that clock and a > proper second on a "B" clock is a second at the location of that clock. No, that's an incorrect description of what proper time is. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-03 13:30 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <9db662e6-bb2a-4878-a661-c6b8d4052ef1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #403889 |
W dniu wtorek, 3 stycznia 2017 21:02:04 UTC+1 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: > On 12/29/2016 10:12 AM, kenseto wrote: > > A proper second on an "A" clock is a second at the location of that clock and a > > proper second on a "B" clock is a second at the location of that clock. > > No, that's an incorrect description of what proper time is. And you know what is correct!!! Because you make toys and tables.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-04 06:13 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <9fd1156b-dd97-4b57-b86e-018dc8a14651@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #403889 |
On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 at 3:02:04 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 12/29/2016 10:12 AM, kenseto wrote: > > A proper second on an "A" clock is a second at the location of that clock and a > > proper second on a "B" clock is a second at the location of that clock. > > No, that's an incorrect description of what proper time is. You have no clue what the correct description of proper time.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-04 09:36 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o4j4pq$9ri$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #403957 |
On 1/4/2017 8:13 AM, kenseto wrote: > On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 at 3:02:04 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 12/29/2016 10:12 AM, kenseto wrote: >>> A proper second on an "A" clock is a second at the location of that clock and a >>> proper second on a "B" clock is a second at the location of that clock. >> >> No, that's an incorrect description of what proper time is. > > You have no clue what the correct description of proper time. > Bullshit. Proper time is what is measured by a clock AT REST in a particular reference frame. Location is not sufficient because a clock can be at a particular location but not AT REST. See Geroch's book on relativity. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-04 07:43 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b8c82846-a8a0-4f18-a5e5-469815127776@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #403967 |
On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 10:36:30 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 1/4/2017 8:13 AM, kenseto wrote: > > On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 at 3:02:04 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 12/29/2016 10:12 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>> A proper second on an "A" clock is a second at the location of that clock and a > >>> proper second on a "B" clock is a second at the location of that clock. > >> > >> No, that's an incorrect description of what proper time is. > > > > You have no clue what the correct description of proper time. > > > > Bullshit. Proper time is what is measured by a clock AT REST in a > particular reference frame. Location is not sufficient because a clock > can be at a particular location but not AT REST. Idiot, the clock is at rest in its inertial frame and that by definition is a location in the aether.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-04 10:33 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o4j84v$ged$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #403970 |
On 1/4/2017 9:43 AM, kenseto wrote: > On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 10:36:30 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 1/4/2017 8:13 AM, kenseto wrote: >>> On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 at 3:02:04 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> On 12/29/2016 10:12 AM, kenseto wrote: >>>>> A proper second on an "A" clock is a second at the location of that clock and a >>>>> proper second on a "B" clock is a second at the location of that clock. >>>> >>>> No, that's an incorrect description of what proper time is. >>> >>> You have no clue what the correct description of proper time. >>> >> >> Bullshit. Proper time is what is measured by a clock AT REST in a >> particular reference frame. Location is not sufficient because a clock >> can be at a particular location but not AT REST. > > Idiot, the clock is at rest in its inertial frame and that by definition is a > location in the aether. > There you go again, adding YOUR OWN stuff to the current meanings of terms like proper time. When you add YOUR OWN stuff to meanings of terms, you are changing the meanings. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-04 13:07 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <862725ee-ad6b-423f-b41c-b62b651106ac@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #403980 |
On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 11:33:37 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 1/4/2017 9:43 AM, kenseto wrote: > > On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 10:36:30 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 1/4/2017 8:13 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>> On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 at 3:02:04 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> On 12/29/2016 10:12 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>>>> A proper second on an "A" clock is a second at the location of that clock and a > >>>>> proper second on a "B" clock is a second at the location of that clock. > >>>> > >>>> No, that's an incorrect description of what proper time is. > >>> > >>> You have no clue what the correct description of proper time. > >>> > >> > >> Bullshit. Proper time is what is measured by a clock AT REST in a > >> particular reference frame. Location is not sufficient because a clock > >> can be at a particular location but not AT REST. > > > > Idiot, the clock is at rest in its inertial frame and that by definition is a > > location in the aether. > > > > There you go again, adding YOUR OWN stuff to the current meanings of > terms like proper time. When you add YOUR OWN stuff to meanings of > terms, you are changing the meanings. I did not add my own meaning of term.....a clock measures 1 second is a proper second in its inertial frame.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-04 15:21 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o4jp0p$1g6q$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #404010 |
