Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #401877 > unrolled thread
| Started by | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-12-14 22:50 -0800 |
| Last post | 2017-02-14 14:06 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 368 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 22:50 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 23:35 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-15 09:03 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-12-15 10:53 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-15 10:56 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-12-15 11:03 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-15 11:13 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-12-15 11:27 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Lauretta Nagle <uattea@aeuatte.au> - 2016-12-16 18:05 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-12-17 01:57 +0100
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Lauretta Nagle <uattea@aeuatte.au> - 2016-12-17 17:46 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2016-12-18 08:29 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Jacquelyn Schiffer <euefhqheeoeeSfaJn@euefhqhee.eeSfaJn.eue> - 2016-12-21 19:58 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-12-22 08:36 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Darleen Sloop <aolenD@nedfdealln.org> - 2016-12-22 21:05 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-12-15 12:54 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Lauretta Nagle <uattea@aeuatte.au> - 2016-12-16 17:57 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-12-20 14:02 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-15 09:32 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-12-15 11:02 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-15 11:08 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-12-15 11:31 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-15 11:40 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-12-15 12:00 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-15 13:01 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-12-15 13:07 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-15 13:10 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-12-15 13:41 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-15 15:21 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-12-16 15:46 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-16 21:32 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-12-19 22:40 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2016-12-20 11:08 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-12-20 14:00 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-16 12:54 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Lauretta Nagle <uattea@aeuatte.au> - 2016-12-16 21:16 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-16 17:09 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Lauretta Nagle <uattea@aeuatte.au> - 2016-12-17 17:40 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-18 09:45 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-18 10:38 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-18 11:02 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-18 16:14 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-19 12:13 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-19 14:09 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-20 10:46 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-20 16:33 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-24 07:01 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-19 12:39 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-19 14:18 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Darron Borton <ororrt@orrtnorr.info> - 2016-12-20 03:38 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-19 19:49 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-19 14:43 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-19 16:22 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Darron Borton <ororrt@orrtnorr.info> - 2016-12-20 03:34 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-19 16:26 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-19 18:31 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Darron Borton <ororrt@orrtnorr.info> - 2016-12-20 03:32 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-20 11:03 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-20 11:19 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay furthermore123456@gmail.com - 2016-12-20 12:54 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay furthermore123456@gmail.com - 2016-12-20 12:55 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay furthermore123456@gmail.com - 2016-12-20 13:04 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay furthermore123456@gmail.com - 2016-12-20 13:07 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-21 12:31 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-12-22 15:20 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2016-12-24 07:19 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-24 07:47 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-24 07:56 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 08:50 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-24 09:59 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-01-24 10:16 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 11:11 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-24 11:45 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 11:58 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-24 12:06 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 12:47 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-24 14:13 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-24 14:31 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-24 14:37 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-25 00:07 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-25 07:54 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-25 11:25 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-27 16:15 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-27 17:29 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-28 01:19 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-28 18:35 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-28 21:08 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-29 10:49 +0100
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-29 02:41 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-29 10:23 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Larry Harson <johnmcandrew66@gmail.com> - 2017-01-29 16:22 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-29 20:40 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-29 22:50 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-29 21:28 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-30 08:21 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-30 08:17 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-30 16:08 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-30 16:30 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-30 16:59 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-30 17:12 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-30 20:49 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-30 20:58 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-01-31 07:38 +0100
