Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #415693 > unrolled thread
| Started by | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-04-10 06:07 -0700 |
| Last post | 2017-04-26 13:38 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 175 — 23 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
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 8 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 Next page →
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-28 17:46 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <odvnvc$35m$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #417548 |
On 04/28/2017 03:18 PM, Kevin Aylward wrote: > "JanPB" wrote in message > news:d1d82f8f-4c30-4283-9152-cbcd48fe4188@googlegroups.com... > >> >> ROFLOL, pot kettle black. >> Your math invention of 11 dimensions or 26 dimensions are prime >> examples of day dreaming. > >> Not even wrong, sorry. You confuse the mathematical details (11 or 26 >> dimensions) with the question whether such theories WORK. > > The use of the word "dimension" by mathematicians is arbitrary, and > somewhat akin to newspeak. All that there is, is that a phenomena being > represented by a set of say, 11 numbers, or 26 numbers. There is nothing > that leads to any deduction that the must be any real physical > correspondence to those numbers. Without physical evidence, these > alleged dimensions, are no more than a convenient calculation tool. > > I can plot pretty much any set of information on a graph, like $ > dollars, it don't mean that money is "geometry", hint Tom Roberts :-) > > I see a fundamental problem in the obvious. Mathematicians are truly not > engineers. They really don't understand the difference between > mathematical inventions, and physical inventions. One only exists in the > mind, the other, can, on occasions, actually generate, money. > Well, big mistakes of many engineers is they underestimate non engineers. Mathematicians as well as scientists do understand the difference between mathematical inventions and physical inventions. BTW, generating money does not make a border between them. -- Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer ) A wise man guards words he says, as they say about him more, than he says about the subject.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-28 14:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <bef1e2e0-3a18-4c0f-bc08-3d60566ca627@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #417563 |
W dniu piątek, 28 kwietnia 2017 17:46:57 UTC+2 użytkownik Poutnik napisał: > > Well, big mistakes of many engineers is > they underestimate non engineers. Well, big mistake of all morons like you is they underestimate engineers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-29 10:12 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <oe2ahj$rl9$5@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #417589 |
On 4/28/17 4:43 PM, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > W dniu piątek, 28 kwietnia 2017 17:46:57 UTC+2 użytkownik Poutnik napisał: > >> >> Well, big mistakes of many engineers is >> they underestimate non engineers. > > Well, big mistake of all morons like you is > they underestimate engineers. > Where did you get the impression that scientists consider themselves superior to engineers? -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-29 17:23 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <oe2avg$kr6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #417649 |
Dne 29/04/2017 v 17:12 Odd Bodkin napsal(a): > On 4/28/17 4:43 PM, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: >> W dniu piątek, 28 kwietnia 2017 17:46:57 UTC+2 użytkownik Poutnik >> napisał: >> >>> >>> Well, big mistakes of many engineers is >>> they underestimate non engineers. >> >> Well, big mistake of all morons like you is >> they underestimate engineers. >> > > Where did you get the impression that scientists consider themselves > superior to engineers? > As the opposite is much more often to be seen. But it is never done by good engineers nor good scientists. -- Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer ) A wise man guards words he says, as they say about him more, than he says about the subject.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-29 13:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c4f12449-a38c-4bf3-9670-91d88c54be8e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #417651 |
W dniu sobota, 29 kwietnia 2017 17:23:30 UTC+2 użytkownik Poutnik napisał: > Dne 29/04/2017 v 17:12 Odd Bodkin napsal(a): > > On 4/28/17 4:43 PM, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > >> W dniu piątek, 28 kwietnia 2017 17:46:57 UTC+2 użytkownik Poutnik > >> napisał: > >> > >>> > >>> Well, big mistakes of many engineers is > >>> they underestimate non engineers. > >> > >> Well, big mistake of all morons like you is > >> they underestimate engineers. > >> > > > > Where did you get the impression that scientists consider themselves > > superior to engineers? > > > > As the opposite is much more often to be seen. In my mind's eye, Horatio.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-29 13:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <418315e9-ba76-46d6-9d63-63428461a09f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #417649 |