On 1/4/2017 3:07 PM, kenseto wrote: > On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 11:33:37 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 1/4/2017 9:43 AM, kenseto wrote: >>> On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 10:36:30 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> On 1/4/2017 8:13 AM, kenseto wrote: >>>>> On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 at 3:02:04 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> On 12/29/2016 10:12 AM, kenseto wrote: >>>>>>> A proper second on an "A" clock is a second at the location of that clock and a >>>>>>> proper second on a "B" clock is a second at the location of that clock. >>>>>> >>>>>> No, that's an incorrect description of what proper time is. >>>>> >>>>> You have no clue what the correct description of proper time. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Bullshit. Proper time is what is measured by a clock AT REST in a >>>> particular reference frame. Location is not sufficient because a clock >>>> can be at a particular location but not AT REST. >>> >>> Idiot, the clock is at rest in its inertial frame and that by definition is a >>> location in the aether. >>> >> >> There you go again, adding YOUR OWN stuff to the current meanings of >> terms like proper time. When you add YOUR OWN stuff to meanings of >> terms, you are changing the meanings. > > I did not add my own meaning of term.....a clock measures 1 second is a proper second in > its inertial frame. > Nope. The clock has to be AT REST in the frame for it to be a proper second. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-04 14:12 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <02324d4a-af9d-419f-9843-2ac71f85a6e0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #404015 |
On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 4:21:33 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 1/4/2017 3:07 PM, kenseto wrote: > > On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 11:33:37 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 1/4/2017 9:43 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 10:36:30 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> On 1/4/2017 8:13 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>>>> On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 at 3:02:04 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>> On 12/29/2016 10:12 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>>>>>> A proper second on an "A" clock is a second at the location of that clock and a > >>>>>>> proper second on a "B" clock is a second at the location of that clock. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> No, that's an incorrect description of what proper time is. > >>>>> > >>>>> You have no clue what the correct description of proper time. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Bullshit. Proper time is what is measured by a clock AT REST in a > >>>> particular reference frame. Location is not sufficient because a clock > >>>> can be at a particular location but not AT REST. > >>> > >>> Idiot, the clock is at rest in its inertial frame and that by definition is a > >>> location in the aether. > >>> > >> > >> There you go again, adding YOUR OWN stuff to the current meanings of > >> terms like proper time. When you add YOUR OWN stuff to meanings of > >> terms, you are changing the meanings. > > > > I did not add my own meaning of term.....a clock measures 1 second is a proper second in > > its inertial frame. > > > > Nope. The clock has to be AT REST in the frame for it to be a proper second. > > NOPE you don't know what is a proper second. AT REST wrt what?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-04 16:18 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o4jsbv$1lsh$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #404031 |
On 1/4/2017 4:12 PM, kenseto wrote: > On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 4:21:33 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 1/4/2017 3:07 PM, kenseto wrote: >>> On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 11:33:37 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> On 1/4/2017 9:43 AM, kenseto wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 10:36:30 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> On 1/4/2017 8:13 AM, kenseto wrote: >>>>>>> On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 at 3:02:04 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>> On 12/29/2016 10:12 AM, kenseto wrote: >>>>>>>>> A proper second on an "A" clock is a second at the location of that clock and a >>>>>>>>> proper second on a "B" clock is a second at the location of that clock. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> No, that's an incorrect description of what proper time is. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You have no clue what the correct description of proper time. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Bullshit. Proper time is what is measured by a clock AT REST in a >>>>>> particular reference frame. Location is not sufficient because a clock >>>>>> can be at a particular location but not AT REST. >>>>> >>>>> Idiot, the clock is at rest in its inertial frame and that by definition is a >>>>> location in the aether. >>>>> >>>> >>>> There you go again, adding YOUR OWN stuff to the current meanings of >>>> terms like proper time. When you add YOUR OWN stuff to meanings of >>>> terms, you are changing the meanings. >>> >>> I did not add my own meaning of term.....a clock measures 1 second is a proper second in >>> its inertial frame. >>> >> >> Nope. The clock has to be AT REST in the frame for it to be a proper second. >> >> > > NOPE you don't know what is a proper second. AT REST wrt what? > An inertial reference frame. The meaning of which you do not know. You MAKE UP a meaning of inertial reference frame, because you do not know the physics definition of inertial reference frame. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-06 06:46 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a4ecdb8e-e71b-4c28-be00-5d3077545bd8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #404035 |