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-31 11:40 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2017-01-31 11:51 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-31 12:08 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2017-01-31 13:01 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-31 13:22 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2017-01-31 14:37 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-31 15:29 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2017-02-01 12:02 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-01 14:12 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-02 00:01 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2017-02-02 10:21 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 12:44 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-01 13:06 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-31 12:19 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-31 12:24 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-31 12:30 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-31 13:19 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-31 15:39 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-31 17:40 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-01 15:58 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-01 16:28 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-01 23:54 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-02 07:04 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 09:36 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 10:04 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-02 10:39 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 12:58 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-02 14:27 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 15:36 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-02 16:00 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 19:23 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-02 19:49 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 00:23 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-03 06:34 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 08:17 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-03 08:30 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 16:48 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-02 18:44 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2017-02-02 15:15 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 17:20 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2017-02-02 15:34 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 16:43 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2017-02-02 18:30 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 16:42 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-28 10:39 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-27 18:27 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-29 11:26 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-30 08:23 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-27 10:57 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-27 17:37 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-27 23:50 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-27 21:55 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-28 11:29 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-28 18:31 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-28 20:45 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-01-30 08:14 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Larry Harson <johnmcandrew66@gmail.com> - 2017-01-28 20:00 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-29 11:45 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-29 10:13 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Larry Harson <johnmcandrew66@gmail.com> - 2017-01-28 19:10 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-05 21:40 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Emmaline Coots <ealoa@loealoioa.los> - 2017-02-06 06:33 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-06 22:07 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Emmaline Coots <ealoa@loealoioa.los> - 2017-02-07 09:18 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-06 07:01 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 15:37 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-06 16:30 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-08 12:14 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-08 10:39 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-12 14:43 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-12 19:35 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 12:39 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Sanjuanita Peeples <naalu@nwmeela.org> - 2017-02-13 21:06 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 13:10 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-13 14:38 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 15:47 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-13 16:08 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 16:31 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-13 17:21 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 19:00 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-13 19:24 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 19:51 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-13 22:10 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 23:47 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-14 06:11 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-02-14 15:20 +0100
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-14 07:14 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 13:42 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 13:30 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-14 22:50 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 00:28 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-15 06:11 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 11:13 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-15 11:31 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 11:45 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-15 11:52 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 12:02 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-15 12:20 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 13:43 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-15 14:29 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 14:44 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-15 14:49 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 14:53 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 13:46 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 13:49 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-15 14:31 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 14:52 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-15 15:03 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-15 20:28 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-15 19:24 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 19:39 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-15 19:44 