Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #406220 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-01-20 23:48 -0800 |
| Last post | 2017-02-06 14:02 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 633 — 30 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-20 23:48 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-21 04:49 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-21 05:24 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-21 06:43 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-21 06:51 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Reid Schaffner <dnfoonio@acdnfni.info> - 2017-01-21 21:34 +0000
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-02-02 12:53 +0100
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-01-27 04:44 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-27 08:39 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-01-27 11:23 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-27 12:43 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-01-27 14:19 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-27 15:51 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-01-28 04:16 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-28 06:02 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-01-28 09:19 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-28 10:58 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-01-28 12:55 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-28 14:32 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-01-29 02:56 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-29 04:18 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-01-30 05:54 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-30 08:24 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-01-31 03:17 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-31 04:56 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-01-31 09:42 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-31 14:56 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-01 07:06 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-02 05:39 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-02 06:29 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-02 08:05 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-31 23:10 +0100
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-01 09:25 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-02-01 21:06 +0100
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-01 17:39 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-02-02 21:20 +0100
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians noelturntive@live.co.uk - 2017-02-03 06:37 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-02-03 20:53 +0100
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-03 13:08 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-02-04 10:22 +0100
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Emmaline Coots <ealoa@loealoioa.los> - 2017-02-04 09:38 +0000
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-04 02:51 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-04 05:26 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-04 10:32 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-04 13:53 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-04 15:57 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-04 20:06 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-05 04:00 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-05 05:35 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-05 06:02 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-05 07:10 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-05 10:58 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-05 12:03 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-02-05 21:19 +0100
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-05 13:04 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-05 13:15 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-05 14:44 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-05 18:09 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-06 07:15 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 07:59 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-06 08:10 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 09:16 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-06 09:58 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 10:55 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-06 13:56 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-02-06 23:00 +0100
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 16:49 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-07 07:07 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-07 08:32 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-07 08:57 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 11:19 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-06 15:36 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 19:39 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 13:33 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-06 14:25 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 16:59 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-07 06:35 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 11:20 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-07 11:46 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Emmaline Coots <ealoa@loealoioa.los> - 2017-02-07 20:01 +0000
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 14:02 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-08 06:18 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 17:08 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-09 06:38 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 09:35 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-09 08:19 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-07 10:41 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-06 09:44 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 13:35 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-13 20:25 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-05 13:41 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-05 23:22 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-05 06:22 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-05 15:32 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-05 14:13 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-01 18:13 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-02 00:35 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-01 22:46 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-02-02 04:13 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-02 11:25 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-02 00:23 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-02-02 21:19 +0100
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-02 21:20 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? noelturntive@live.co.uk - 2017-02-03 08:36 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Juliana Auerbach <jaot@tognaenn.org> - 2017-01-27 19:31 +0000
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-01-27 12:29 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-27 12:54 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-28 13:48 +0100
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-01-28 05:22 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-28 17:35 +0100
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? matt.rush200@outlook.com - 2017-01-28 09:33 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-28 09:37 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-28 09:54 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-28 10:07 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-28 12:45 -0800
Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-28 13:40 -0600
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-28 12:56 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-28 14:13 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-28 14:17 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-02 12:13 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-02 14:51 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 17:19 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-03 09:04 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 11:29 -0600
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-03 11:12 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 13:34 -0600
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-03 14:29 -0800
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-04 06:17 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 09:50 -0600
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-04 06:36 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-03 13:15 -0800
Re: Silver mirror "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-03 13:42 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 15:49 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-03 14:34 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 17:02 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-04 09:32 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-04 09:49 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-04 10:26 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-04 10:29 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 10:09 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-04 12:19 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-04 15:57 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 10:08 -0600
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 17:46 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-04 10:11 -0800
Re: Silver mirror "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-04 10:16 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-04 10:32 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-04 13:03 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-04 16:15 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-05 09:28 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 11:33 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-05 09:49 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 07:30 -0600
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-06 05:56 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-06 07:49 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 13:35 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 10:14 -0600
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-05 23:18 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 10:11 -0600
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-06 20:23 -0500
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 07:38 -0600
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-07 17:37 -0500
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 16:25 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-04 08:42 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 10:19 -0600
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-06 20:19 -0500
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 07:32 -0600
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-07 17:35 -0500
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 08:18 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-07 08:07 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 08:17 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-07 08:34 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 11:15 -0600
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 15:44 -0800
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-07 23:30 -0800
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-07 10:43 -0800
