Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #415693 > unrolled thread

New Gravity Theory

Started bykenseto <setoken@att.net>
First post2017-04-10 06:07 -0700
Last post2017-04-26 13:38 -0700
Articles 20 on this page of 175 — 23 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-10 06:07 -0700
    Re: New Gravity Theory moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-10 15:40 +0000
      Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-10 09:49 -0700
        Re: New Gravity Theory moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-10 19:09 +0000
    Re: New Gravity Theory Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-10 17:47 +0200
      Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-10 09:53 -0700
        Re: New Gravity Theory Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-12 08:04 +0200
          Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-12 05:51 -0700
            Re: New Gravity Theory Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-12 14:53 +0200
              Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-12 07:32 -0700
                Re: New Gravity Theory Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-12 16:40 +0200
                  Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-12 13:39 -0700
                    Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 16:03 -0700
                      Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-13 05:04 -0700
                        Re: New Gravity Theory Heki Entouba <buububu@enou3eh.ac> - 2017-04-13 12:09 +0000
                        Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 12:19 -0700
                          Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-13 23:00 -0700
                            Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 15:02 -0700
                      Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-13 12:57 -0700
                        Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-13 15:04 -0700
                          Re: New Gravity Theory Wendi Maddox <ox@awdodww.oe> - 2017-04-14 14:25 +0000
                            Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 15:09 -0700
                              Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-15 10:44 -0700
                          Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-14 08:22 -0700
                        Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 15:07 -0700
                  Re: New Gravity Theory Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-16 22:07 -0500
                    Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-17 05:17 -0700
            Re: New Gravity Theory moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-12 16:00 +0000
              Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-13 13:13 -0700
    Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-10 13:40 -0700
      Re: New Gravity Theory "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-04-10 14:52 -0700
        Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-10 15:19 -0700
      Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-10 23:25 -0700
      Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-11 07:39 -0700
        Re: New Gravity Theory Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-04-11 10:15 -0700
          Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-11 10:52 -0700
          Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-11 11:12 -0700
            Re: New Gravity Theory Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-04-11 11:35 -0700
              Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-11 11:41 -0700
              Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-11 21:46 -0700
                Re: New Gravity Theory Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-04-12 04:31 -0700
                  Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-12 06:07 -0700
            Re: New Gravity Theory moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-11 20:32 +0000
              Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-11 21:51 -0700
                Re: New Gravity Theory moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-12 16:07 +0000
        Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-11 20:35 -0700
          Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-11 23:18 -0700
          Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-12 05:45 -0700
            Re: New Gravity Theory moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-12 16:06 +0000
            Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-12 10:40 -0700
              Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-13 05:03 -0700
              Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-13 13:09 -0700
                Re: New Gravity Theory pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-04-13 13:17 -0700
                Re: New Gravity Theory moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-13 21:43 +0000
                Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 15:18 -0700
                  Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-15 01:02 -0700
                  Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-15 12:34 -0700
                    Re: New Gravity Theory Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-04-15 23:07 +0200
                      Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-15 15:14 -0700
                        Re: New Gravity Theory Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-04-16 10:23 +0200
                          Re: New Gravity Theory Emma Harmony <aymmmaeo@anownwrm.cm> - 2017-04-16 15:05 +0000
                    Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-15 15:14 -0700
                      Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-16 05:42 -0700
                        Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-16 16:54 -0700
                          Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-17 06:11 -0700
                            Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-18 12:37 -0700
                              Re: New Gravity Theory Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-18 14:42 -0500
                                Re: New Gravity Theory benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-04-18 18:25 -0400
                                Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-19 05:26 -0700
                                  Re: New Gravity Theory Ward Jenkins <uaar@rwjawr2r.aa> - 2017-04-19 13:08 +0000
                                  Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-19 12:30 -0700
                                    Re: New Gravity Theory Loma Bibee <miube@oeeele.ei> - 2017-04-19 19:34 +0000
                                      Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-19 13:16 -0700
                                        Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-19 13:25 -0700
                                          Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-19 13:45 -0700
                                            Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-19 14:02 -0700
                                            Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-20 07:16 -0700
                                              Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-20 13:08 -0700
                                                Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-20 14:05 -0700
                                                Re: New Gravity Theory Loma Bibee <miube@oeeele.ei> - 2017-04-20 21:05 +0000
                                                  Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-20 14:26 -0700
                                                    Re: New Gravity Theory Bordamos Alamidade <dd@dsmdawo.ab> - 2017-05-08 13:44 +0000
                                          Re: New Gravity Theory Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-20 06:24 -0700
                                            Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-20 06:50 -0700
                                    Re: New Gravity Theory Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-19 14:45 -0500
                                    Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-19 13:00 -0700
                                      Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-19 13:22 -0700
                                    Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-19 23:20 -0700
                                  Re: New Gravity Theory Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-20 12:11 +0200
                                    Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-20 07:06 -0700
                                      Re: New Gravity Theory Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-04-20 16:47 +0200
                                        Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-20 09:56 -0700
                                          Re: New Gravity Theory Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-04-20 23:48 +0200
                                            Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-20 15:13 -0700
                                              Re: New Gravity Theory Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-04-21 10:49 +0200
                                    Re: New Gravity Theory Loma Bibee <miube@oeeele.ei> - 2017-04-20 17:13 +0000