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 21:05 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-15 21:25 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 08:22 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-16 08:39 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 16:02 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Sanjuanita Peeples <naalu@nwmeela.org> - 2017-02-16 16:53 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 13:40 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-16 13:46 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 15:11 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-16 13:48 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 15:18 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-16 15:42 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 16:12 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-16 17:42 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-16 22:35 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-16 20:46 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 21:16 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-16 21:22 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 21:37 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-16 21:45 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 21:58 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-16 22:11 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 22:22 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-16 22:32 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 22:40 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-16 22:42 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 23:26 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 23:57 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-16 21:50 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-16 20:03 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 21:07 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-16 21:21 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 21:53 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-16 22:14 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 22:33 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-17 17:06 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-17 16:43 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-18 04:52 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-18 07:09 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-18 12:41 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-18 21:16 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-18 21:39 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-18 23:57 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-19 07:10 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-19 10:17 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-19 08:27 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Larry Harson <johnmcandrew66@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 15:24 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-16 15:43 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Larry Harson <johnmcandrew66@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 16:23 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-16 17:45 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Larry Harson <johnmcandrew66@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 19:31 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-16 19:46 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Larry Harson <johnmcandrew66@gmail.com> - 2017-02-19 10:26 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-19 10:59 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 11:52 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Sanjuanita Peeples <naalu@nwmeela.org> - 2017-02-15 20:44 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 13:44 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-15 14:30 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 14:46 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-15 14:50 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 14:56 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Sanjuanita Peeples <naalu@nwmeela.org> - 2017-02-16 16:16 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 11:32 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Sanjuanita Peeples <naalu@nwmeela.org> - 2017-02-16 21:00 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 13:29 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Sanjuanita Peeples <naalu@nwmeela.org> - 2017-02-17 12:26 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Larry Harson <johnmcandrew66@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 22:36 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-13 22:45 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Larry Harson <johnmcandrew66@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 15:49 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-16 15:54 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-16 16:16 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-13 23:35 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-13 22:14 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 23:54 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-14 10:51 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-14 09:02 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 13:46 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-15 11:19 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-15 09:39 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 11:42 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-15 23:47 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Sanjuanita Peeples <naalu@nwmeela.org> - 2017-02-14 12:43 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-14 14:04 +0100
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Sanjuanita Peeples <naalu@nwmeela.org> - 2017-02-15 16:08 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-15 17:29 +0100
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 10:42 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-07 11:05 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 15:30 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 15:31 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-07 15:38 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 16:43 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-07 18:04 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-08 11:58 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-08 10:23 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Larry Harson <johnmcandrew66@gmail.com> - 2017-01-28 19:22 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-29 22:58 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Larry Harson <johnmcandrew66@gmail.com> - 2017-01-30 23:32 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-01-31 16:06 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Larry Harson <johnmcandrew66@gmail.com> - 2017-02-01 05:56 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-01 13:04 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Larry Harson <johnmcandrew66@gmail.com> - 2017-02-02 03:52 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-04 12:45 -0600