Re: Silver mirror "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-07 08:33 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-02-07 17:39 +0100
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 11:10 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-07 09:29 -0800
Re: Silver mirror "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-07 10:12 -0800
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-07 17:54 -0500
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 12:28 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-07 13:30 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 16:20 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 16:38 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 16:56 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-08 07:33 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 08:12 -0800
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-08 08:23 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-08 08:37 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 16:30 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-09 07:23 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 09:37 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-09 08:27 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-10 07:15 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-10 09:24 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-11 15:39 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-12 09:21 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-12 15:19 -0600
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-08 18:21 -0500
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-09 07:54 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 14:14 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-08 12:30 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-08 16:02 -0600
Re: Silver mirror "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-08 14:35 -0800
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-08 18:39 -0500
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-08 22:52 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-09 07:08 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 07:29 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-09 08:11 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-10 07:15 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-10 09:07 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-11 15:39 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-12 09:14 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-12 15:24 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-10 07:15 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-10 09:15 -0800
Re: Silver mirror paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2017-02-10 10:07 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-10 12:33 -0800
Re: Silver mirror paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2017-02-10 16:21 -0800
Re: Silver mirror John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-10 16:52 -0800
Re: Silver mirror paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2017-02-10 17:44 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-11 07:01 -0800
Re: Silver mirror "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-11 10:42 -0800
Re: Silver mirror paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2017-02-11 12:22 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-11 15:39 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-12 09:26 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-12 12:20 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-12 12:29 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-12 15:27 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 09:42 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-09 08:41 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-12 15:15 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-09 09:23 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-09 09:31 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-09 09:41 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-11 15:38 -0600
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-09 17:23 -0500
Re: Silver mirror Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-09 18:29 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-10 07:16 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-02-10 17:44 +0100
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-10 09:32 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-02-10 19:35 +0100
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 16:37 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-09 07:29 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-12 15:15 -0600
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-07 18:56 -0500
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 08:48 -0600
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-08 17:46 -0500
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-07 23:29 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-08 07:20 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 08:24 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 14:15 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-08 13:01 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-02-08 22:46 +0100
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-09 06:51 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 07:37 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-09 08:22 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-02-09 18:10 +0100
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-10 07:14 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-02-08 23:03 +0100
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 16:47 -0600
Re: Silver mirror "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-08 14:56 -0800
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-08 17:54 -0500
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-09 07:39 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-08 07:05 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 14:15 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 14:15 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-08 13:30 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 16:50 -0600
Re: Silver mirror RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-13 11:43 -0800
Re: Silver mirror RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-13 11:52 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 17:46 -0600
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-07 21:08 -0500
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-08 07:51 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 08:29 -0800
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-08 08:44 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 08:59 -0800
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-08 13:33 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 19:16 -0800
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-08 22:54 -0800
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-09 06:34 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 07:46 -0800
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-09 08:26 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 14:14 -0600
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-08 13:23 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 16:51 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-08 08:48 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 09:06 -0800
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-08 09:24 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 16:30 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-09 07:17 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 08:00 -0800
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-08 09:22 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 14:15 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-08 13:24 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-08 13:42 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 16:56 -0600
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-09 06:55 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 08:03 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Emmaline Coots <ealoa@loealoioa.los> - 2017-02-09 16:09 +0000
Re: Silver mirror moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-09 23:26 +0000
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-10 07:14 -0600
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-10 07:16 -0800
Re: Silver mirror moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-10 18:31 +0000
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-11 05:59 -0800
Re: Silver mirror moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-11 14:20 +0000
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-13 06:38 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 08:51 -0600
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-13 07:39 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 09:47 -0600
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-13 10:29 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 11:04 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Sanjuanita Peeples <naalu@nwmeela.org> - 2017-02-13 19:08 +0000
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-13 13:12 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 21:06 -0800
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-13 23:29 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 06:43 -0600
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-14 04:50 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 07:59 -0800
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-13 10:31 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 10:56 -0800
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-13 08:14 -0800
Re: Silver mirror moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-13 16:11 +0000
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-13 08:16 -0800
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-13 10:35 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Sanjuanita Peeples <naalu@nwmeela.org> - 2017-02-13 18:39 +0000
Re: Silver mirror moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-14 02:28 +0000
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-11 16:33 -0800
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-12 04:28 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-12 06:43 -0800
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-13 06:46 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-10 11:06 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-11 15:38 -0600
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-12 05:28 -0800
Re: Silver mirror moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-12 22:25 +0000
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-13 06:59 -0800
Re: Silver mirror moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-13 16:26 +0000
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-13 10:49 -0800
Re: Silver mirror moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-14 02:33 +0000
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-09 07:44 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 08:15 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-10 07:15 -0600
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-08 13:25 -0800
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-07 17:57 -0500
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-08 07:39 -0800