                              Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-18 13:19 -0700
                              Re: New Gravity Theory Ward Jenkins <uaar@rwjawr2r.aa> - 2017-04-19 13:02 +0000
                                Re: New Gravity Theory Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-19 15:40 +0200
                                  Re: New Gravity Theory Loma Bibee <miube@oeeele.ei> - 2017-04-19 18:05 +0000
                          Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-17 06:34 -0700
                            Re: New Gravity Theory moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-17 16:03 +0000
                              Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-17 13:11 -0700
                                Re: New Gravity Theory moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-18 01:42 +0000
                                  Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-18 06:17 -0700
                                    Re: New Gravity Theory moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-18 20:17 +0000
                            Re: New Gravity Theory "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-04-19 20:30 +0200
                              Re: New Gravity Theory Loma Bibee <miube@oeeele.ei> - 2017-04-19 19:37 +0000
                              Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-19 13:19 -0700
                                Re: New Gravity Theory "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-04-20 14:09 +0200
                                  Re: New Gravity Theory Loma Bibee <miube@oeeele.ei> - 2017-04-20 17:12 +0000
                                  Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-20 15:26 -0700
                                  Re: New Gravity Theory Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-25 01:29 +0200
                                    Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-25 10:35 -0700
                                      Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-25 14:21 -0700
                                        Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-26 05:58 -0700
                                          Re: New Gravity Theory Himère Bezuinig <numunenen@wgngiweig.mc> - 2017-04-26 14:26 +0000
                                          Re: New Gravity Theory Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-29 10:07 -0500
                                        Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-26 06:53 -0700
                                    Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-26 05:55 -0700
                                      Re: New Gravity Theory moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-26 17:51 +0000
                                      Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-26 12:30 -0700
                                        Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-27 06:43 -0700
                                          Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-27 13:02 -0700
                                            Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-27 14:53 -0700
                                              Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-27 14:56 -0700
                                                Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-28 05:37 -0700
                                                  Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-28 16:44 -0700
                                                    Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-29 06:47 -0700
                                                  Re: New Gravity Theory Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-29 10:11 -0500
                                                    Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-30 07:49 -0700
                                                      Re: New Gravity Theory Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 07:59 -0500
                                                        Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-01 11:56 -0700
                                                          Re: New Gravity Theory Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 14:20 -0500
                                                            Re: New Gravity Theory Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 14:23 -0500
                                                            Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-01 22:41 -0700
                                                              Re: New Gravity Theory Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-02 14:11 -0500
                                                                Re: New Gravity Theory RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-02 12:25 -0700
                                                                Re: New Gravity Theory "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-03 07:47 +0100
                                            Re: New Gravity Theory "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-04-28 14:18 +0100
                                              Re: New Gravity Theory Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-04-28 17:46 +0200
                                                Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-28 14:43 -0700
                                                  Re: New Gravity Theory Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-29 10:12 -0500
                                                    Re: New Gravity Theory Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-04-29 17:23 +0200
                                                      Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-29 13:58 -0700
                                                    Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-29 13:56 -0700
                                                      Re: New Gravity Theory Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-29 15:59 -0500
                                                        Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-04-30 00:55 -0700
                                                          Re: New Gravity Theory Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 08:01 -0500
                                                            Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-01 22:47 -0700
                                                              Re: New Gravity Theory Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-02 14:13 -0500
                                                                Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-03 04:01 -0700
                                                                  Re: New Gravity Theory Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-03 13:04 -0500
                                                          Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 14:25 -0700
                                                            Re: New Gravity Theory mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-01 22:52 -0700
                                      Re: New Gravity Theory Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-04-29 10:09 -0500
                                        Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-30 07:42 -0700
                                          Re: New Gravity Theory moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-30 18:19 +0000
                                            Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-30 17:33 -0700
                                              Re: New Gravity Theory moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-01 02:39 +0000
                                          Re: New Gravity Theory Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 07:57 -0500
                              Re: New Gravity Theory Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-19 23:15 +0200
                                Re: New Gravity Theory Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-20 01:21 +0200
                                  Re: New Gravity Theory Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-04-26 20:18 +0200
                                    Re: New Gravity Theory Himère Bezuinig <numunenen@wgngiweig.mc> - 2017-04-26 19:20 +0000
                                Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-04-20 07:44 -0700
                                  Re: New Gravity Theory Loma Bibee <miube@oeeele.ei> - 2017-04-20 17:09 +0000
                                  Re: New Gravity Theory Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-05-07 02:06 +0200
                                    Re: New Gravity Theory kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-07 07:14 -0700
                                      Re: New Gravity Theory Bordamos Alamidade <dd@dsmdawo.ab> - 2017-05-07 14:19 +0000
                                      Re: New Gravity Theory Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-05-07 17:45 +0200
                        Re: New Gravity Theory Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-04-17 10:24 +0200
          Re: New Gravity Theory RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-04-26 13:08 -0700
            Re: New Gravity Theory Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-04-26 22:23 +0200
            Re: New Gravity Theory JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-04-26 13:38 -0700