W dniu sobota, 29 kwietnia 2017 17:12:54 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: > On 4/28/17 4:43 PM, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > > W dniu piątek, 28 kwietnia 2017 17:46:57 UTC+2 użytkownik Poutnik napisał: > > > >> > >> Well, big mistakes of many engineers is > >> they underestimate non engineers. > > > > Well, big mistake of all morons like you is > > they underestimate engineers. > > > > Where did you get the impression that scientists consider themselves > superior to engineers? Here, for instance.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-29 15:59 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <oe2ura$b0$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #417676 |
On 4/29/17 3:56 PM, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > W dniu sobota, 29 kwietnia 2017 17:12:54 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: >> On 4/28/17 4:43 PM, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: >>> W dniu piątek, 28 kwietnia 2017 17:46:57 UTC+2 użytkownik Poutnik napisał: >>> >>>> >>>> Well, big mistakes of many engineers is >>>> they underestimate non engineers. >>> >>> Well, big mistake of all morons like you is >>> they underestimate engineers. >>> >> >> Where did you get the impression that scientists consider themselves >> superior to engineers? > > Here, for instance. > I'm sorry, I'm not seeing it. What led you to the impression here that scientists consider themselves superior to engineers? Surely you have some evidence, rather than just something you carried in yourself? -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-30 00:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ae171ce3-ef6c-48cd-b982-ff6ab899f5fb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #417679 |
W dniu sobota, 29 kwietnia 2017 22:59:27 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: > On 4/29/17 3:56 PM, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > > W dniu sobota, 29 kwietnia 2017 17:12:54 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: > >> On 4/28/17 4:43 PM, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > >>> W dniu piątek, 28 kwietnia 2017 17:46:57 UTC+2 użytkownik Poutnik napisał: > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Well, big mistakes of many engineers is > >>>> they underestimate non engineers. > >>> > >>> Well, big mistake of all morons like you is > >>> they underestimate engineers. > >>> > >> > >> Where did you get the impression that scientists consider themselves > >> superior to engineers? > > > > Here, for instance. > > > > > I'm sorry, I'm not seeing it. That's because you're a brainwashed fanatic. > What led you to the impression here that > scientists consider themselves superior to engineers? Your idiot guru with "common sense is a set of prejudices". Poor idiot Jan with "another complaining engineer, nothing new". And many others.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-01 08:01 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <oe7bk5$j47$6@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #417690 |
On 4/30/17 2:55 AM, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > W dniu sobota, 29 kwietnia 2017 22:59:27 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: >> On 4/29/17 3:56 PM, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: >>> W dniu sobota, 29 kwietnia 2017 17:12:54 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: >>>> On 4/28/17 4:43 PM, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: >>>>> W dniu piątek, 28 kwietnia 2017 17:46:57 UTC+2 użytkownik Poutnik napisał: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, big mistakes of many engineers is >>>>>> they underestimate non engineers. >>>>> >>>>> Well, big mistake of all morons like you is >>>>> they underestimate engineers. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Where did you get the impression that scientists consider themselves >>>> superior to engineers? >>> >>> Here, for instance. >>> >> >> >> I'm sorry, I'm not seeing it. > > That's because you're a brainwashed fanatic. Surely you can point it out to me why you believe what you do. > >> What led you to the impression here that >> scientists consider themselves superior to engineers? > > Your idiot guru with "common sense > is a set of prejudices". Einstein has never posted here. You said that HERE you've seen evidence that scientists consider themselves superior to engineers. > Poor idiot Jan > with "another complaining engineer, nothing > new". And many others. > I'm not sure where you got in Jan's remark that scientists consider themselves superior to engineers. First of all, is Jan a physicist? -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-01 22:47 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7c86e280-150c-4935-9eaa-9f17747420e9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #417765 |
W dniu poniedziałek, 1 maja 2017 15:02:02 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: > >> > >> I'm sorry, I'm not seeing it. > > > > That's because you're a brainwashed fanatic. > > Surely you can point it out to me why you believe what you do. > > > > >> What led you to the impression here that > >> scientists consider themselves superior to engineers? > > > > Your idiot guru with "common sense > > is a set of prejudices". > > Einstein has never posted here. You said that HERE you've seen evidence > that scientists consider themselves superior to engineers. Einstein has never posted here, true. But he is often quoted HERE, poor idiot. > > Poor idiot Jan > > with "another complaining engineer, nothing > > new". And many others. > > > > I'm not sure where you got in Jan's remark that scientists consider > themselves superior to engineers. First of all, is Jan a physicist? No. Second of all - is he a scientist? And third - is he one of you?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-02 14:13 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <oealp8$c2d$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #417846 |