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-07 11:41 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Emmaline Coots <ealoa@loealoioa.los> - 2017-02-07 19:50 +0000
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 13:59 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Emmaline Coots <ealoa@loealoioa.los> - 2017-02-07 20:15 +0000
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-07 13:22 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 16:01 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 14:10 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-07 13:33 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 16:08 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-08 06:57 -0800
Re: Silver mirror "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-08 09:54 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-10 07:14 -0600
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-08 06:45 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 14:14 -0600
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-08 13:19 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 16:59 -0600
Re: Silver mirror kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-02-09 06:46 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 08:24 -0800
Re: Silver mirror moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-09 23:12 +0000
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-10 07:14 -0600
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-08 13:19 -0800
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-07 17:47 -0500
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 17:47 -0600
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-07 21:14 -0500
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 18:31 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 08:47 -0600
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-08 17:50 -0500
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 17:06 -0600
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-08 20:12 -0500
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 09:21 -0600
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-09 17:22 -0500
Re: Silver mirror Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-08 09:45 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Emmaline Coots <ealoa@loealoioa.los> - 2017-02-08 22:06 +0000
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-08 18:38 -0500
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-08 18:16 -0500
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 08:45 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 09:19 -0600
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-09 17:20 -0500
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 18:18 -0800
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-04 05:25 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 11:17 -0800
Re: Silver mirror JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 15:48 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Irvin Starrett <etrrarn@arneir.etr> - 2017-02-03 04:55 +0000
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-29 09:20 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-29 15:28 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-31 07:34 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-31 09:02 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-31 09:03 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-31 17:38 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-31 23:19 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-01 07:01 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-01 07:36 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-01 08:32 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-01 09:36 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-01 10:14 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-01 12:27 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-01 12:15 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-01 14:46 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-01 13:12 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-01 15:41 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-02 08:02 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 10:16 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-02 08:55 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 11:21 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-02 09:55 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 12:18 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-02 12:07 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 12:40 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-02 14:25 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-02 20:48 -0600
Re: Silver mirror John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-02 19:21 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-03 09:26 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 11:32 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-03 13:18 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 15:52 -0600
Re: Silver mirror RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-03 10:06 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-03 13:38 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 17:52 -0800
Re: Silver mirror RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-06 17:21 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 07:41 -0600
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-07 17:40 -0500
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 17:48 -0600
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-07 21:09 -0500
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 18:59 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-03 09:35 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 11:28 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Emmaline Coots <ealoa@loealoioa.los> - 2017-02-03 19:33 +0000
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-03 14:17 -0800
Re: Silver mirror "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-03 17:02 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-04 09:40 -0800
Re: Silver mirror "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-04 10:10 -0800
Re: Silver mirror "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-04 10:45 -0800
Re: Silver mirror "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-03 17:28 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 17:58 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-01 18:32 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-01 23:41 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-02 08:26 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 09:12 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-02 09:48 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-02 14:11 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 16:36 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-03 10:07 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 12:29 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-03 14:06 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 16:50 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-04 09:06 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-04 09:20 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-04 10:23 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-04 10:44 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-02-04 19:54 +0100
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-04 13:15 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-04 16:34 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-05 09:32 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-02-05 18:40 +0100
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-05 10:00 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 13:36 -0600
Re: Silver mirror "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-05 11:48 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 15:10 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-06 06:47 -0800
Re: Silver mirror "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-06 07:04 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 13:34 -0600
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-06 14:23 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 13:33 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 10:33 -0600
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-06 20:29 -0500
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 10:22 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 10:26 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 10:30 -0600
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-02 16:34 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 19:13 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-03 09:42 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 11:54 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-03 13:22 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 15:55 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-04 07:56 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-04 08:13 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-04 10:16 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-04 10:36 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-04 13:06 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-02-04 22:08 +0100
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-04 16:40 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-05 09:38 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 15:20 -0800
Re: Silver mirror mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-05 23:27 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-06 06:51 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 07:14 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 13:35 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 07:30 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-06 07:27 -0800
Re: Silver mirror "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-06 07:38 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 08:05 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-06 08:16 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 09:21 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 13:33 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 13:35 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 10:44 -0600
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-06 20:31 -0500
Re: Silver mirror RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-06 17:33 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 10:42 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 11:58 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-03 13:30 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 16:03 -0600
Re: Silver mirror Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-04 08:20 -0800
Re: Silver mirror rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-04 09:12 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 10:51 -0600
Re: Silver mirror benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-06 20:39 -0500
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 11:42 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 16:03 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-02 21:14 -0600
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-01 08:10 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-02-01 08:44 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-29 16:19 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-29 17:29 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-30 06:59 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-30 09:07 -0600
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-30 10:11 -0800