Page 2 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9  Next page →

#416294

FromWendi Maddox <ox@awdodww.oe>
Date2017-04-14 14:25 +0000
Message-ID<ocqm5c$eh0$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#416232
JanPB wrote:

>> This is an idiotic statement. You are a lying sack of shit.
> 
> Why is asking you to prove your credentials an "idiotic statement"?
> Would you allow, for example, a random person perform an open heart
> surgery on you?

Totally unrelated. As expected from a poor idiot.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#416328

FromJanPB <filmart@gmail.com>
Date2017-04-14 15:09 -0700
Message-ID<1a499fad-2227-43f2-97bb-9df9eeb7e8d9@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#416294
On Friday, April 14, 2017 at 7:25:52 AM UTC-7, Wendi Maddox wrote:
> JanPB wrote:
> 
> >> This is an idiotic statement. You are a lying sack of shit.
> > 
> > Why is asking you to prove your credentials an "idiotic statement"?
> > Would you allow, for example, a random person perform an open heart
> > surgery on you?
> 
> Totally unrelated. As expected from a poor idiot.

How is it unrelated? Ken started the thread in the first place, I'm simply
asking him to prove his credentials.

What's so exotic about that?

--
Jan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#416363

Fromkenseto <setoken@att.net>
Date2017-04-15 10:44 -0700
Message-ID<19ef30d8-5b39-411b-87eb-cd5b4c3df794@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#416328
On Friday, April 14, 2017 at 6:09:29 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> On Friday, April 14, 2017 at 7:25:52 AM UTC-7, Wendi Maddox wrote:
> > JanPB wrote:
> > 
> > >> This is an idiotic statement. You are a lying sack of shit.
> > > 
> > > Why is asking you to prove your credentials an "idiotic statement"?
> > > Would you allow, for example, a random person perform an open heart
> > > surgery on you?
> > 
> > Totally unrelated. As expected from a poor idiot.
> 
> How is it unrelated? Ken started the thread in the first place, I'm simply
> asking him to prove his credentials.
> 
> What's so exotic about that?