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2017-02-04 13:55 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Larry Harson <johnmcandrew66@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 12:49 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-03 09:19 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-03 09:47 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2017-02-03 11:19 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 12:46 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2017-02-03 13:30 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-03 14:14 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-03 21:43 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-03 21:42 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-04 12:42 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Emmaline Coots <ealoa@loealoioa.los> - 2017-02-05 01:33 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-02-05 03:20 +0100
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Emmaline Coots <ealoa@loealoioa.los> - 2017-02-05 06:03 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-05 00:09 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-06 06:51 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 01:58 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-07 05:48 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 21:09 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-07 21:40 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 00:35 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 03:24 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-08 05:47 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 08:51 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-08 09:29 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 19:32 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-08 19:49 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-08 20:04 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-02-09 05:15 +0100
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-08 20:33 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 02:05 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-09 07:13 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 00:05 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-13 07:57 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 10:29 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-13 11:09 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 11:16 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 12:51 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 13:08 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 01:38 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-09 07:12 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 08:09 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Emmaline Coots <ealoa@loealoioa.los> - 2017-02-09 16:13 +0000
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-09 08:13 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 09:56 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-09 10:04 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 10:14 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-25 09:59 +0100
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2017-01-29 11:36 -0800
Re: Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay alsor@interia.pl - 2017-02-04 14:08 -0800
Zero-area Sagnac path and its residual time delay "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-14 14:06 -0800
Page 18 of 19 — ← Prev page 1 … 16 17 [18] 19 Next page →
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-08 08:51 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <7d4d9a0f-5717-435f-8294-237b9871d50c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408372 |
On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 7:47:35 AM UTC-6, Dono, wrote: > On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 12:35:42 AM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > INCOMPETENT COWARD!!! > > > > Stubborn Cretin, > > Maxwell's equations are invariant to the rotation transform. Therefore the solutions in the frame of the rotating are identical to the ones in the inertial frame of the hub. > > You can try it too, rather than blathering your idiocies. The transform is: > > x' |cos \omega*t sin \omega*t 0 0 | x > y'= |-sin \omega*t cos \omega*t 0 0 | y > z' | 0 0 1 0 | z > t' | 0 0 0 1 | t > t' > > > > I ask you to account for the loss of an invariant quantity. > > > > The only "loss" is in your cretin brain. Do you honestly think that you are fooling anybody but yourself? | Why don't you answer the question that you SNIPPED: If, as you claim, a beat . . | frequency exists between the light incident on M1 and the light which has . . | traversed around the ring returning to M1 (which obviously is at the same . . | gravitational potential as itself and which is traveling through the same path . . | in spacetime as itself), where did the missing cycles disappear? . . | https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8XIf0XcrpOcSE5GNWtQOS12Sk0 . . | How can you sustain an indefinite mismatch between cycles emitted and cycles . . | received given that the ring is a closed loop whose perimeter is unvarying in . . | length? . . https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8XIf0XcrpOcSE5GNWtQOS12Sk0
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-08 09:29 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3003599b-14dd-4721-bbcd-6c8582d86794@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408407 |
On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 8:51:37 AM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 7:47:35 AM UTC-6, Dono, wrote: > > On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 12:35:42 AM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > > > INCOMPETENT COWARD!!! > > > > > > > Stubborn Cretin, > > > > Maxwell's equations are invariant to the rotation transform. Therefore the solutions in the frame of the rotating are identical to the ones in the inertial frame of the hub. > > > > You can try it too, rather than blathering your idiocies. The transform is: > > > > x' |cos \omega*t sin \omega*t 0 0 | x > > y'= |-sin \omega*t cos \omega*t 0 0 | y > > z' | 0 0 1 0 | z > > t' | 0 0 0 1 | t > > t' > > > > > > > I ask you to account for the loss of an invariant quantity. > > > > > > > The only "loss" is in your cretin brain. > > Do you honestly think that you are fooling anybody but yourself? > I don't fool anybody, I can't fix your imbecility, I can't fix your dark soul. > | Why don't you answer the question that you SNIPPED: If, as you claim, a beat . . > | frequency exists between the light incident on M1 and the light which has . . > | traversed around the ring returning to M1 (which obviously is at the same . . > | gravitational potential as itself and which is traveling through the same path . . > | in spacetime as itself), where did the missing cycles disappear? . . NOTHING "Disappears" , imbecile. One cannot synchronize clocks on a rotating platform, so your demented "counting" is just that: demented.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-08 19:32 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <305271f2-78dc-439d-b941-cb3cb60c7f80@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408412 |