Re: Silver mirror (was: Moving Clocks Run Slow...) RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-05 17:39 -0800
Re: Silver mirror Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-05 20:12 -0600
Re: Silver mirror "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-05 19:09 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Reid Schaffner <dnfoonio@acdnfni.info> - 2017-01-21 21:28 +0000
Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-21 07:01 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-21 07:49 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-21 08:17 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-21 10:00 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-21 20:03 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Reid Schaffner <dnfoonio@acdnfni.info> - 2017-01-22 02:55 +0000
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-22 01:15 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-22 06:20 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-22 08:54 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-22 13:12 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-22 13:16 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-22 13:21 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-22 13:44 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-22 14:47 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-23 07:32 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-22 16:18 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? xxein1@att.net - 2017-01-22 20:40 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 12:23 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-23 18:03 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-22 21:10 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 12:10 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-23 12:44 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-23 07:07 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 12:19 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-23 12:23 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-23 13:34 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-23 13:52 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 19:13 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-23 23:33 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-24 08:01 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 18:41 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-24 08:35 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-24 12:49 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-24 13:18 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-24 14:21 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-24 14:26 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-24 14:52 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-25 06:51 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-25 07:09 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-25 07:30 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-25 07:50 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 18:50 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-25 07:12 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-25 07:54 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-25 08:14 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-25 09:03 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-25 09:31 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-25 10:05 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 18:46 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-23 11:53 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-23 13:18 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 15:29 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-23 13:47 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 16:28 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-24 07:29 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 10:45 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-24 09:45 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-25 05:42 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-25 07:21 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-25 10:22 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-24 13:21 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 13:31 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-25 09:45 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-02 21:17 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-03 10:13 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Emmaline Coots <ealoa@loealoioa.los> - 2017-02-03 20:15 +0000
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-24 13:33 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-23 13:57 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 16:32 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-24 07:36 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-24 07:42 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-24 08:16 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 10:47 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-24 10:00 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 14:18 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-23 23:24 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-24 07:03 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-23 17:39 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 17:44 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 19:33 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-22 06:04 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-21 20:18 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? xxein1@att.net - 2017-01-21 19:31 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Reid Schaffner <dnfoonio@acdnfni.info> - 2017-01-22 07:18 +0000
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-23 12:59 -0600
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-23 11:42 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-22 09:13 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-22 09:29 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-22 09:51 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-22 10:04 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-22 10:15 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-22 10:23 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-22 10:37 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-22 10:42 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-01-22 05:59 -0800
Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-21 15:50 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Reid Schaffner <dnfoonio@acdnfni.info> - 2017-01-22 00:30 +0000
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-22 13:25 +1100
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-21 22:30 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Larisa Kull <looaiuoais@kesfgais.org> - 2017-01-22 07:41 +0000
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-22 21:42 -0800
Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-24 08:44 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-01-24 09:33 -0800
Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-30 11:05 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? shelfstackerextraordinaire@gmail.com - 2017-02-06 10:58 -0800
Re: Moving Clocks Run Slow or... Fast, Einsteinians? Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-02-06 14:02 -0800
Page 9 of 32 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 32 Next page →
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-07 07:38 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <o7cijk$1n17$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #408171 |
On 2/6/2017 7:23 PM, benj wrote: > On 2/5/2017 11:11 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 2/4/2017 12:11 PM, Ed Lake wrote: >>>> That is quite inconsiderate & greedy of you. A real scientist post >>>> his text freely on the net and most do! >>>> >>> ABSOLUTE NONSENSE. Real scientists are virtually PARANOID that someone >>> is going to steal their idea before they publish it. >>> >> >> Uh, no. That's a misconception. >> > Oh look Ed, it's Odd using his superpowers as an amateur scientist to > give us the truth about publication stealing among real scientists. And > you didn't even mention how they not only steal ideas, but then work > make sure that the original work will not be published in any credible > journal so that their priority cannot be questioned later. Oh, Ben, Ben, Ben, foister of all evil plans and conspiracies. You who put your real name online. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-07 17:37 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <589a4c17$0$57736$c3e8da3$5e5e430d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #408224 |
On 2/7/2017 8:38 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 2/6/2017 7:23 PM, benj wrote: >> On 2/5/2017 11:11 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> On 2/4/2017 12:11 PM, Ed Lake wrote: >>>>> That is quite inconsiderate & greedy of you. A real scientist post >>>>> his text freely on the net and most do! >>>>> >>>> ABSOLUTE NONSENSE. Real scientists are virtually PARANOID that someone >>>> is going to steal their idea before they publish it. >>>> >>> >>> Uh, no. That's a misconception. >>> >> Oh look Ed, it's Odd using his superpowers as an amateur scientist to >> give us the truth about publication stealing among real scientists. And >> you didn't even mention how they not only steal ideas, but then work >> make sure that the original work will not be published in any credible >> journal so that their priority cannot be questioned later. > > Oh, Ben, Ben, Ben, foister of all evil plans and conspiracies. You who > put your real name online. > A cover-up and anonymity is clearly the mark of a conspirator. Bank robbers wear masks the employees and customers don't. You who has no name just opinions.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-03 16:25 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <o73006$2v9$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #407755 |
On 2/3/2017 3:15 PM, Ed Lake wrote: >> OK, where's the preprint? >> > Preprint? I'm not going to show the paper on this forum. That would be CRAZY. If it gets > published, you can buy a copy. Six months after publication, I would get the copyrights back, > and then I could post a link here. > > Meanwhile, you can check out some papers I wrote on the same subject of time dilation when I was > just using the papers for Internet discussions. Here's the link: http://vixra.org/abs/1505.0234 > So, I'll just point out the obvious. None of your other papers on vixra.org passed peer review for publication in a journal. And so you put them out where they are freely available. So I ask you again: What is the point of holding your submitted paper secret while it goes through review? Is there any conceivable benefit from withholding it? I notice too that you are self-absorbed enough to spend hours and hours posting DAILY to you website at http://www.ed-lake.com/, where you are recapping stuff that you wrote about elsewhere. What is the point of THAT, other than to occupy your time in retirement? -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-04 08:42 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <4828bd4a-6f67-458a-9c1f-488696d228e4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #407771 |