Moron.... you followed a thread that Python and I were talking about the links to my theory. Gee you are a fucking stupid mathematician.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#416302

Fromkenseto <setoken@att.net>
Date2017-04-14 08:22 -0700
Message-ID<f91e163f-35c2-48d7-a53d-9847e8f76bcc@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#416232
On Thursday, April 13, 2017 at 6:04:21 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> On Thursday, April 13, 2017 at 12:57:53 PM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> > On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 7:03:51 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 1:39:31 PM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 10:40:10 AM UTC-4, Python wrote:
> > > > > kenseto wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 8:54:01 AM UTC-4, Python wrote:
> > > > > >> kenseto wrote:
> > > > > >>> On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 2:04:15 AM UTC-4, Python wrote:
> > > > > >>>> kenseto wrote:
> > > > > >>>>> On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 11:47:14 AM UTC-4, Python wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>> Le 10/04/2017 à 15:07, kenseto a écrit :
> > > > > >>>>>>> The paper in the following link describes a new theory of gravity called DTG:
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> http:∕∕www.modelmechanics.org∕2015gravity.pdf
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> The link does not work Mr Seto.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> Idiot, you changed the link address. The correct link in my post that started this thread is as follows:
> > > > > >>>>> http:∕∕www.modelmechanics.org∕2015gravity.pdf
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Look carefully, Mr Seto. I didn't change a single letter or digit in
> > > > > >>>> the original link.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Hey moron, why did you need to provide a new link? Why not just click on to the link I provided?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I quoted your link, Mr Seto.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > No you didn't.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Could you spot the difference(s) then, Mr Seto?
> > > > 
> > > > I have no time for your game....Bye.
> > > 
> > > I see. You cannot answer a simple question designed to see if you CAN know
> > > what you are talking about.
> > 
> > Hey moron.....why should I waste my time to decipher the changes he made to my link? I provide a link that works and if he doesn't want to use it, that's his problem.
> 
> You also seem to have reading comprehension problems. I never said anything
> about any links.

You are a fucking moron mathematician devoid any knowledge of the real physical world. 
I was talking to Python.....he asked me to find the difference between the link he wrote (that doesn't work) and the link I provided that works and I refuse to waste any time on it.
 Gee you are so fucking stupid and that's why I said that you are not qualified to evaluate my physical theory of gravity.

> 
> > > This invalidates everything you say. You can post as many responses here
> > > as you please - it's all junk and nonsense from start to finish. You are
> > > wasting your life away on a mirage. Physics just isn't for you, pick a
> > > different hobby.
> > 
> > This is an idiotic statement. You are a lying sack of shit.
> 
> Why is asking you to prove your credentials an "idiotic statement"? Would
> you allow, for example, a random person perform an open heart surgery on you?
> 
> No?
> 
> So how come you insist you can seriously engage in physics research while
> not knowing the basics of physics?
> 
> --
> Jan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#416327

FromJanPB <filmart@gmail.com>
Date2017-04-14 15:07 -0700
Message-ID<cf496bd2-6cbb-416e-9141-ec4726e92251@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#416207
On Thursday, April 13, 2017 at 12:57:53 PM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 7:03:51 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> > On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 1:39:31 PM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 10:40:10 AM UTC-4, Python wrote:
> > > > kenseto wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 8:54:01 AM UTC-4, Python wrote:
> > > > >> kenseto wrote:
> > > > >>> On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 2:04:15 AM UTC-4, Python wrote:
> > > > >>>> kenseto wrote:
> > > > >>>>> On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 11:47:14 AM UTC-4, Python wrote:
> > > > >>>>>> Le 10/04/2017 à 15:07, kenseto a écrit :
> > > > >>>>>>> The paper in the following link describes a new theory of gravity called DTG:
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> http:∕∕www.modelmechanics.org∕2015gravity.pdf
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> The link does not work Mr Seto.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Idiot, you changed the link address. The correct link in my post that started this thread is as follows:
> > > > >>>>> http:∕∕www.modelmechanics.org∕2015gravity.pdf
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Look carefully, Mr Seto. I didn't change a single letter or digit in
> > > > >>>> the original link.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Hey moron, why did you need to provide a new link? Why not just click on to the link I provided?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I quoted your link, Mr Seto.
> > > > >
> > > > > No you didn't.
> > > > 
> > > > Could you spot the difference(s) then, Mr Seto?
> > > 
> > > I have no time for your game....Bye.
> > 
> > I see. You cannot answer a simple question designed to see if you CAN know
> > what you are talking about.
> 
> Hey moron.....why should I waste my time to decipher the changes he made to my link?