On 5/2/17 12:47 AM, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > W dniu poniedziałek, 1 maja 2017 15:02:02 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: > >>>> >>>> I'm sorry, I'm not seeing it. >>> >>> That's because you're a brainwashed fanatic. >> >> Surely you can point it out to me why you believe what you do. >> >>> >>>> What led you to the impression here that >>>> scientists consider themselves superior to engineers? >>> >>> Your idiot guru with "common sense >>> is a set of prejudices". >> >> Einstein has never posted here. You said that HERE you've seen evidence >> that scientists consider themselves superior to engineers. > > Einstein has never posted here, true. But he is often > quoted HERE, poor idiot. Yes, that's natural. But I don't see what that has to do with scientists (including Einstein) considering themselves superior to engineers. > >>> Poor idiot Jan >>> with "another complaining engineer, nothing >>> new". And many others. >>> >> >> I'm not sure where you got in Jan's remark that scientists consider >> themselves superior to engineers. First of all, is Jan a physicist? > > No. Second of all - is he a scientist? And third - is > he one of you? > OK, so if Jan is not a scientist, where are you getting the impression here that scientists consider themselves superior to engineers? -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-03 04:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6a36a410-3bb8-4331-9d2b-a0ac9692742f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #417880 |
W dniu wtorek, 2 maja 2017 21:13:47 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: > On 5/2/17 12:47 AM, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > > W dniu poniedziałek, 1 maja 2017 15:02:02 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: > > > >>>> > >>>> I'm sorry, I'm not seeing it. > >>> > >>> That's because you're a brainwashed fanatic. > >> > >> Surely you can point it out to me why you believe what you do. > >> > >>> > >>>> What led you to the impression here that > >>>> scientists consider themselves superior to engineers? > >>> > >>> Your idiot guru with "common sense > >>> is a set of prejudices". > >> > >> Einstein has never posted here. You said that HERE you've seen evidence > >> that scientists consider themselves superior to engineers. > > > > Einstein has never posted here, true. But he is often > > quoted HERE, poor idiot. > > Yes, that's natural. But I don't see what that has to do with scientists > (including Einstein) considering themselves superior to engineers. Of course you don't. You're just a brainwashed fanatic told that scientists are always nice and good, and they're free from the weaknesses of mortal worms. > > > > >>> Poor idiot Jan > >>> with "another complaining engineer, nothing > >>> new". And many others. > >>> > >> > >> I'm not sure where you got in Jan's remark that scientists consider > >> themselves superior to engineers. First of all, is Jan a physicist? > > > > No. Second of all - is he a scientist? And third - is > > he one of you? > > > > OK, so if Jan is not a scientist And isn't he? > where are you getting the impression > here that scientists consider themselves superior to engineers? That was not what I wrote. I wrote "your moronic bunch" so I provide evidence for your moronic bunch. Of course, it's samely true with "scientists", and in my opinion Jan is a typical scientist, but I won't insist he is.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-03 13:04 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <oed63u$inj$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #417947 |
On 5/3/17 6:01 AM, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > W dniu wtorek, 2 maja 2017 21:13:47 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: >> On 5/2/17 12:47 AM, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: >>> W dniu poniedziałek, 1 maja 2017 15:02:02 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: >>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm sorry, I'm not seeing it. >>>>> >>>>> That's because you're a brainwashed fanatic. >>>> >>>> Surely you can point it out to me why you believe what you do. >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> What led you to the impression here that >>>>>> scientists consider themselves superior to engineers? >>>>> >>>>> Your idiot guru with "common sense >>>>> is a set of prejudices". >>>> >>>> Einstein has never posted here. You said that HERE you've seen evidence >>>> that scientists consider themselves superior to engineers. >>> >>> Einstein has never posted here, true. But he is often >>> quoted HERE, poor idiot. >> >> Yes, that's natural. But I don't see what that has to do with scientists >> (including Einstein) considering themselves superior to engineers. > > Of course you don't. You're just a brainwashed > fanatic told that scientists are always nice > and good, and they're free from the weaknesses > of mortal worms. Eh? Who has said that? I'm still looking for your evidence that scientists consider themselves superior to engineers. > > > >> >>> >>>>> Poor idiot Jan >>>>> with "another complaining engineer, nothing >>>>> new". And many others. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I'm not sure where you got in Jan's remark that scientists consider >>>> themselves superior to engineers. First of all, is Jan a physicist? >>> >>> No. Second of all - is he a scientist? And third - is >>> he one of you? >>> >> >> OK, so if Jan is not a scientist > > And isn't he? I don't think so. What makes you say that? > > >> where are you getting the impression >> here that scientists consider themselves superior to engineers? > > That was not what I wrote. I wrote "your moronic bunch" > so I provide evidence for your moronic bunch. > Of course, it's samely true with "scientists", > and in my opinion Jan is a typical scientist, > but I won't insist he is. When I asked you where you got the impression that scientists considered themselves superior to engineers, you said "Here for instance." Now, I'm going to ask you directly: Do you think scientists consider themselves superior to engineers or not? And from where or what did you get that impression? -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-01 14:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6d4e1f10-1042-41fd-98e6-15c17b7c90a9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #417690 |
On Sunday, April 30, 2017 at 12:55:03 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote: > W dniu sobota, 29 kwietnia 2017 22:59:27 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: > > On 4/29/17 3:56 PM, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > > > W dniu sobota, 29 kwietnia 2017 17:12:54 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: > > >> On 4/28/17 4:43 PM, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > > >>> W dniu piątek, 28 kwietnia 2017 17:46:57 UTC+2 użytkownik Poutnik napisał: > > >>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Well, big mistakes of many engineers is > > >>>> they underestimate non engineers. > > >>> > > >>> Well, big mistake of all morons like you is > > >>> they underestimate engineers. > > >>> > > >> > > >> Where did you get the impression that scientists consider themselves > > >> superior to engineers? > > > > > > Here, for instance. > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry, I'm not seeing it. > > That's because you're a brainwashed fanatic. > > > What led you to the impression here that > > scientists consider themselves superior to engineers? > > Your idiot guru with "common sense > is a set of prejudices". Poor idiot Jan > with "another complaining engineer, nothing > new". And many others. I never said I was considering myself superior. I simply stated a FACT that on this newsgroup, since its inception (around 1995 IIRC), a disproportionate number of false and not-even-wrong claims about relativity came from MALE RETIRED ENGINEERS, mostly electrical engineers. It's just one of those strange statistics, like the following one, for example: majority of claims of being abducted by UFOs come from overweight women. It's known but nobody knows why. One of those things and none of it makes me feel superior as long as the people in question don't assume that "their ignorance is as good as experts' knowledge" and don't yell obscenities at people constantly, like you do. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-01 22:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fae6773b-58a1-4803-97e6-0634f6bd3c5f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #417820 |
W dniu poniedziałek, 1 maja 2017 23:26:01 UTC+2 użytkownik JanPB napisał: > On Sunday, April 30, 2017 at 12:55:03 AM UTC-7, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote: > > W dniu sobota, 29 kwietnia 2017 22:59:27 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: > > > On 4/29/17 3:56 PM, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > > > > W dniu sobota, 29 kwietnia 2017 17:12:54 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: > > > >> On 4/28/17 4:43 PM, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > > > >>> W dniu piątek, 28 kwietnia 2017 17:46:57 UTC+2 użytkownik Poutnik napisał: > > > >>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Well, big mistakes of many engineers is > > > >>>> they underestimate non engineers. > > > >>> > > > >>> Well, big mistake of all morons like you is > > > >>> they underestimate engineers. > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >> Where did you get the impression that scientists consider themselves > > > >> superior to engineers? > > > > > > > > Here, for instance. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sorry, I'm not seeing it. > > > > That's because you're a brainwashed fanatic. > > > > > What led you to the impression here that > > > scientists consider themselves superior to engineers? > > > > Your idiot guru with "common sense > > is a set of prejudices". Poor idiot Jan > > with "another complaining engineer, nothing > > new". And many others. > > I never said I was considering myself superior. You only scream "I'm a GURU!" "I'm like Bach!!" And, of course, syntax schmyntax. > I simply stated a FACT that > on this newsgroup, since its inception (around 1995 IIRC), a disproportionate > number of false and not-even-wrong claims about relativity came from MALE > RETIRED ENGINEERS, mostly electrical engineers. Or at least you consider them false and not even wrong. Sort of the same thing. > One of those things and none of it makes me feel superior as long as the > people in question don't assume that "their ignorance is as good as experts' > knowledge" and don't yell obscenities at people constantly, like you do. Or your fellow idiots - Gary, Paparios, Tom. And yourself.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-29 10:09 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <oe2aac$rl9$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #417305 |
