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 5 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 11 Next page →
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-04 14:07 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <965d1095-d024-4ce0-ba79-8bf481458255@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #404018 |
On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 4:29:18 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > 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?iner read it and she The Copyright Specialist read it and she said it's creative and original. > > Nice that you've set a low bar for accomplishment for yourself. Better than you who have nothing created.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-04 16:17 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o4js9j$1lsh$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #404030 |
On 1/4/2017 4:07 PM, kenseto wrote: > On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 4:29:18 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> 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?iner read it and she > > The Copyright Specialist read it and she said it's creative and original. OK, one then. One person. >> >> Nice that you've set a low bar for accomplishment for yourself. > > Better than you who have nothing created. Not true, Ken. I have lots of things I have created and for which people have paid a lot of money. Getting a book in the Library of Congress just wasn't one of the things that mattered to me. Because it's too easy. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-06 06:28 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a11c13f8-71af-4dad-bafe-aaab75ed4137@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #404034 |
On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 5:17:28 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 1/4/2017 4:07 PM, kenseto wrote: > > On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 4:29:18 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> 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?iner read it and she > > > > The Copyright Specialist read it and she said it's creative and original. > > OK, one then. One person. > > >> > >> Nice that you've set a low bar for accomplishment for yourself. > > > > Better than you who have nothing created. > > Not true, Ken. I have lots of things I have created and for which people > have paid a lot of money. Getting a book in the Library of Congress just > wasn't one of the things that mattered to me. Because it's too easy. If it's so easy why don't you create a book and put it in the Library of Congress? I have patents and they will continue to be used after I die. What do you have-- nothing as expected and nobody will care that you sell things to made money after you die.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-05 17:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <o4lvjl$lok$4@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #404012 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 at 4:00:59 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Seto, one day it might occur to you that it doesn't matter whether YOU >> believe your own babble. What matters is whether anybody else believes >> your babble. >> >> From your book sales, how many people are even interested in READING >> your babble? >> >> That bad, huh? Have you exceeded the fingers on one hand yet? >> How does it feel to be getting old, to know that you spent all that >> effort on something nobody cares about, and to know that the day after >> you pass on there will be a post on usenet about "Hey, did you hear that >> Seto died?" and that'll be it and your work will quietly disappear along >> with you? How does it feel to know that you've spent the last 20 years >> simply arguing with people on the internet, to no productive end? How >> does it feel realizing that you've learned absolutely nothing about >> physics since you started all that time ago? Yup. You wasted years of your life here. You refused to ever learn SR or to learn from when people corrected you. You will quickly fade into obscurity, and you and IRT/Model Mechanics will be soon forgotten. >Idiot....My book is copyrighted and in the Library of Congress and >therefore it will there for a loooong time. So eat your heart out. Yeah, so what? It will be lost among the terabytes of other books in the LOC, one of many kookbooks there. And it's simple to get a book into the LOC, it is no accomplishment. Did you know the LOC has books of random numbers? Not books _about_ random numbers, books that contain just random numbers!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-05 17:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <o4lugf$lok$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #404006 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >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? At rest in the "particular reference frame" Odd mentioned. In other words, co-moving with the clock, or stationary relative to the clock. > An inertial frame is just >another name for a specific location in the aether. Quit making up crap. Nowhere in SR or GR is that stated. And need I remind you yet again that Einstein explicitlyt disavowed the aether as unnecessary for his work? > BTW the only inertial >frame exist in our universe is the rest frame of the aether..... Again, quit making up crap. I can create inertial frames all day long, whenever I want. And there isn't even an aether.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-04 13:46 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <18c23971-5c72-4364-a2d8-4d887c50133a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #403967 |
W dniu środa, 4 stycznia 2017 16:36:30 UTC+1 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: > Bullshit. Proper time is what is measured by a clock AT REST in a > particular reference frame. And you can't be wrong about "proper or unproper"!!! Because you make fine toys!! and tables!!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-05 17:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <o4lvo4$lok$5@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #404026 |