I didn't change any of your links. You are confusing me with someone else.
I suggest you check your attributions before hurling any more "morons".

> I provide a link that works and if he doesn't want to use it, that's his problem.

You are talking to someone else.
> > 
> > This invalidates everything you say. You can post as many responses here
> > as you please - it's all junk and nonsense from start to finish. You are
> > wasting your life away on a mirage. Physics just isn't for you, pick a
> > different hobby.
> 
> This is an idiotic statement. You are a lying sack of shit.

How is simply ASKING for someone who pontificates about X to provide
credentials for doing X "idiotic"? Would you allow a random person to
perform a surgery on you without checking his credentials first?

Why is it so difficult for you to understand such a basic thing? 

--
Jan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#416470

FromOdd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date2017-04-16 22:07 -0500
Message-ID<od1bhi$1vrr$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#416038
On 4/12/2017 9:40 AM, Python wrote:
> Could you spot the difference(s) then, Mr Seto?

Mr. Seto does not fully understand the error he has made. He is 
unfamiliar with link rot, and he doesn't know how to post a link so that 
it does not suffer from link rot.

He blames others for sabotage, but it's his own technical ignorance that 
allowed the link rot to seep in.

-- 
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#416486

Fromkenseto <setoken@att.net>
Date2017-04-17 05:17 -0700
Message-ID<59b6d6bb-6502-4c5b-993f-862ea2041a6c@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#416470
On Sunday, April 16, 2017 at 11:07:32 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 4/12/2017 9:40 AM, Python wrote:
> > Could you spot the difference(s) then, Mr Seto?
> 
> Mr. Seto does not fully understand the error he has made. He is 
> unfamiliar with link rot, and he doesn't know how to post a link so that 
> it does not suffer from link rot.

It is true that I don't understand link rot. But the link I posted works just fine. I don't understand why Python had to write a new link that doesn't work and asked me to waste time to find the differences.

> 
> He blames others for sabotage, but it's his own technical ignorance that 
> allowed the link rot to seep in.

I didn't blame any body....I merely pointed out that the link I posted works just fine.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#416043

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2017-04-12 16:00 +0000
Message-ID<ocliuq$gem$4@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#416003
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes:

>On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 2:04:15 AM UTC-4, Python wrote:
>> kenseto wrote:
>> > On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 11:47:14 AM UTC-4, Python wrote:

>> >> The link does not work Mr Seto.
>> >
>> > Idiot, you changed the link address. The correct link in my post that
>> > started this thread is as follows:
>> > http://www.modelmеchanics.org/2015gravity.pdf
>>
>> Look carefully, Mr Seto. I didn't change a single letter or digit in
>> the original link.

>Hey moron, why did you need to provide a new link? Why not just click on to
> the link I provided?

But it still doesn't work, Stupid Ken.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#416210

Fromkenseto <setoken@att.net>
Date2017-04-13 13:13 -0700
Message-ID<d501e768-a97a-4b1f-893f-f2c8f95f2104@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#416043
On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 12:00:27 PM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote:
> kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes:
> 
> >On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 2:04:15 AM UTC-4, Python wrote:
> >> kenseto wrote:
> >> > On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 11:47:14 AM UTC-4, Python wrote:
> 
> >> >> The link does not work Mr Seto.
> >> >
> >> > Idiot, you changed the link address. The correct link in my post that
> >> > started this thread is as follows:
> >> > http://www.modelmеchanics.org/2015gravity.pdf
> >>
> >> Look carefully, Mr Seto. I didn't change a single letter or digit in
> >> the original link.
> 
> >Hey moron, why did you need to provide a new link? Why not just click on to
> > the link I provided?
> 
> But it still doesn't work, Stupid Ken.