On 4/26/17 7:55 AM, kenseto wrote: > Model Mechanics is a real proposed scientific thereof the universe. The reviewer at the Copy Right Office said it's original and therefore granted the copy-right. So eat your heart out. Being original has nothing whatsoever to do with being of scientific value. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-30 07:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f278e85e-c1e6-4a60-b7d7-2beb6cf68218@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #417646 |
On Saturday, April 29, 2017 at 11:09:03 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 4/26/17 7:55 AM, kenseto wrote: > > Model Mechanics is a real proposed scientific thereof the universe. The reviewer at the Copy Right Office said it's original and therefore granted the copy-right. So eat your heart out. > > Being original has nothing whatsoever to do with being of scientific value. Being original and copy-rightable is scientific.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-30 18:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oe59qr$3uf$3@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #417709 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >On Saturday, April 29, 2017 at 11:09:03 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 4/26/17 7:55 AM, kenseto wrote: >> > Model Mechanics is a real proposed scientific thereof the universe. >> > The reviewer at the Copy Right Office said it's original and >> > therefore granted the copy-right. So eat your heart out. >> Being original has nothing whatsoever to do with being of scientific value. >Being original and copy-rightable is scientific. No, Stupid Ken. Being original simply means that you didn't copy it from someone else, it means you made it up yourself. Which is easy for you, there isn't anyone else out there who could create as big of a failure as Model Mechanics is. "Original" does not mean "scientific", it means "original". In addition, Stupid Ken, current copyright law states that all original work is born copyrighted. The original portion of this post is Copyright © 2017 Michael Moroney. Portions quoted under the fair use provision. Registering a work with the Copyright office and adding a copyright notice provides additional evidence (such as proof of date) but are no longer strictly necessary. Works of fiction can be, and are, copyrighted. Complete outright lies are copyrighted (but still could be subject to slander/libel). True items are copyrighted. The Library of Congress is full of copyrighted kꙭkbooks such as yours on Model Mechanics. Or at least that obscure warehouse of theirs is. (how much did you waste on a lawyer to get your failure of a book copyrighted, Stupid Ken?)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-30 17:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ec98e2d0-ab54-4835-b0f5-dc93a7c642d3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #417723 |
On Sunday, April 30, 2017 at 2:19:09 PM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote: > kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: > > >On Saturday, April 29, 2017 at 11:09:03 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 4/26/17 7:55 AM, kenseto wrote: > >> > Model Mechanics is a real proposed scientific thereof the universe. > >> > The reviewer at the Copy Right Office said it's original and > >> > therefore granted the copy-right. So eat your heart out. > > >> Being original has nothing whatsoever to do with being of scientific value. > > >Being original and copy-rightable is scientific. > > No, Stupid Ken. Being original simply means that you didn't copy it from > someone else, it means you made it up yourself. Which is easy for you, > there isn't anyone else out there who could create as big of a failure as > Model Mechanics is. "Original" does not mean "scientific", it means > "original". > > In addition, Stupid Ken, current copyright law states that all original > work is born copyrighted. The original portion of this post is > Copyright © 2017 Michael Moroney. Portions quoted under the fair use > provision. Registering a work with the Copyright office and adding a > copyright notice provides additional evidence (such as proof of date) but > are no longer strictly necessary. > > Works of fiction can be, and are, copyrighted. Complete outright lies are > copyrighted (but still could be subject to slander/libel). True items are > copyrighted. The Library of Congress is full of copyrighted kꙭkbooks such > as yours on Model Mechanics. Or at least that obscure warehouse of theirs > is. > > (how much did you waste on a lawyer to get your failure of a book copyrighted, > Stupid Ken?) Moronic argument.....no wonder your na,e is Moron-y.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-01 02:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oe674p$1el$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #417738 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >Moronic argument.....no wonder your na,e is Moron-y. So what part of what I wrote do you claim is moronic, Stupid Ken? And why do you claim it is moronic, Stupid Ken?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 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