On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 4:25:15 PM UTC-6, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 2/3/2017 3:15 PM, Ed Lake wrote: > >> OK, where's the preprint? > >> > > Preprint? I'm not going to show the paper on this forum. That would be CRAZY. If it gets > > published, you can buy a copy. Six months after publication, I would get the copyrights back, > > and then I could post a link here. > > > > Meanwhile, you can check out some papers I wrote on the same subject of time dilation when I was > > just using the papers for Internet discussions. Here's the link: http://vixra.org/abs/1505.0234 > > > > So, I'll just point out the obvious. None of your other papers on > vixra.org passed peer review for publication in a journal. And so you > put them out where they are freely available. So I ask you again: What > is the point of holding your submitted paper secret while it goes > through review? Is there any conceivable benefit from withholding it? > I never even thought about sending the papers to a scientific journal at first. I just wanted to put the papers somewhere that I could link to them. And, I was hoping someone would want to discuss them. There IS a place for posting comments after each paper. It was a learning process for me. Eventually, after a couple years, I started thinking about getting something published. That was another learning process. I tried to get a paper published about an EFFECT of time dilation. It took awhile for me to realize that I needed to get time dilation defined first. Then I could get into the EFFECTS of time dilation. So, I wrote a paper about Time Dilation in the right format for publication in a specific scientific journal. I submitted it, it was received, and I'm awaiting the peer review. If they turn it down, I'm hoping the peer reviews will provide some good reasons for turning it down. If they don't, I'll submit the paper elsewhere. I didn't even evaluate different journals before sending out the paper. I just sent it to the journal that is available for reading at my local library and which seems to publish lots of articles involving time dilation. Now I have a list of over a half-dozen other journals I can try. > I notice too that you are self-absorbed enough to spend hours and hours > posting DAILY to you website at http://www.ed-lake.com/, where you are > recapping stuff that you wrote about elsewhere. What is the point of > THAT, other than to occupy your time in retirement? I had a web site about the anthrax attacks of 2001 which still gets hundreds of visitors per day. When I stopped updating that web site, I started a new site on January 1, 2015, and many visitors from the old site started reading the new site. It gets about 60 visitors per day, and many people come to the site only every few days or once a week. My site is basically a JOURNAL where I write down the things I'm doing. It's a great reference when I want to recheck something or find a link to some on-line conversation. My anthrax site is being used as a reference by a scientist who is writing a book about the anthrax attacks of 2001. I'm proof-reading the book for him. Yesterday, he asked me a question that took a lot of time for me to provide an answer. As a result I fell way behind on posting here. I think this discussion about time dilation is VERY interesting. It's like I'm a psychologist trying to understand how some patient thinks. The patient doesn't know himself how he thinks, so he cannot explain anything. I have to figure it out. And about 60 people follow what I'm doing via my site. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-05 10:19 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <o77j9q$beo$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #407832 |
On 2/4/2017 10:42 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > I had a web site about the anthrax attacks of 2001 which still gets hundreds of visitors per day. > When I stopped updating that web site, I started a new site on January 1, 2015, and many visitors > from the old site started reading the new site. It gets about 60 visitors per day, and many people > come to the site only every few days or once a week. > > My site is basically a JOURNAL where I write down the things I'm doing. It's a great reference when > I want to recheck something or find a link to some on-line conversation. My anthrax site is being > used as a reference by a scientist who is writing a book about the anthrax attacks of 2001. I'm > proof-reading the book for him. Yesterday, he asked me a question that took a lot of time for me > to provide an answer. As a result I fell way behind on posting here. > > I think this discussion about time dilation is VERY interesting. It's like I'm a psychologist > trying to understand how some patient thinks. The patient doesn't know himself how he thinks, > so he cannot explain anything. I have to figure it out. And about 60 people follow what I'm > doing via my site. > > Ed Ed, I'm just going to comment at this point that if it is more important to you to have 60 people reading your stream-of-consciousness thinking than it is to actually stop writing and start reading some good materials on the subject you're interested in, then you're never going to learn that subject. Self-aggrandizement will always get in your way. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-06 20:19 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <589920b9$0$43720$c3e8da3$5e5e430d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #407966 |
On 2/5/2017 11:19 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 2/4/2017 10:42 AM, Ed Lake wrote: >> I had a web site about the anthrax attacks of 2001 which still gets >> hundreds of visitors per day. >> When I stopped updating that web site, I started a new site on January >> 1, 2015, and many visitors >> from the old site started reading the new site. It gets about 60 >> visitors per day, and many people >> come to the site only every few days or once a week. >> >> My site is basically a JOURNAL where I write down the things I'm >> doing. It's a great reference when >> I want to recheck something or find a link to some on-line >> conversation. My anthrax site is being >> used as a reference by a scientist who is writing a book about the >> anthrax attacks of 2001. I'm >> proof-reading the book for him. Yesterday, he asked me a question >> that took a lot of time for me >> to provide an answer. As a result I fell way behind on posting here. >> >> I think this discussion about time dilation is VERY interesting. It's >> like I'm a psychologist >> trying to understand how some patient thinks. The patient doesn't >> know himself how he thinks, >> so he cannot explain anything. I have to figure it out. And about 60 >> people follow what I'm >> doing via my site. >> >> Ed > > Ed, I'm just going to comment at this point that if it is more important > to you to have 60 people reading your stream-of-consciousness thinking > than it is to actually stop writing and start reading some good > materials on the subject you're interested in, then you're never going > to learn that subject. Self-aggrandizement will always get in your way. > > That's right Ed. If you are like Boinker, you won't have any new ideas to write up so all you can do is read other people's ideas instead. Then you will be just like Odd and know your subject backwards and forwards but will never be able to do anything more than just repeat what others have said.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-07 07:32 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <o7ci90$1mot$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #408169 |
On 2/6/2017 7:19 PM, benj wrote: > On 2/5/2017 11:19 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 2/4/2017 10:42 AM, Ed Lake wrote: >>> I had a web site about the anthrax attacks of 2001 which still gets >>> hundreds of visitors per day. >>> When I stopped updating that web site, I started a new site on January >>> 1, 2015, and many visitors >>> from the old site started reading the new site. It gets about 60 >>> visitors per day, and many people >>> come to the site only every few days or once a week. >>> >>> My site is basically a JOURNAL where I write down the things I'm >>> doing. It's a great reference when >>> I want to recheck something or find a link to some on-line >>> conversation. My anthrax site is being >>> used as a reference by a scientist who is writing a book about the >>> anthrax attacks of 2001. I'm >>> proof-reading the book for him. Yesterday, he asked me a question >>> that took a lot of time for me >>> to provide an answer. As a result I fell way behind on posting here. >>> >>> I think this discussion about time dilation is VERY interesting. It's >>> like I'm a psychologist >>> trying to understand how some patient thinks. The patient doesn't >>> know himself how he thinks, >>> so he cannot explain anything. I have to figure it out. And about 60 >>> people follow what I'm >>> doing via my site. >>> >>> Ed >> >> Ed, I'm just going to comment at this point that if it is more important >> to you to have 60 people reading your stream-of-consciousness thinking >> than it is to actually stop writing and start reading some good >> materials on the subject you're interested in, then you're never going >> to learn that subject. Self-aggrandizement will always get in your way. >> >> > That's right Ed. If you are like Boinker, you won't have any new ideas > to write up so all you can do is read other people's ideas instead. Then > you will be just like Odd and know your subject backwards and forwards > but will never be able to do anything more than just repeat what others > have said. Oh, now benji. None of this propaganda inciting fear of brainwashing from education. You should know better. The ones who make novel contributions to the field are ALSO the ones that know their subject backwards and forwards, because they've taken the time to learn it from solid sources. People who just rely on their common intuition without education rarely if ever make any sense in the subject. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-07 17:35 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <589a4b98$0$57736$c3e8da3$5e5e430d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #408221 |