On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 11:29:39 AM UTC-6, Dono, wrote: > On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 8:51:37 AM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > > > Do you honestly think that you are fooling anybody but yourself? > > > > I don't fool anybody, I can't fix your imbecility, I can't fix your dark soul. > > > > | Why don't you answer the question that you SNIPPED: If, as you claim, a beat . . > > | frequency exists between the light incident on M1 and the light which has . . > > | traversed around the ring returning to M1 (which obviously is at the same . . > > | gravitational potential as itself and which is traveling through the same path . . > > | in spacetime as itself), where did the missing cycles disappear? . . > NOTHING "Disappears" , imbecile. One cannot synchronize clocks on a rotating platform, so your demented "counting" is just that: demented. On a rotating platform or not, mirror M1 must be synchronized with itself!!! M1 emits a certain number of cycles per second, and you claim that the return beam shows a shortfall in counts compared with the outgoing beam. It is impossible for you to attribute this shortfall to relativity of simultaneity or time dilation because M1 is necessarily in the same state of motion as itself and is at the same gravitational potential as itself. There is only one explanation that makes sense, namely that the "theory" of the Sagnac effect that you developed in your PDF is completely, totally goofed up.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-08 19:49 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <d1769e0d-e8e6-4d1e-adad-e577854d488a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408505 |
On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 7:32:33 PM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 11:29:39 AM UTC-6, Dono, wrote: > > On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 8:51:37 AM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > > > > > > Do you honestly think that you are fooling anybody but yourself? > > > > > > > I don't fool anybody, I can't fix your imbecility, I can't fix your dark soul. > > > > > > > | Why don't you answer the question that you SNIPPED: If, as you claim, a beat . . > > > | frequency exists between the light incident on M1 and the light which has . . > > > | traversed around the ring returning to M1 (which obviously is at the same . . > > > | gravitational potential as itself and which is traveling through the same path . . > > > | in spacetime as itself), where did the missing cycles disappear? . . > > NOTHING "Disappears" , imbecile. One cannot synchronize clocks on a rotating platform, so your demented "counting" is just that: demented. > > On a rotating platform or not, mirror M1 must be synchronized with itself!!! > > M1 emits a certain number of cycles per second, and you claim that the return > beam shows a shortfall in counts compared with the outgoing beam. It is > impossible for you to attribute this shortfall to relativity of simultaneity > or time dilation because M1 is necessarily in the same state of motion as itself > and is at the same gravitational potential as itself. > No, idiot, there is no "shortfall", there is only your lack of understanding of the Doppler effect. You are confusing the change in frequency with a change in total elapsed proper time. Keep it up, don't give in. > There is only one explanation that makes sense, namely that the "theory" of the > Sagnac effect that you developed in your PDF is completely, totally goofed up. The other explanation is that you are an idiot. You could have used all this time proving to yourself that the solutions of the Maxwell equations are the same in the rotating platform as in the frame of the hub. Keep wasting your life.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-08 20:04 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <4b94774f-0fe5-4e48-8598-e5a33dfa98f2@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408505 |
On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 7:32:33 PM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 11:29:39 AM UTC-6, Dono, wrote: > > On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 8:51:37 AM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > > > > > > Do you honestly think that you are fooling anybody but yourself? > > > > > > > I don't fool anybody, I can't fix your imbecility, I can't fix your dark soul. > > > > > > > | Why don't you answer the question that you SNIPPED: If, as you claim, a beat . . > > > | frequency exists between the light incident on M1 and the light which has . . > > > | traversed around the ring returning to M1 (which obviously is at the same . . > > > | gravitational potential as itself and which is traveling through the same path . . > > > | in spacetime as itself), where did the missing cycles disappear? . . > > NOTHING "Disappears" , imbecile. One cannot synchronize clocks on a rotating platform, so your demented "counting" is just that: demented. > > On a rotating platform or not, mirror M1 must be synchronized with itself!!! > Look , imbecile The Sagnac experiment consists of sending a single pulse, not a train of pulses. The pulse returns at the origin with a frequency that is ever so slightly less than the original frequency, so, there is no "shortfall of cycles". > M1 emits a certain number of cycles per second, and you claim that the return > beam shows a shortfall in counts compared with the outgoing beam. It is > impossible for you to attribute this shortfall to relativity of simultaneity > or time dilation because M1 is necessarily in the same state of motion as itself > and is at the same gravitational potential as itself. > > There is only one explanation that makes sense, namely that the "theory" of the > Sagnac effect that you developed in your PDF is completely, totally goofed up. Cretin, You could have used all this time to learn that the Maxwell equations are invariant wrt the transformation into the rotating frame. As such, the solution in the rotating frame is identical to the one in the inertial frame: light follows a straight geodesic. I the inertial frame (te one that counts for the determination of the TDE), light will appear to follow a circular arc, due to aberration. You can't calculate your way out of a paper bag.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <python@python.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-09 05:15 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <o7gqdp$1eev$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #408508 |
Mister Dono, are you the one who wrote this? http://everythinguseless.org/AndrewGeorgesFumbles/TheHammockParadox2.pdf
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-08 20:33 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <00c293bc-8951-4eb1-a89f-d31e0e411283@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408509 |
On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 8:15:56 PM UTC-8, Python wrote: > Mister Dono, are you the one who wrote this? > > http://everythinguseless.org/AndrewGeorgesFumbles/TheHammockParadox2.pdf Yes, I did. What does it have to do with the current thread?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-09 02:05 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <dddd4f91-9f42-4b60-bdf4-71a4222d4b7d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408509 |