On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 5:18:42 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 1/4/2017 4:12 PM, kenseto wrote: > > On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 4:21:33 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 1/4/2017 3:07 PM, kenseto wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 11:33:37 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> On 1/4/2017 9:43 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>>>> On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 10:36:30 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>> On 1/4/2017 8:13 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>>>>>> On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 at 3:02:04 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>>>> On 12/29/2016 10:12 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>>>>>>>> A proper second on an "A" clock is a second at the location of that clock and a > >>>>>>>>> proper second on a "B" clock is a second at the location of that clock. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> No, that's an incorrect description of what proper time is. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> You have no clue what the correct description of proper time. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Bullshit. Proper time is what is measured by a clock AT REST in a > >>>>>> particular reference frame. Location is not sufficient because a clock > >>>>>> can be at a particular location but not AT REST. > >>>>> > >>>>> Idiot, the clock is at rest in its inertial frame and that by definition is a > >>>>> location in the aether. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> There you go again, adding YOUR OWN stuff to the current meanings of > >>>> terms like proper time. When you add YOUR OWN stuff to meanings of > >>>> terms, you are changing the meanings. > >>> > >>> I did not add my own meaning of term.....a clock measures 1 second is a proper second in > >>> its inertial frame. > >>> > >> > >> Nope. The clock has to be AT REST in the frame for it to be a proper second. > >> > >> > > > > NOPE you don't know what is a proper second. AT REST wrt what? > > > > An inertial reference frame. The meaning of which you do not know. > You MAKE UP a meaning of inertial reference frame, because you do not > know the physics definition of inertial reference frame. You don't know the precise definition of an inertial frame and that's why you refused to give such definition. My description of an inertial frame as a coordinate system set up in a specific location in the stationary aether will include the SRT definition.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-06 09:09 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o4obvo$4c9$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #404249 |
On 1/6/2017 8:46 AM, kenseto wrote: >> An inertial reference frame. The meaning of which you do not know. >> You MAKE UP a meaning of inertial reference frame, because you do not >> know the physics definition of inertial reference frame. > You don't know the precise definition of an inertial frame and that's why > you refused to give such definition. My description of an inertial frame > as a coordinate system set up in a specific location in the stationary > aether will include the SRT definition. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_frame_of_reference Ken, you are incapable of reading anything other than what you see on sci.physics.relativity, and so you bait people day in and day out to type things out here for you. Do your own fucking homework like a good boy. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-05 17:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <o4lun7$lok$3@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #404010 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 11:33:37 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 1/4/2017 9:43 AM, kenseto wrote: >> > On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 10:36:30 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> >> Bullshit. Proper time is what is measured by a clock AT REST in a >> >> particular reference frame. Location is not sufficient because a clock >> >> can be at a particular location but not AT REST. >> > >> > Idiot, the clock is at rest in its inertial frame and that by definition is a >> > location in the aether. >> >> There you go again, adding YOUR OWN stuff to the current meanings of >> terms like proper time. When you add YOUR OWN stuff to meanings of >> terms, you are changing the meanings. >I did not add my own meaning of term..... Yes you did. You made up your own meaning when you added the phrase "and that by definition is a location in the aether." That's nowhere in the definitions of proper time.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-04 12:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <e2ba3ba6-ebaa-41fb-b404-af16a4c7dfd7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #403967 |
On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 10:36:30 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 1/4/2017 8:13 AM, kenseto wrote: > > On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 at 3:02:04 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 12/29/2016 10:12 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>> A proper second on an "A" clock is a second at the location of that clock and a > >>> proper second on a "B" clock is a second at the location of that clock. > >> > >> No, that's an incorrect description of what proper time is. > > > > You have no clue what the correct description of proper time. > > > > Bullshit. Proper time is what is measured by a clock AT REST in a > particular reference frame. Location is not sufficient because a clock > can be at a particular location but not AT REST. Idiot.....no clock is at rest. At rest wrt what? An inertial frame is just another name for a specific location in the aether. BTW the only inertial frame exist in our universe is the rest frame of the aether.....but no object in our universe is at rest in such inertial frame.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-04 15:00 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o4jnq7$1ecd$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #404006 |