On 2/7/2017 8:32 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 2/6/2017 7:19 PM, benj wrote: >> On 2/5/2017 11:19 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> On 2/4/2017 10:42 AM, Ed Lake wrote: >>>> I had a web site about the anthrax attacks of 2001 which still gets >>>> hundreds of visitors per day. >>>> When I stopped updating that web site, I started a new site on January >>>> 1, 2015, and many visitors >>>> from the old site started reading the new site. It gets about 60 >>>> visitors per day, and many people >>>> come to the site only every few days or once a week. >>>> >>>> My site is basically a JOURNAL where I write down the things I'm >>>> doing. It's a great reference when >>>> I want to recheck something or find a link to some on-line >>>> conversation. My anthrax site is being >>>> used as a reference by a scientist who is writing a book about the >>>> anthrax attacks of 2001. I'm >>>> proof-reading the book for him. Yesterday, he asked me a question >>>> that took a lot of time for me >>>> to provide an answer. As a result I fell way behind on posting here. >>>> >>>> I think this discussion about time dilation is VERY interesting. It's >>>> like I'm a psychologist >>>> trying to understand how some patient thinks. The patient doesn't >>>> know himself how he thinks, >>>> so he cannot explain anything. I have to figure it out. And about 60 >>>> people follow what I'm >>>> doing via my site. >>>> >>>> Ed >>> >>> Ed, I'm just going to comment at this point that if it is more important >>> to you to have 60 people reading your stream-of-consciousness thinking >>> than it is to actually stop writing and start reading some good >>> materials on the subject you're interested in, then you're never going >>> to learn that subject. Self-aggrandizement will always get in your way. >>> >>> >> That's right Ed. If you are like Boinker, you won't have any new ideas >> to write up so all you can do is read other people's ideas instead. Then >> you will be just like Odd and know your subject backwards and forwards >> but will never be able to do anything more than just repeat what others >> have said. > > Oh, now benji. None of this propaganda inciting fear of brainwashing > from education. You should know better. > > The ones who make novel contributions to the field are ALSO the ones > that know their subject backwards and forwards, because they've taken > the time to learn it from solid sources. People who just rely on their > common intuition without education rarely if ever make any sense in the > subject. > Gosh Boinker, that's a great story that really justifies your blind belief in the dogma of your high priests, but too bad it's simply dead wrong. For example, Tesla practically invented the 20th century (and has the patents to prove it) and made a great number of scientific discoveries that were ignored until someone else could put their names on them, buy you and yours just ignore and dismiss him as a kook. Edison too. Think for a minute, Boinker. How can knowing the field backwards and forwards create any advance? All you know is what is already been done. That is HISTORY not an advance! As any true artist can tell you real advances are plucked out of the aether with ESP like Tesla did. And that is something any amateur can potentially do. Even amateurs like you. Just burn all your books and start thinking instead. Reber can teach you how to be an imperial thinker.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-07 08:18 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <o7ckvh$1rhj$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #408169 |
On 2/6/2017 7:19 PM, benj wrote: > That's right Ed. If you are like Boinker, you won't have any new ideas > to write up so all you can do is read other people's ideas instead. Then > you will be just like Odd and know your subject backwards and forwards > but will never be able to do anything more than just repeat what others > have said. At this point, Ed has gone a little uncharacteristically quiet. Perhaps he's addressing something in real life. Or perhaps he has taken sound advice and has abstained from chattering while he reads up on some things that he was not aware of before. Such as Galileo's principle of relativity and how moving and stationary are an accident of reference frame. Such as Einstein's relativity of simultaneity and of synchronization, which is at the root of time dilation and length contraction. Such as relying on common intuitions about "cause" is not necessarily a wise approach to physics. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-07 08:07 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <a03f4acb-e3b8-4832-b226-3a46e688e346@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408231 |
On Tuesday, February 7, 2017 at 8:18:29 AM UTC-6, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 2/6/2017 7:19 PM, benj wrote: > > That's right Ed. If you are like Boinker, you won't have any new ideas > > to write up so all you can do is read other people's ideas instead. Then > > you will be just like Odd and know your subject backwards and forwards > > but will never be able to do anything more than just repeat what others > > have said. > > At this point, Ed has gone a little uncharacteristically quiet. Perhaps > he's addressing something in real life. > > Or perhaps he has taken sound advice and has abstained from chattering > while he reads up on some things that he was not aware of before. Such > as Galileo's principle of relativity and how moving and stationary are > an accident of reference frame. Such as Einstein's relativity of > simultaneity and of synchronization, which is at the root of time > dilation and length contraction. Such as relying on common intuitions > about "cause" is not necessarily a wise approach to physics. > > -- > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables I "went quiet" because I'm only on-line for a few hours a day. I have other things to do. Looking over this morning's posts, I'm seeing very little worthy of a response. I see some sarcasm from "Benj." I see personal attacks by "RichD" and "David Fuller." And I see a lot of personal opinions and beliefs by you, along with demands that I do things your way so that I will believe as you believe. I was hoping to discuss the Hafele-Keaton experiments. I want to see how you, "rotchm" and Tom Roberts would rationalize that the clocks didn't "run slow" during the experiments, they just magically changed from one time to another. Mostly, I've been wondering about this massive conspiracy you seem to believe in, where the intelligentsia are deliberately misleading the common people into believing that "time runs slow" during time dilation, while the intelligentsia KNOW that time does NOT "run slow," it just magically changes from one time to another time. Tom Roberts wrote in this thread: "The following notions are WRONG, and are merely used in writings for the popular press by authors who either don't know the underlying physics, or who deem the actual details too complicated: * Moving clocks run slow * Mirrors reflect because their atoms absorb and re-emit photons " And he wrote about "authors writing casually in popular, non-technical journals as Gospel, without bothering to THINK about what they say." And YOU wrote this about lying to the general public: "It's not lying, in their eyes. It's making a statement they will state some things for a general reader that are so loosely presented that they will be inaccurate, but accuracy is less important than being interesting, engaging, accessible, and understandable in plain terms for the general reader." Since they ALL seem to be lying about clocks "running slow" during time dilation, I'm wondering if the mathematical intelligentsia communicate via some news letter or something. How do they all know to spout the same lies? Here's an article from Nature magazine which says "time slows down for moving objects": http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100923/full/news.2010.487.html Here's a web page from Boston University that says "Moving clocks run slow": http://physics.bu.edu/py106/notes/Relativity.html Here's an article from the University of California Riverside about clocks running slow: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/movingClocks.html Here's a lesson from the University of Virginia the explains how clocks run slow: http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/252/time_dil.html Here's a web page provided by the Max Planck institute on "moving clocks go slower": http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/Twins Here's an article from physics.org: http://www.physics.org/article-questions.asp?id=77 Here's a YouTube video from the World Science Festival titled "Time Dilation: Moving Clocks Tick Slower" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7m2KK8rOTBE Here's a web page from the University of Oregon about clocks ticking slower: http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/cosmo/lectures/lec06.html I could go on and on, but I'm wondering how you think all these people coordinate their lies about clocks running slow. And why are college professors teaching this "lie" to their students? Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-07 08:17 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <4e9e4723-9075-4d62-99e9-66bc8d2eb1d4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408241 |
On Tuesday, February 7, 2017 at 11:07:34 AM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote: > On Tuesday, February 7, 2017 at 8:18:29 AM UTC-6, Odd Bodkin wrote: > I was hoping to discuss the Hafele-Keaton experiments. I want to > see how you, "rotchm" and Tom Roberts would rationalize that the > clocks didn't "run slow" during the experiments, > they just magically changed from one time to another. > > Mostly, I've been wondering about this massive conspiracy you > seem to believe in, where the intelligentsia are deliberately > misleading the common people into believing that "time runs slow" > during time dilation, while the intelligentsia KNOW that time does > NOT "run slow," it just magically changes from one time to another > time. Its as your quotes below. You do not understand the meaning of the expression 'run slow'. moreover, what ever it means, has nothing to do with physics. If two clocks indicate different values (as they coincide) it just means that they indicate different values; that t' < t. All other words used are unnecessary and overkill, and may even mislead. What do YOU think is the 'cause' of the empirical fact that t' < t ?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-07 08:34 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <891d34c8-255a-411a-8f6d-7a70e8e3708b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408242 |
On Tuesday, February 7, 2017 at 10:17:03 AM UTC-6, rotchm wrote: > On Tuesday, February 7, 2017 at 11:07:34 AM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote: > > On Tuesday, February 7, 2017 at 8:18:29 AM UTC-6, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > > > I was hoping to discuss the Hafele-Keaton experiments. I want to > > see how you, "rotchm" and Tom Roberts would rationalize that the > > clocks didn't "run slow" during the experiments, > > they just magically changed from one time to another. > > > > Mostly, I've been wondering about this massive conspiracy you > > seem to believe in, where the intelligentsia are deliberately > > misleading the common people into believing that "time runs slow" > > during time dilation, while the intelligentsia KNOW that time does > > NOT "run slow," it just magically changes from one time to another > > time. > > Its as your quotes below. You do not understand the meaning of the expression 'run slow'. moreover, what ever it means, has nothing to do with physics. WHATEVER IT MEANS? So, you don't know what "run slow" means? How can you be sure I don't know what it means if you don't know what it means? You are REALLY WASTING MY TIME. > If two clocks indicate different values (as they coincide) it just means that they indicate different values; that t' < t. All other words used are unnecessary and overkill, and may even mislead. > > What do YOU think is the 'cause' of the empirical fact that t' < t ? YOU MAKE NO SENSE! YOU ARE WASTING MY TIME! It is NOT an "empirical fact" that t' < t. Out of context, it's just a meaningless mathematical equation. This will be my LAST RESPONSE to you. YOU ARE JUST WASTING MY TIME. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-07 11:15 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <o7cvap$fku$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #408245 |
On 2/7/2017 10:34 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > YOU MAKE NO SENSE! YOU ARE WASTING MY TIME! Ed, for what we tell you to make sense, you're going to have to trust in the communication here. You're going to have to trust that it is necessary to take three steps back before you can take a step forward in the right direction. You seem unwilling to do that. The only person here who is wasting your time is YOU, by pursuing a path that is in the weeds and is NOT the right answer for what happens with time dilation. If you are so invested in the weed patch you're in, then you will continue to waste your own time in it. If you want to STOP wasting time, you will accept the need to back out of the weed patch and start again from further back. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-07 15:44 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <f3324881-d810-48d2-aee9-0d39756c1930@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408245 |