mlwozniak@wp.pl writes: >W dniu środa, 4 stycznia 2017 16:36:30 UTC+1 użytkownik Odd Bodki>n napisał: >> Bullshit. Proper time is what is measured by a clock AT REST in a >> particular reference frame. >And you can't be wrong about "proper or unproper"!!! >Because you make fine toys!! and tables!! So how does it feel knowing that a mere toymaker repeatedly shows more knowledge about physics than you do?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-05 09:46 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <9695b4e1-6935-4bbe-9e2f-69750f247c31@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #404144 |
W dniu czwartek, 5 stycznia 2017 18:28:37 UTC+1 użytkownik Michael Moroney napisał: > mlwozniak@wp.pl writes: > > >W dniu Å›roda, 4 stycznia 2017 16:36:30 UTC+1 użytkownik Odd Bodki>n napisaÅ‚: > > >> Bullshit. Proper time is what is measured by a clock AT REST in a > >> particular reference frame. > > >And you can't be wrong about "proper or unproper"!!! > >Because you make fine toys!! and tables!! > > So how does it feel knowing that a mere toymaker repeatedly shows more > knowledge about physics than you do? And how does it feel being an idiot not knowing even that "proper" is a term from outside your pathetic physics?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-05 17:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <o4lu34$lok$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #403957 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >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. Stupid Ken, that is the *definition* of proper time, at least once you add the requirement that the clock is also stationary relative to the observer.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-06 07:02 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2c3482af-7a16-47d5-b780-39b288239ba4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #404136 |
On Thursday, January 5, 2017 at 12:00:21 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote: > kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: > > >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. > > Stupid Ken, that is the *definition* of proper time, at least once > you add the requirement that the clock is also stationary relative to > the observer. Hey moron why don't you give a description of proper time and I will give a description of proper time and we can compare.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-06 09:12 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o4oc57$4c9$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #404253 |
On 1/6/2017 9:02 AM, kenseto wrote: > Hey moron why don't you give a description of proper time and I will > give a description of proper time and we can compare. Ken, this isn't a matter of your word against someone else's word. This is not a matter of argument on usenet. The definition of proper time is DOCUMENTED in books. To settle the argument about what proper time means, you look in a book. Period. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-06 07:37 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <9d3f58c2-05fa-4bf9-b626-a811625068d1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #404256 |
On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 10:12:42 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 1/6/2017 9:02 AM, kenseto wrote: > > Hey moron why don't you give a description of proper time and I will > > give a description of proper time and we can compare. > > Ken, this isn't a matter of your word against someone else's word. > This is not a matter of argument on usenet. The definition of proper > time is DOCUMENTED in books. To settle the argument about what proper > time means, you look in a book. Period. > ROTFLOL...so you don't have the correct definition of proper time so you tell me to read a book.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Aubrey Primmer <myr@ejmr.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-06 15:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <o4oefa$8j0$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #404260 |
kenseto wrote: > On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 10:12:42 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 1/6/2017 9:02 AM, kenseto wrote: >> > Hey moron why don't you give a description of proper time and I will >> > give a description of proper time and we can compare. >> >> Ken, this isn't a matter of your word against someone else's word. This >> is not a matter of argument on usenet. The definition of proper time is >> DOCUMENTED in books. To settle the argument about what proper time >> means, you look in a book. Period. > > ROTFLOL...so you don't have the correct definition of proper time so you > tell me to read a book. I would take it as a gross insult if I were you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-06 10:13 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o4ofnr$asr$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #404260 |
On 1/6/2017 9:37 AM, kenseto wrote: > On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 10:12:42 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 1/6/2017 9:02 AM, kenseto wrote: >>> Hey moron why don't you give a description of proper time and I will >>> give a description of proper time and we can compare. >> >> Ken, this isn't a matter of your word against someone else's word. >> This is not a matter of argument on usenet. The definition of proper >> time is DOCUMENTED in books. To settle the argument about what proper >> time means, you look in a book. Period. >> > > ROTFLOL...so you don't have the correct definition of proper time so you > tell me to read a book. > Baiting is the tactic of a 9-year-old, Ken. Do your own fucking homework. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-06 18:21 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <52ffa9d6-fae2-4231-9e57-cd06ae02aeb7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #404270 |