On 1/4/2017 2:48 PM, kenseto wrote: > On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 10:36:30 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 1/4/2017 8:13 AM, kenseto wrote: >>> On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 at 3:02:04 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> On 12/29/2016 10:12 AM, kenseto wrote: >>>>> A proper second on an "A" clock is a second at the location of that clock and a >>>>> proper second on a "B" clock is a second at the location of that clock. >>>> >>>> No, that's an incorrect description of what proper time is. >>> >>> You have no clue what the correct description of proper time. >>> >> >> Bullshit. Proper time is what is measured by a clock AT REST in a >> particular reference frame. Location is not sufficient because a clock >> can be at a particular location but not AT REST. > > Idiot.....no clock is at rest. At rest wrt what? An inertial frame is just another > name for a specific location in the aether. BTW the only inertial frame exist in > our universe is the rest frame of the aether.....but no object in our universe > is at rest in such inertial frame. > Seto, one day it might occur to you that it doesn't matter whether YOU believe your own babble. What matters is whether anybody else believes your babble. From your book sales, how many people are even interested in READING your babble? That bad, huh? How does it feel to be getting old, to know that you spent all that effort on something nobody cares about, and to know that the day after you pass on there will be a post on usenet about "Hey, did you hear that Seto died?" and that'll be it and your work will quietly disappear along with you? How does it feel to know that you've spent the last 20 years simply arguing with people on the internet, to no productive end? How does it feel realizing that you've learned absolutely nothing about physics since you started all that time ago? -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-04 13:11 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <cdf26f97-206e-4c8f-a3a6-82a1366a1b2b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #404007 |
On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 4:00:59 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 1/4/2017 2:48 PM, kenseto wrote: > > On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 10:36:30 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 1/4/2017 8:13 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>> On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 at 3:02:04 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> On 12/29/2016 10:12 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>>>> A proper second on an "A" clock is a second at the location of that clock and a > >>>>> proper second on a "B" clock is a second at the location of that clock. > >>>> > >>>> No, that's an incorrect description of what proper time is. > >>> > >>> You have no clue what the correct description of proper time. > >>> > >> > >> Bullshit. Proper time is what is measured by a clock AT REST in a > >> particular reference frame. Location is not sufficient because a clock > >> can be at a particular location but not AT REST. > > > > Idiot.....no clock is at rest. At rest wrt what? An inertial frame is just another > > name for a specific location in the aether. BTW the only inertial frame exist in > > our universe is the rest frame of the aether.....but no object in our universe > > is at rest in such inertial frame. > > > > Seto, one day it might occur to you that it doesn't matter whether YOU > believe your own babble. What matters is whether anybody else believes > your babble. > > From your book sales, how many people are even interested in READING > your babble? > > That bad, huh? > > How does it feel to be getting old, to know that you spent all that > effort on something nobody cares about, and to know that the day after > you pass on there will be a post on usenet about "Hey, did you hear that > Seto died?" and that'll be it and your work will quietly disappear along > with you? How does it feel to know that you've spent the last 20 years > simply arguing with people on the internet, to no productive end? How > does it feel realizing that you've learned absolutely nothing about > physics since you started all that time ago? > Idiot....My book is copyrighted and in the Library of Congress and therefore it will there for a loooong time. So eat your heart out.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-04 15:29 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o4jpfb$1h13$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #404012 |
On 1/4/2017 3:11 PM, kenseto wrote: > On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 4:00:59 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 1/4/2017 2:48 PM, kenseto wrote: >>> On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 10:36:30 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> On 1/4/2017 8:13 AM, kenseto wrote: >>>>> On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 at 3:02:04 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> On 12/29/2016 10:12 AM, kenseto wrote: >>>>>>> A proper second on an "A" clock is a second at the location of that clock and a >>>>>>> proper second on a "B" clock is a second at the location of that clock. >>>>>> >>>>>> No, that's an incorrect description of what proper time is. >>>>> >>>>> You have no clue what the correct description of proper time. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Bullshit. Proper time is what is measured by a clock AT REST in a >>>> particular reference frame. Location is not sufficient because a clock >>>> can be at a particular location but not AT REST. >>> >>> Idiot.....no clock is at rest. At rest wrt what? An inertial frame is just another >>> name for a specific location in the aether. BTW the only inertial frame exist in >>> our universe is the rest frame of the aether.....but no object in our universe >>> is at rest in such inertial frame. >>> >> >> Seto, one day it might occur to you that it doesn't matter whether YOU >> believe your own babble. What matters is whether anybody else believes >> your babble. >> >> From your book sales, how many people are even interested in READING >> your babble? >> >> That bad, huh? >> >> How does it feel to be getting old, to know that you spent all that >> effort on something nobody cares about, and to know that the day after >> you pass on there will be a post on usenet about "Hey, did you hear that >> Seto died?" and that'll be it and your work will quietly disappear along >> with you? How does it feel to know that you've spent the last 20 years >> simply arguing with people on the internet, to no productive end? How >> does it feel realizing that you've learned absolutely nothing about >> physics since you started all that time ago? >> > > Idiot....My book is copyrighted and in the Library of Congress and therefore it > will there for a loooong time. So eat your heart out. > So, Ken, you are happy now just having your book in the Library of Congress, even if nobody ever reads it? Nice that you've set a low bar for accomplishment for yourself. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web