On Tuesday, February 7, 2017 at 11:34:26 AM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote: > On Tuesday, February 7, 2017 at 10:17:03 AM UTC-6, rotchm wrote: > > Its as your quotes below. You do not understand the meaning > > of the expression 'run slow'. moreover, what ever it means, > > has nothing to do with physics. > > WHATEVER IT MEANS? So, you don't know what "run slow" means? Of course I know what it means. Once again, you misunderstand what was said. > How can you be sure I don't know what it means Because from our conversations, it is clear to many of us, that you just dont understand the meaning of the expressions used in physics and nor in its polarizations. > > What do YOU think is the 'cause' of the empirical fact that t' < t ? > > YOU MAKE NO SENSE! The question is quite clear. > YOU ARE WASTING MY TIME! You keep saying that every time you are stumped. Change your record! > It is NOT an "empirical fact" that t' < t. Out of context, > it's just a meaningless mathematical equation. Yes it is an empirical fact. Scientist regularly send a clock to "over there" and return it "here". The empirical result is that the "traveling" clock indicates a value less than the "non travelling" one. Various equivalent exps are routinely performed and we always get the same *empirical* result: t' < t. Are you denying these empirical results? Again, the expression " t' < t " is just a symbol form, a language, to say that the values of the clocks differed. > This will be my LAST RESPONSE to you. YOU ARE JUST WASTING MY TIME. Then that will be your loss, and you will remain indoctrinated by your own misconceptions.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-07 23:30 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <0f6c5b3c-dba2-4613-a162-f70ed5d6c0a9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408303 |
W dniu środa, 8 lutego 2017 00:44:14 UTC+1 użytkownik rotchm napisał: > > It is NOT an "empirical fact" that t' < t. Out of context, > > it's just a meaningless mathematical equation. > > Yes it is an empirical fact. A lie, as expecred from a fanatic lying shit. Here is real data from real clocks: http://www.leapsecond.com/java/gpsclock.htm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-07 10:43 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <073203dd-7a9f-404d-926c-c1faed3c0b6a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408242 |
W dniu wtorek, 7 lutego 2017 17:17:03 UTC+1 użytkownik rotchm napisał: > What do YOU think is the 'cause' of the empirical fact that t' < t ? The cause of this "empirical fact" is imagination of brainwashed morons like you. Here is real data from real clocks. t'=t with the precision of an acceptable error. http://www.leapsecond.com/java/gpsclock.htm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-07 08:33 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <690ba512-7591-4744-a50f-795e6081a528@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408241 |
Ed Lake gibbered I could go on and on, but I'm wondering how you think all these people coordinate their lies about clocks running slow. And why are college professors teaching this "lie" to their students? You are stupid, learn basic physics first Imbecile Everyone here is telling you to go learn some more about Basic Physics to assist you in your Cognition of your Error http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/emcon.html#c1 Start here .... https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCiEHVhv0SBMpP75JbzJShqw Or here ....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-07 17:39 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <o7ct7m$bh7$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #408241 |
Op 07-feb-2017 om 17:07 schreef Ed Lake: [snip] > Since they ALL seem to be lying about clocks "running slow" during > time dilation, I'm wondering if the mathematical intelligentsia > communicate via some news letter or something. How do they all know > to spout the same lies? They don't. They just speak loosely, "for the layman". As a layman, you seem to want more, so here on this forum you managed to have a few people patiently (desperately?) try to explain to you what it is really like. Alas, you don't listen. And that is entirely understandable because you don't have the background to understand. I tried to explain too for a short while, but I quickly decided not to insist, as you clearly have no intention (or ability) to take at least three steps back and start from there. You are trying to run a marathon, but you haven't learned to crawl yet. Dirk Vdm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-07 11:10 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <o7cv1n$f41$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #408241 |
On 2/7/2017 10:07 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > On Tuesday, February 7, 2017 at 8:18:29 AM UTC-6, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 2/6/2017 7:19 PM, benj wrote: >>> That's right Ed. If you are like Boinker, you won't have any new ideas >>> to write up so all you can do is read other people's ideas instead. Then >>> you will be just like Odd and know your subject backwards and forwards >>> but will never be able to do anything more than just repeat what others >>> have said. >> >> At this point, Ed has gone a little uncharacteristically quiet. Perhaps >> he's addressing something in real life. >> >> Or perhaps he has taken sound advice and has abstained from chattering >> while he reads up on some things that he was not aware of before. Such >> as Galileo's principle of relativity and how moving and stationary are >> an accident of reference frame. Such as Einstein's relativity of >> simultaneity and of synchronization, which is at the root of time >> dilation and length contraction. Such as relying on common intuitions >> about "cause" is not necessarily a wise approach to physics. >> >> -- >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > I "went quiet" because I'm only on-line for a few hours a day. I have other things to do. > > Looking over this morning's posts, I'm seeing very little worthy of a response. > > I see some sarcasm from "Benj." I see personal attacks by "RichD" and "David Fuller." > And I see a lot of personal opinions and beliefs by you, along with demands that I do > things your way so that I will believe as you believe. No sir. I have recommendations that you do some studying in the manner that I have found to be constructive. This is not a demand, it is a recommendation. If you elect not to take the recommendation, then frankly I think you will suffer the same artifacts of lack of education that you exhibit now. Finally, I do not believe that education forces people to believe in a common way. I think that is the propaganda that conflates education with brainwashing, and frankly I think this propaganda is lofted as an excuse by the lazy to avoid education. Education NEVER is a bad idea. > > I was hoping to discuss the Hafele-Keaton experiments. I want to see how you, > "rotchm" and Tom Roberts would rationalize that the clocks didn't "run slow" > during the experiments, they just magically changed from one time to another. And I've told you that we can get to your answers. There are steps to get to that answer. These steps will involve a few things: - Dismantling a couple of key misconceptions that you are hanging onto - Learning the key part of the 1905 paper on special relativity about relativity of simultaneity and relativity of clock synchronization - Explaining the implications of the relativity of simultaneity, including length contraction and time dilation. Now, if you do not wish to engage on these steps, then you will not get your answer for how in the HK experiment the results are understood without clocks running slow. You may elect, for example, to insist that you do not have any misconceptions about anything and therefore there is no need to dismantle anything. If that blockage occurs, then you will not get your answer. So, do you want the answer or do you not? > > Mostly, I've been wondering about this massive conspiracy you seem to > believe in, where the intelligentsia are deliberately misleading the common > people into believing that "time runs slow" during time dilation, while the > intelligentsia KNOW that time does NOT "run slow," it just magically changes > from one time to another time. It's not a conspiracy. It is however a deliberate choice to use language, based on audience, that has enough ambiguity in it that it can be misconstrued. In popularizations, it is not true that there is a deliberate INTENT to deceive. However, it IS true that the language ALLOWS the reader to become deceived. It is not magic. It does have a different explanation than what you are holding in your head. If you are WILLING to learn what that new explanation is, then it CAN be explained to you better than what you have read. I do not have to claim that you were deceived. I do claim you were given enough rope with casual language to arrive at the wrong conclusion. > > Tom Roberts wrote in this thread: > > "The following notions are WRONG, and are merely used in writings for > the popular press by authors who either don't know the underlying physics, or > who deem the actual details too complicated: > * Moving clocks run slow > * Mirrors reflect because their atoms absorb and re-emit photons " > > And he wrote about "authors writing casually in popular, non-technical journals as > Gospel, without bothering to THINK about what they say." > > And YOU wrote this about lying to the general public: > > "It's not lying, in their eyes. It's making a statement they will state some things > for a general reader that are so loosely presented that they will be inaccurate, > but accuracy is less important than being interesting, engaging, accessible, and > understandable in plain terms for the general reader." Yes, these statements are both right. > > Since they ALL seem to be lying about clocks "running slow" during time dilation, Didn't I JUST SAY it is not lying? Yet, you insist on calling it lying. Just because you have landed at an incorrect conclusion because of the language they used, does NOT mean that they intended to deceive you. > I'm wondering if the mathematical intelligentsia communicate via some news letter > or something. How do they all know to spout the same lies? It's NOT a conspiracy. It's a habit of casual language to say things sloppily in the same way. There is no intent to deceive. There is just not an intent to say things carefully in a popularization. Do you see the difference? > > Here's an article from Nature magazine which says "time slows down for > moving objects": http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100923/full/news.2010.487.html > > Here's a web page from Boston University that says "Moving clocks run slow": > http://physics.bu.edu/py106/notes/Relativity.html > > Here's an article from the University of California Riverside about clocks > running slow: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/movingClocks.html > > Here's a lesson from the University of Virginia the explains how clocks > run slow: http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/252/time_dil.html > > Here's a web page provided by the Max Planck institute on "moving clocks go > slower": http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/Twins > > Here's an article from physics.org: http://www.physics.org/article-questions.asp?id=77 > > Here's a YouTube video from the World Science Festival titled > "Time Dilation: Moving Clocks Tick Slower" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7m2KK8rOTBE > > Here's a web page from the University of Oregon about clocks ticking > slower: http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/cosmo/lectures/lec06.html These are ALL web resources. This is the trap of using the web as an instructional device. There is too much CRAP to filter through where people are NOT trying to instruct, they are trying to popularize. Web resources are free, and you get the quality you pay for. I've suggested several times that you abandon trying to learn this subject from the web, and I've given you several good book suggestions and I believe others have too. I've even suggested rereading the 1905 paper by Einstein. Now you have a choice: You can either go on lamenting about the information you see splashed all over the web about clocks running slow, or you can walk away from the web and start studying a book for real. Tell me what your choice is and WHY you elect that choice. > > I could go on and on, but I'm wondering how you think all these people > coordinate their lies about clocks running slow. They're not lies. They are loose language. > And why are college > professors teaching this "lie" to their students? They don't. If you take a course in the subject of relativity, you will find that they are much more likely to be more careful in their language. This is why I suggested you TAKE the course, rather than try to divine what they must be teaching by virtue of their web trail. > > Ed > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-07 09:29 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Silver mirror |