That's because you are a moron.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415764

FromJanPB <filmart@gmail.com>
Date2017-04-10 13:40 -0700
Message-ID<b376196a-d6fe-4bc6-b274-020786041052@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#415693
On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 6:07:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> The paper in the following link describes a new theory of gravity called DTG:
> http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015gravity.pdf
> 
> DTG is compatible with all the other forces of nature and thus the unification of all the forces of nature becomes feasible.

It's junk. You are wasting your life away.

--
Jan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415775

From"David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date2017-04-10 14:52 -0700
Message-ID<bf0867f2-efc5-4586-baef-04c6bcb9c93d@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#415764
It says 2015.... that is not "New"
That is almost 3 years old 

I tried the link, it worked fine, but I got a "Deceptive Site Ahead" browser warning.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415781

Fromkenseto <setoken@att.net>
Date2017-04-10 15:19 -0700
Message-ID<b0111f8b-0917-4894-8f26-02b85c989a8e@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#415775
On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 5:52:35 PM UTC-4, David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller wrote:
> It says 2015.... that is not "New"
> That is almost 3 years old 
> 
> I tried the link, it worked fine, but I got a "Deceptive Site Ahead" browser warning.

It is new because it is not the current accepted GRT for gravity.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415845

Frommlwozniak@wp.pl
Date2017-04-10 23:25 -0700
Message-ID<19f157c8-b6ce-465b-81c4-955fca056429@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#415764
W dniu poniedziałek, 10 kwietnia 2017 22:40:50 UTC+2 użytkownik JanPB napisał:
> On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 6:07:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> > The paper in the following link describes a new theory of gravity called DTG:
> > http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015gravity.pdf
> > 
> > DTG is compatible with all the other forces of nature and thus the unification of all the forces of nature becomes feasible.
> 
> It's junk. You are wasting your life away.

Jan #1

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415882

Fromkenseto <setoken@att.net>
Date2017-04-11 07:39 -0700
Message-ID<4614623a-411b-4140-85de-50426443f2a5@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#415764
On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 4:40:50 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 6:07:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> > The paper in the following link describes a new theory of gravity called DTG:
> > http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015gravity.pdf
> > 
> > DTG is compatible with all the other forces of nature and thus the unification of all the forces of nature becomes feasible.
> 
> It's junk. You are wasting your life away.
> 
> --
> Jan

You are not qualifies to evaluate my theory.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415920

FromGary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com>
Date2017-04-11 10:15 -0700
Message-ID<2731e745-b1b2-4322-bef3-0a09aa2417bd@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#415882
On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 8:39:39 AM UTC-6, kenseto wrote:
>
> On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 4:40:50 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> >
> > On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 6:07:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> > >
> > > The paper in the following link describes a new theory of gravity
> > > called DTG:
> > > http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015gravity.pdf
> > > 
> > > DTG is compatible with all the other forces of nature and thus the
> > > unification of all the forces of nature becomes feasible.
> > 
> > It's junk. You are wasting your life away.
> > 
> > --
> > Jan
> 
> You are not qualifies to evaluate my theory.

Of course he's qualified.  Don't be a stupe.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415926

Frommlwozniak@wp.pl
Date2017-04-11 10:52 -0700
Message-ID<555fad03-b932-4064-a217-173f11af311b@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#415920
W dniu wtorek, 11 kwietnia 2017 19:15:37 UTC+2 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał:
> On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 8:39:39 AM UTC-6, kenseto wrote:
> >
> > On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 4:40:50 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> > >
> > > On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 6:07:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The paper in the following link describes a new theory of gravity
> > > > called DTG:
> > > > http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015gravity.pdf
> > > > 
> > > > DTG is compatible with all the other forces of nature and thus the
> > > > unification of all the forces of nature becomes feasible.
> > > 
> > > It's junk. You are wasting your life away.
> > > 
> > > --
> > > Jan
> > 
> > You are not qualifies to evaluate my theory.
> 
> Of course he's qualified.  Don't be a stupe.