On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 11:13:50 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 1/6/2017 9:37 AM, kenseto wrote: > > On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 10:12:42 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 1/6/2017 9:02 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>> Hey moron why don't you give a description of proper time and I will > >>> give a description of proper time and we can compare. > >> > >> Ken, this isn't a matter of your word against someone else's word. > >> This is not a matter of argument on usenet. The definition of proper > >> time is DOCUMENTED in books. To settle the argument about what proper > >> time means, you look in a book. Period. > >> > > > > ROTFLOL...so you don't have the correct definition of proper time so you > > tell me to read a book. > > > > Baiting is the tactic of a 9-year-old, Ken. > Do your own fucking homework. Idiot there is no baiting.....you and moron said my definition of proper time is wrong so what is the proper definition according to you and moron. telling me to read a book doesn't cut it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-07 13:39 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o4rg5h$18g1$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #404371 |
On 1/6/2017 8:21 PM, kenseto wrote: > On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 11:13:50 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 1/6/2017 9:37 AM, kenseto wrote: >>> On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 10:12:42 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> On 1/6/2017 9:02 AM, kenseto wrote: >>>>> Hey moron why don't you give a description of proper time and I will >>>>> give a description of proper time and we can compare. >>>> >>>> Ken, this isn't a matter of your word against someone else's word. >>>> This is not a matter of argument on usenet. The definition of proper >>>> time is DOCUMENTED in books. To settle the argument about what proper >>>> time means, you look in a book. Period. >>>> >>> >>> ROTFLOL...so you don't have the correct definition of proper time so you >>> tell me to read a book. >>> >> >> Baiting is the tactic of a 9-year-old, Ken. >> Do your own fucking homework. > > Idiot there is no baiting.....you and moron said my definition of proper time > is wrong so what is the proper definition according to you and moron. telling > me to read a book doesn't cut it. > Yes, it does cut it, and I'll tell you why. If I tell you the right definition of proper time, all that's going to happen is you're going to argue about it as though this were a dispute between you and me. If you go read a book, you're going to both learn the right definition of proper time and you'll realize there is no point arguing with a documented fact. Grow up, Ken. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-07 13:26 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <40b4feb7-e9c4-4b02-a83d-91237940e16b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #404460 |
W dniu sobota, 7 stycznia 2017 20:39:34 UTC+1 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: > On 1/6/2017 8:21 PM, kenseto wrote: > > On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 11:13:50 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 1/6/2017 9:37 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>> On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 10:12:42 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> On 1/6/2017 9:02 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>>>> Hey moron why don't you give a description of proper time and I will > >>>>> give a description of proper time and we can compare. > >>>> > >>>> Ken, this isn't a matter of your word against someone else's word. > >>>> This is not a matter of argument on usenet. The definition of proper > >>>> time is DOCUMENTED in books. To settle the argument about what proper > >>>> time means, you look in a book. Period. > >>>> > >>> > >>> ROTFLOL...so you don't have the correct definition of proper time so you > >>> tell me to read a book. > >>> > >> > >> Baiting is the tactic of a 9-year-old, Ken. > >> Do your own fucking homework. > > > > Idiot there is no baiting.....you and moron said my definition of proper time > > is wrong so what is the proper definition according to you and moron. telling > > me to read a book doesn't cut it. > > > > Yes, it does cut it, and I'll tell you why. If I tell you the right > definition of proper time, all that's going to happen is you're going to > argue about it as though this were a dispute between you and me. If you > go read a book, you're going to both learn the right definition of > proper time and you'll realize there is no point arguing with a > documented fact. Samely, if you go read a book, you will know communism is the best and rotten capitalism has to die; and you'll realize realize there is no point arguing with a documented fact.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-08 06:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <8e6cf9c1-a336-4dac-ada6-1b603f318fa9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #404460 |