| Message-ID | <eba07d91-e07b-4d23-bdf3-e98a4c805096@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408248 |
On Tuesday, February 7, 2017 at 11:10:22 AM UTC-6, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 2/7/2017 10:07 AM, Ed Lake wrote: > > On Tuesday, February 7, 2017 at 8:18:29 AM UTC-6, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 2/6/2017 7:19 PM, benj wrote: > >>> That's right Ed. If you are like Boinker, you won't have any new ideas > >>> to write up so all you can do is read other people's ideas instead. Then > >>> you will be just like Odd and know your subject backwards and forwards > >>> but will never be able to do anything more than just repeat what others > >>> have said. > >> > >> At this point, Ed has gone a little uncharacteristically quiet. Perhaps > >> he's addressing something in real life. > >> > >> Or perhaps he has taken sound advice and has abstained from chattering > >> while he reads up on some things that he was not aware of before. Such > >> as Galileo's principle of relativity and how moving and stationary are > >> an accident of reference frame. Such as Einstein's relativity of > >> simultaneity and of synchronization, which is at the root of time > >> dilation and length contraction. Such as relying on common intuitions > >> about "cause" is not necessarily a wise approach to physics. > >> > >> -- > >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > > > I "went quiet" because I'm only on-line for a few hours a day. I have other things to do. > > > > Looking over this morning's posts, I'm seeing very little worthy of a response. > > > > I see some sarcasm from "Benj." I see personal attacks by "RichD" and "David Fuller." > > And I see a lot of personal opinions and beliefs by you, along with demands that I do > > things your way so that I will believe as you believe. > > No sir. I have recommendations that you do some studying in the manner > that I have found to be constructive. This is not a demand, it is a > recommendation. If you elect not to take the recommendation, then > frankly I think you will suffer the same artifacts of lack of education > that you exhibit now. Finally, I do not believe that education forces > people to believe in a common way. I think that is the propaganda that > conflates education with brainwashing, and frankly I think this > propaganda is lofted as an excuse by the lazy to avoid education. > Education NEVER is a bad idea. > > > > > I was hoping to discuss the Hafele-Keaton experiments. I want to see how you, > > "rotchm" and Tom Roberts would rationalize that the clocks didn't "run slow" > > during the experiments, they just magically changed from one time to another. > > And I've told you that we can get to your answers. There are steps to > get to that answer. These steps will involve a few things: > - Dismantling a couple of key misconceptions that you are hanging onto > - Learning the key part of the 1905 paper on special relativity about > relativity of simultaneity and relativity of clock synchronization > - Explaining the implications of the relativity of simultaneity, > including length contraction and time dilation. > > Now, if you do not wish to engage on these steps, then you will not get > your answer for how in the HK experiment the results are understood > without clocks running slow. You may elect, for example, to insist that > you do not have any misconceptions about anything and therefore there is > no need to dismantle anything. If that blockage occurs, then you will > not get your answer. > > So, do you want the answer or do you not? > > > > > Mostly, I've been wondering about this massive conspiracy you seem to > > believe in, where the intelligentsia are deliberately misleading the common > > people into believing that "time runs slow" during time dilation, while the > > intelligentsia KNOW that time does NOT "run slow," it just magically changes > > from one time to another time. > > It's not a conspiracy. It is however a deliberate choice to use > language, based on audience, that has enough ambiguity in it that it can > be misconstrued. In popularizations, it is not true that there is a > deliberate INTENT to deceive. However, it IS true that the language > ALLOWS the reader to become deceived. > > It is not magic. It does have a different explanation than what you are > holding in your head. If you are WILLING to learn what that new > explanation is, then it CAN be explained to you better than what you > have read. I do not have to claim that you were deceived. I do claim you > were given enough rope with casual language to arrive at the wrong > conclusion. > > > > > Tom Roberts wrote in this thread: > > > > "The following notions are WRONG, and are merely used in writings for > > the popular press by authors who either don't know the underlying physics, or > > who deem the actual details too complicated: > > * Moving clocks run slow > > * Mirrors reflect because their atoms absorb and re-emit photons " > > > > And he wrote about "authors writing casually in popular, non-technical journals as > > Gospel, without bothering to THINK about what they say." > > > > And YOU wrote this about lying to the general public: > > > > "It's not lying, in their eyes. It's making a statement they will state some things > > for a general reader that are so loosely presented that they will be inaccurate, > > but accuracy is less important than being interesting, engaging, accessible, and > > understandable in plain terms for the general reader." > > Yes, these statements are both right. > > > > > Since they ALL seem to be lying about clocks "running slow" during time dilation, > > Didn't I JUST SAY it is not lying? Yet, you insist on calling it lying. > Just because you have landed at an incorrect conclusion because of the > language they used, does NOT mean that they intended to deceive you. > > > I'm wondering if the mathematical intelligentsia communicate via some news letter > > or something. How do they all know to spout the same lies? > > It's NOT a conspiracy. It's a habit of casual language to say things > sloppily in the same way. There is no intent to deceive. There is just > not an intent to say things carefully in a popularization. Do you see > the difference? > > > > > Here's an article from Nature magazine which says "time slows down for > > moving objects": http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100923/full/news.2010.487.html > > > > Here's a web page from Boston University that says "Moving clocks run slow": > > http://physics.bu.edu/py106/notes/Relativity.html > > > > Here's an article from the University of California Riverside about clocks > > running slow: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/movingClocks.html > > > > Here's a lesson from the University of Virginia the explains how clocks > > run slow: http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/252/time_dil.html > > > > Here's a web page provided by the Max Planck institute on "moving clocks go > > slower": http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/Twins > > > > Here's an article from physics.org: http://www.physics.org/article-questions.asp?id=77 > > > > Here's a YouTube video from the World Science Festival titled > > "Time Dilation: Moving Clocks Tick Slower" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7m2KK8rOTBE > > > > Here's a web page from the University of Oregon about clocks ticking > > slower: http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/cosmo/lectures/lec06.html > > These are ALL web resources. This is the trap of using the web as an > instructional device. There is too much CRAP to filter through where > people are NOT trying to instruct, they are trying to popularize. Web > resources are free, and you get the quality you pay for. > > I've suggested several times that you abandon trying to learn this > subject from the web, and I've given you several good book suggestions > and I believe others have too. I've even suggested rereading the 1905 > paper by Einstein. > > Now you have a choice: You can either go on lamenting about the > information you see splashed all over the web about clocks running slow, > or you can walk away from the web and start studying a book for real. > Tell me what your choice is and WHY you elect that choice. > Why do you twists and distort everything???!! I am certainly NOT "lamenting" about information on the web. YOU ARE. My choice? Maybe I'll read a book on the web just to see how you react to that. I'm currently reading a science book on my Kindle during breakfast and lunch, and I'm listening to another on the CD player in my car as I drive from place to place. Complaining about the source of reading material is the same as arguing that the person with the best credentials is the one who is right. It's NONSENSE. It's away of avoiding any intelligent discussion. > > > > I could go on and on, but I'm wondering how you think all these people > > coordinate their lies about clocks running slow. > > They're not lies. They are loose language. > > > And why are college > > professors teaching this "lie" to their students? > > They don't. If you take a course in the subject of relativity, you will > find that they are much more likely to be more careful in their > language. This is why I suggested you TAKE the course, rather than try > to divine what they must be teaching by virtue of their web trail. > > > > > Ed > > I took Brian Greene's course on "Time and Einstein" sometime in 2014. I thought it was TOTAL CRAP. Back in August of 2016 I put a comment about it on my blog: http://oldguynewissues.blogspot.com/2016/08/physics-teachers-are-teaching.html It was one of the factors that got me to thinking about getting a scientific paper published to show how wrong college professors like Greene are. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 9 of 32 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 32 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web