Of course he is. He knows that syntax schmyntax.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415930

Fromkenseto <setoken@att.net>
Date2017-04-11 11:12 -0700
Message-ID<3aa2ab52-bca1-492c-a45e-8a9cea828e76@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#415920
On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 1:15:37 PM UTC-4, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 8:39:39 AM UTC-6, kenseto wrote:
> >
> > On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 4:40:50 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> > >
> > > On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 6:07:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The paper in the following link describes a new theory of gravity
> > > > called DTG:
> > > > http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015gravity.pdf
> > > > 
> > > > DTG is compatible with all the other forces of nature and thus the
> > > > unification of all the forces of nature becomes feasible.
> > > 
> > > It's junk. You are wasting your life away.
> > > 
> > > --
> > > Jan
> > 
> > You are not qualifies to evaluate my theory.
> 
> Of course he's qualified.  Don't be a stupe.

You are the stupe......you claimed that two identical clocks in a moving Van will show  a difference in accumulated clock seconds after a journey. HeHeHe....

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415934

FromGary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com>
Date2017-04-11 11:35 -0700
Message-ID<8f331a82-ef92-4900-ac70-2d98314de673@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#415930
On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 12:12:10 PM UTC-6, kenseto wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 1:15:37 PM UTC-4, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 8:39:39 AM UTC-6, kenseto wrote:
> > >
> > > On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 4:40:50 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 6:07:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > The paper in the following link describes a new theory of gravity
> > > > > called DTG:
> > > > > http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015gravity.pdf
> > > > > 
> > > > > DTG is compatible with all the other forces of nature and thus the
> > > > > unification of all the forces of nature becomes feasible.
> > > > 
> > > > It's junk. You are wasting your life away.
> > > > 
> > > > --
> > > > Jan
> > > 
> > > You are not qualifies to evaluate my theory.
> > 
> > Of course he's qualified.  Don't be a stupe.
> 
> You are the stupe......you claimed that two identical clocks in a moving
> Van will show  a difference in accumulated clock seconds after a journey.

Hmmm, don't seem to recall ever saying that, although it's obviously true.
After all, this was aptly demonstrated by Hafele and keating:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation#Velocity_and_gravitational_time_dilation_combined-effect_tests

It appears that you are STILL the stupe.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415936

Frommlwozniak@wp.pl
Date2017-04-11 11:41 -0700
Message-ID<ced6b6db-c65f-4207-960a-846a954c893d@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#415934
W dniu wtorek, 11 kwietnia 2017 20:35:05 UTC+2 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał:

> > You are the stupe......you claimed that two identical clocks in a moving
> > Van will show  a difference in accumulated clock seconds after a journey.
> 
> Hmmm, don't seem to recall ever saying that, although it's obviously true.

Of course, under the condition, that clocks
won't be unreal, like these from GPS satellite.
Right, poor idiot?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#415983

Fromkenseto <setoken@att.net>
Date2017-04-11 21:46 -0700
Message-ID<da9f8bb7-2619-4e52-9439-37426d289762@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#415934
On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 2:35:05 PM UTC-4, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 12:12:10 PM UTC-6, kenseto wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 1:15:37 PM UTC-4, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 8:39:39 AM UTC-6, kenseto wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 4:40:50 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 6:07:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The paper in the following link describes a new theory of gravity
> > > > > > called DTG:
> > > > > > http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015gravity.pdf
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > DTG is compatible with all the other forces of nature and thus the
> > > > > > unification of all the forces of nature becomes feasible.
> > > > > 
> > > > > It's junk. You are wasting your life away.
> > > > > 
> > > > > --
> > > > > Jan
> > > > 
> > > > You are not qualifies to evaluate my theory.
> > > 
> > > Of course he's qualified.  Don't be a stupe.
> > 
> > You are the stupe......you claimed that two identical clocks in a moving
> > Van will show  a difference in accumulated clock seconds after a journey.
> 
> Hmmm, don't seem to recall ever saying that, although it's obviously true.
> After all, this was aptly demonstrated by Hafele and keating:

Hey moron.....you claimed that the two clocks in the Van will show different accumulated clock seconds after a journey.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation#Velocity_and_gravitational_time_dilation_combined-effect_tests
> 
> It appears that you are STILL the stupe.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web