On Saturday, January 7, 2017 at 2:39:34 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 1/6/2017 8:21 PM, kenseto wrote: > > On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 11:13:50 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 1/6/2017 9:37 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>> On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 10:12:42 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> On 1/6/2017 9:02 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>>>> Hey moron why don't you give a description of proper time and I will > >>>>> give a description of proper time and we can compare. > >>>> > >>>> Ken, this isn't a matter of your word against someone else's word. > >>>> This is not a matter of argument on usenet. The definition of proper > >>>> time is DOCUMENTED in books. To settle the argument about what proper > >>>> time means, you look in a book. Period. > >>>> > >>> > >>> ROTFLOL...so you don't have the correct definition of proper time so you > >>> tell me to read a book. > >>> > >> > >> Baiting is the tactic of a 9-year-old, Ken. > >> Do your own fucking homework. > > > > Idiot there is no baiting.....you and moron said my definition of proper time > > is wrong so what is the proper definition according to you and moron. telling > > me to read a book doesn't cut it. > > > > Yes, it does cut it, and I'll tell you why. If I tell you the right > definition of proper time, all that's going to happen is you're going to > argue about it as though this were a dispute between you and me. How do we know that your definition is correct if you refused to tell me what that definition is? >If you > go read a book, you're going to both learn the right definition of > proper time and you'll realize there is no point arguing with a > documented fact. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-09 12:56 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o50mch$8pj$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #404564 |
On 1/8/2017 8:48 AM, kenseto wrote: > On Saturday, January 7, 2017 at 2:39:34 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 1/6/2017 8:21 PM, kenseto wrote: >>> On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 11:13:50 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> On 1/6/2017 9:37 AM, kenseto wrote: >>>>> On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 10:12:42 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> On 1/6/2017 9:02 AM, kenseto wrote: >>>>>>> Hey moron why don't you give a description of proper time and I will >>>>>>> give a description of proper time and we can compare. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ken, this isn't a matter of your word against someone else's word. >>>>>> This is not a matter of argument on usenet. The definition of proper >>>>>> time is DOCUMENTED in books. To settle the argument about what proper >>>>>> time means, you look in a book. Period. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ROTFLOL...so you don't have the correct definition of proper time so you >>>>> tell me to read a book. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Baiting is the tactic of a 9-year-old, Ken. >>>> Do your own fucking homework. >>> >>> Idiot there is no baiting.....you and moron said my definition of proper time >>> is wrong so what is the proper definition according to you and moron. telling >>> me to read a book doesn't cut it. >>> >> >> Yes, it does cut it, and I'll tell you why. If I tell you the right >> definition of proper time, all that's going to happen is you're going to >> argue about it as though this were a dispute between you and me. > > How do we know that your definition is correct if you refused to tell me what > that definition is? You're going to know the definition is correct when you read it in a book. Ken you have this mistaken idea that everything in physics is up for argument on a newsgroup. Sorry, but not so. Documented facts are documented facts, and you find them in the places where they are documented, and there is absolutely no point in putting them up for argument. > >> If you >> go read a book, you're going to both learn the right definition of >> proper time and you'll realize there is no point arguing with a >> documented fact. >>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-09 12:21 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a7162117-7723-4b4b-a77e-bcc1d8d8b59b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #404764 |
On Monday, January 9, 2017 at 1:56:20 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 1/8/2017 8:48 AM, kenseto wrote: > > On Saturday, January 7, 2017 at 2:39:34 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 1/6/2017 8:21 PM, kenseto wrote: > >>> On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 11:13:50 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> On 1/6/2017 9:37 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>>>> On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 10:12:42 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>> On 1/6/2017 9:02 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>>>>>> Hey moron why don't you give a description of proper time and I will > >>>>>>> give a description of proper time and we can compare. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Ken, this isn't a matter of your word against someone else's word. > >>>>>> This is not a matter of argument on usenet. The definition of proper > >>>>>> time is DOCUMENTED in books. To settle the argument about what proper > >>>>>> time means, you look in a book. Period. > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> ROTFLOL...so you don't have the correct definition of proper time so you > >>>>> tell me to read a book. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Baiting is the tactic of a 9-year-old, Ken. > >>>> Do your own fucking homework. > >>> > >>> Idiot there is no baiting.....you and moron said my definition of proper time > >>> is wrong so what is the proper definition according to you and moron. telling > >>> me to read a book doesn't cut it. > >>> > >> > >> Yes, it does cut it, and I'll tell you why. If I tell you the right > >> definition of proper time, all that's going to happen is you're going to > >> argue about it as though this were a dispute between you and me. > > > > How do we know that your definition is correct if you refused to tell me what > > that definition is? > > You're going to know the definition is correct when you read it in a book. > > Ken you have this mistaken idea that everything in physics is up for > argument on a newsgroup. Sorry, but not so. Documented facts are > documented facts, and you find them in the places where they are > documented, and there is absolutely no point in putting them up for > argument. There is no argument....I just point out that SRT understanding of time is wrong.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web