On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 10:15:56 PM UTC-6, Python wrote: > Mister Dono, are you the one who wrote this? > > http://everythinguseless.org/AndrewGeorgesFumbles/TheHammockParadox2.pdf Here is a relevant thread. I am not sure that it is *the* thread where he first presented his calculations, but it certainly illustrates his thought processes. "version of the train and platform thought experiment" https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics.relativity/uTjO9JOD1AA/FjfH2KivpYMJ
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-09 07:13 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <c6e62338-ef98-4a77-9c5b-16964c541931@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408554 |
On Thursday, February 9, 2017 at 2:05:13 AM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 10:15:56 PM UTC-6, Python wrote: > > Mister Dono, are you the one who wrote this? > > > > http://everythinguseless.org/AndrewGeorgesFumbles/TheHammockParadox2.pdf > > Here is a relevant thread. I am not sure that it is *the* thread where he first > presented his calculations, but it certainly illustrates his thought processes. > "version of the train and platform thought experiment" > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics.relativity/uTjO9JOD1AA/FjfH2KivpYMJ It demonstrates you being not only an imbecile but also a pathological stalker. Well done!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-13 00:05 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <aedaa95f-7072-4220-893d-acb9fcb3c306@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408594 |
On Thursday, February 9, 2017 at 9:13:56 AM UTC-6, Dono, wrote: > On Thursday, February 9, 2017 at 2:05:13 AM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > Here is a relevant thread. I am not sure that it is *the* thread where he first > > presented his calculations, but it certainly illustrates his thought processes. > > "version of the train and platform thought experiment" > > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics.relativity/uTjO9JOD1AA/FjfH2KivpYMJ > > It demonstrates you being not only an imbecile but also a pathological stalker. Well done! In your incompetent analysis, you used only HALF of the equations of the Lorentz Transformation. By omitting from your calculations the two equations that (roughly speaking) deal with relativity of simultaneity, you falsely concluded that the body falls perpendicular to the y-axis in all frames of reference. http://everythinguseless.org/AndrewGeorgesFumbles/TheHammockParadox2.pdf I have never seen a more bizarre misuse of LT. Yet in the aforementioned thread, you spent hundreds of posts defending your malpractice.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-13 07:57 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <0d675c46-7c21-4125-afa0-0576f4ab86f0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #409002 |
On Monday, February 13, 2017 at 12:05:06 AM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > snip pathological stalker irrelevant garbage< Psycho, This thread is about electromagnetism.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-13 10:29 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <14311313-193e-4339-8cc3-1623fceb86b0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #409054 |
On Monday, February 13, 2017 at 9:57:46 AM UTC-6, Dono, wrote: > On Monday, February 13, 2017 at 12:05:06 AM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > snip pathological stalker irrelevant garbage< > > Psycho, > > This thread is about electromagnetism. Threads go wherever they will. You cannot dictate which way a thread goes, although this thread is admittedly getting a little too long to conveniently handle another subtopic. Python brought up the issue of your messed-up analysis of the falling hammock paradox, and this issue legitimately belongs on this thread as part of a general discussion of your competence in physics. http://everythinguseless.org/AndrewGeorgesFumbles/TheHammockParadox2.pdf Your only response, of course, has been to snip and run away, shouting insults.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-13 11:09 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <e0b28442-d601-459d-96dd-84f5ec1bd36a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #409080 |
On Monday, February 13, 2017 at 10:29:40 AM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > On Monday, February 13, 2017 at 9:57:46 AM UTC-6, Dono, wrote: > > On Monday, February 13, 2017 at 12:05:06 AM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > > snip pathological stalker irrelevant garbage< > > > > Psycho, > > > > This thread is about electromagnetism. > > Threads go wherever they will. Do you think that you can stay on subject psycho? Why do you need to change the subject every time time you are proven wrong?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-13 11:16 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <9ccb9944-1ea8-4c20-991a-08b28bb93ca6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #409080 |
On Monday, February 13, 2017 at 10:29:40 AM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > On Monday, February 13, 2017 at 9:57:46 AM UTC-6, Dono, wrote: > > On Monday, February 13, 2017 at 12:05:06 AM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > > snip pathological stalker irrelevant garbage< > > > > Psycho, > > > > This thread is about electromagnetism. > > Threads go wherever they will. There is a universal law of Internet forums that says every thread that's long enough shall eventually discuss Andrei Tarkovsky (the Russian film director). Might as well look up "self-fulfilling prophecy" while we're at it. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-13 12:51 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <68f0d86d-4525-433e-837c-443e3de8646c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #409097 |
On Monday, February 13, 2017 at 1:16:02 PM UTC-6, JanPB wrote: > On Monday, February 13, 2017 at 10:29:40 AM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > Threads go wherever they will. > > There is a universal law of Internet forums that says every thread that's > long enough shall eventually discuss Andrei Tarkovsky (the Russian film > director). > > Might as well look up "self-fulfilling prophecy" while we're at it. So THAT'S who he was!!! Back in the early 70's I was dating a girl who was into art films, and she dragged me to a bunch of movies that I never otherwise would have watched. Mostly they were from the silent era: Intolerance, Battleship Potemkin, and a 3 hour cut version of Abel Gance's Napoleon. But they also included more recent films like Grand Illusion, Seventh Seal and Tarkovsky's Andrei Rublev. Brings back memories... thanks! "self-fulfilling prophecy" accomplished! :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-13 13:08 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <4ff69836-fd03-4cff-b4e2-4d818aebac80@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #409111 |
On Monday, February 13, 2017 at 12:51:07 PM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > On Monday, February 13, 2017 at 1:16:02 PM UTC-6, JanPB wrote: > > On Monday, February 13, 2017 at 10:29:40 AM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > > > Threads go wherever they will. > > > > There is a universal law of Internet forums that says every thread that's > > long enough shall eventually discuss Andrei Tarkovsky (the Russian film > > director). > > > > Might as well look up "self-fulfilling prophecy" while we're at it. > > So THAT'S who he was!!! Back in the early 70's I was dating a girl who was into > art films, and she dragged me to a bunch of movies that I never otherwise would > have watched. Mostly they were from the silent era: Intolerance, Battleship > Potemkin, and a 3 hour cut version of Abel Gance's Napoleon. But they also > included more recent films like Grand Illusion, Seventh Seal and Tarkovsky's > Andrei Rublev. > > Brings back memories... thanks! > > "self-fulfilling prophecy" accomplished! :-) I like his "Mirror" most, its outward structure is a bit convoluted, like Maxwell's equations in rotating coordinates, because Tarkovsky uses the same actors to portray different characters(*) AND the film's two main time frames(**) switch by straight cuts and without warning (a device invented IIRC by Alain Resnais in his inscrutable "Last Year in Marienbad"). But it's pretty easy to tell them apart, esp. on second viewing. The plot is actually amazingly simple. WARNING: most video versions feature a soundtrack altered by the studio in order to "suuround-sound-ify" it, it's not really BAD, just inauthentic, with an absurd amount of reverb added to the narrator's voice, and simply absurd in places, like a wall clock showing 5:20 and chiming seven or some such. BTW, you can now get the almost complete 5 1/2 (five and a half) hour version of "Napoleon" on Blu-ray at the UK Amazon: http://amzn.to/2kMindg (they keep finding the missing pieces) (*) In mathematics this is called "the abuse of notation". (**) WWII and today. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-09 01:38 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <f3863ed4-0d0d-4fdd-ae3b-d42350a7b50d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408508 |
On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 10:04:38 PM UTC-6, Dono, wrote: > On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 7:32:33 PM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 11:29:39 AM UTC-6, Dono, wrote: > > > NOTHING "Disappears" , imbecile. One cannot synchronize clocks on a rotating platform, so your demented "counting" is just that: demented. > > > > On a rotating platform or not, mirror M1 must be synchronized with itself!!! > > > > Look , imbecile > > The Sagnac experiment consists of sending a single pulse, not a train of pulses. The pulse returns at the origin with a frequency that is ever so slightly less than the original frequency, so, there is no "shortfall of cycles". Don't be ridiculous. The concept of "frequency" is completely undefined for a single infinitesimal pulse. Doppler effect applies just as well to a train of pulses as to a beam of light. Your analysis indicates that if you are situated at M1 on the unidirectional Sagnac apparatus illustrated and send out 3.8e19 pulses around the apparatus, at the end of a day's observation you will receive 8.6e4 fewer pulses than you have sent out. Where did these pulses disappear? https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8XIf0XcrpOcSE5GNWtQOS12Sk0 > > M1 emits a certain number of cycles per second, and you claim that the return > > beam shows a shortfall in counts compared with the outgoing beam. It is > > impossible for you to attribute this shortfall to relativity of simultaneity > > or time dilation because M1 is necessarily in the same state of motion as itself > > and is at the same gravitational potential as itself. > > > > There is only one explanation that makes sense, namely that the "theory" of the > > Sagnac effect that you developed in your PDF is completely, totally goofed up. > > Cretin, > > You could have used all this time to learn that the Maxwell equations are invariant wrt the transformation into the rotating frame. As such, the solution in the rotating frame is identical to the one in the inertial frame: light follows a straight geodesic. I the inertial frame (te one that counts for the determination of the TDE), light will appear to follow a circular arc, due to aberration. You can't calculate your way out of a paper bag. Garbage in, garbage out. Tom and Jan have demonstrated that your basic premises are completely screwed up, so your conclusions are nonsense.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-09 07:12 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b3639924-0e9c-4d6e-b634-da9cfa8bca16@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408550 |
On Thursday, February 9, 2017 at 1:38:33 AM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 10:04:38 PM UTC-6, Dono, wrote: > > On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 7:32:33 PM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > > On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 11:29:39 AM UTC-6, Dono, wrote: > > > > > NOTHING "Disappears" , imbecile. One cannot synchronize clocks on a rotating platform, so your demented "counting" is just that: demented. > > > > > > On a rotating platform or not, mirror M1 must be synchronized with itself!!! > > > > > > > Look , imbecile > > > > The Sagnac experiment consists of sending a single pulse, not a train of pulses. The pulse returns at the origin with a frequency that is ever so slightly less than the original frequency, so, there is no "shortfall of cycles". > > Don't be ridiculous. The concept of "frequency" is completely undefined for a > single infinitesimal pulse. > Cretin is like cretin does. > Doppler effect applies just as well to a train of pulses as to a beam of light. There is no "train of pulses" in Sagnac, you need to try to understand the basics before you start modifying experiments in order to fit your demented agenda.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-09 08:09 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b8494a53-a53b-4bb6-a4e1-17413530ec83@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408593 |
On Thursday, February 9, 2017 at 9:12:52 AM UTC-6, Dono, wrote: > On Thursday, February 9, 2017 at 1:38:33 AM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > Don't be ridiculous. The concept of "frequency" is completely undefined for a > > single infinitesimal pulse. > > > > Cretin is like cretin does. Do you understand anything about Fourier analysis?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Emmaline Coots <ealoa@loealoioa.los> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-09 16:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <o7i4em$1jru$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #408613 |
Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > On Thursday, February 9, 2017 at 9:12:52 AM UTC-6, Dono, wrote: >> On Thursday, February 9, 2017 at 1:38:33 AM UTC-8, Prokaryotic Caspase >> Homolog wrote: > >> > Don't be ridiculous. The concept of "frequency" is completely >> > undefined for a single infinitesimal pulse. >> > >> > >> Cretin is like cretin does. > > Do you understand anything about Fourier analysis? Proka, me neither. But I know the process. It strongly depends locally on the shape of that pulse.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 18 of 19 — ← Prev page 1 … 16 17 [18] 19 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web