Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #418393 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-05-06 07:41 -0700 |
| Last post | 2017-06-07 12:53 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 538 — 51 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-06 07:41 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-06 16:43 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-06 07:51 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-06 08:08 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-06 08:37 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-13 13:44 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-06 17:25 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2017-05-06 08:35 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Prijzen Sörözésekre <ouwu@wueidewliiut.te> - 2017-05-06 15:56 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-06 08:57 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Prijzen Sörözésekre <ouwu@wueidewliiut.te> - 2017-05-06 16:27 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-06 09:35 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Kého Resované <knau@wjf2op.we> - 2017-05-06 16:50 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-05-07 01:56 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-06 09:38 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-06 09:58 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-06 10:06 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-06 10:29 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-06 11:00 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-06 12:51 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-06 13:44 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-06 14:30 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-06 14:52 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-06 15:53 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 09:33 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 18:47 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-07 19:07 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 10:27 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-07 19:57 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Bordamos Alamidade <dd@dsmdawo.ab> - 2017-05-07 18:03 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 19:34 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 10:40 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-07 10:45 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Bordamos Alamidade <dd@dsmdawo.ab> - 2017-05-07 17:46 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-07 10:55 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 19:55 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-07 12:04 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-07 12:11 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 13:01 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-07 13:06 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 13:10 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-07 13:38 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 13:48 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math polyfrag@gmail.com - 2017-05-07 14:37 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-07 23:51 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-08 09:04 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-05-08 09:37 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-08 10:28 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-07 13:33 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Bordamos Alamidade <dd@dsmdawo.ab> - 2017-05-07 21:01 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 22:39 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 13:53 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 23:29 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Bordamos Alamidade <dd@dsmdawo.ab> - 2017-05-07 20:54 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 07:51 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-06 12:06 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-06 13:11 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-06 14:26 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 09:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 19:09 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 10:36 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 19:51 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Bordamos Alamidade <dd@dsmdawo.ab> - 2017-05-07 17:57 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-07 21:27 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 22:45 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Bordamos Alamidade <dd@dsmdawo.ab> - 2017-05-07 20:58 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Bordamos Alamidade <dd@dsmdawo.ab> - 2017-05-07 17:49 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 19:58 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Bordamos Alamidade <dd@dsmdawo.ab> - 2017-05-07 18:01 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-05-07 20:57 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-07 10:18 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-07 10:24 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2017-05-07 14:16 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-07 14:30 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-07 20:10 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-08 08:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-05-08 09:39 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-08 10:23 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math polyfrag@gmail.com - 2017-05-08 10:15 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-08 12:35 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-08 11:53 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-08 12:37 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-08 13:06 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-08 13:21 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 15:33 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-08 14:16 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 07:48 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-09 16:59 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 08:17 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-09 17:38 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 09:18 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-09 18:20 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 09:24 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-09 18:26 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 09:37 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-09 18:41 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 09:58 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-09 19:01 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 12:59 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-16 11:15 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-16 12:55 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-16 13:03 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-05-16 13:12 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-16 16:10 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-19 06:22 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 08:39 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-19 07:01 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-19 16:30 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-19 10:03 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-19 23:18 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 12:05 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-19 13:09 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Houchiko Inatsuki <uatci@swckskuwe.io> - 2017-05-19 20:19 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math anne <0140519@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 13:43 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-20 05:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-20 10:01 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-21 13:30 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-22 04:37 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-22 08:25 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Seki Ushisa <sis@iscauhw.ea> - 2017-05-22 13:33 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-02 17:20 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-06-02 17:57 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-02 19:10 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-06-02 20:16 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-06-03 07:34 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2017-06-04 14:40 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-06-03 07:33 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-06-03 09:40 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-03 23:07 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-06-04 08:39 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-06-04 09:25 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 16:17 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-20 08:22 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-21 13:32 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-21 13:34 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-22 04:45 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-22 08:27 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-22 08:44 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Seki Ushisa <sis@iscauhw.ea> - 2017-05-22 13:57 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-22 09:50 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Seki Ushisa <sis@iscauhw.ea> - 2017-05-22 18:20 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Seki Ushisa <sis@iscauhw.ea> - 2017-05-22 18:24 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-22 09:13 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-22 11:51 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-22 14:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-22 22:50 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 07:47 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-23 06:41 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 13:02 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-23 11:43 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 14:28 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-24 05:01 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-24 09:28 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-24 17:03 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-23 23:17 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-24 14:36 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-24 09:45 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-24 08:45 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-24 16:34 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-24 23:24 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-24 08:43 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math sdru.product@gmail.com - 2017-05-23 10:02 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-22 15:01 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 07:49 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-23 05:58 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-23 06:57 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 13:04 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-23 11:34 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 14:30 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-24 05:16 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-24 09:36 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-24 14:02 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-24 16:29 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-26 08:14 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-26 10:19 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-26 23:55 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-27 05:37 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-28 05:58 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-28 17:44 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-29 08:40 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-29 16:42 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-29 14:33 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-30 06:35 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-30 08:37 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-30 14:36 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-26 10:47 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-28 06:18 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math shuba <thailao2558@gmail.com> - 2017-05-28 07:18 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Sienkiewicz Emniak <iecunkn@swazine.po> - 2017-05-28 15:19 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-28 16:31 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-28 17:45 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-29 08:33 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-29 08:59 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-29 10:54 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Earnest Rives <ueeenn@wweiwne.ac> - 2017-05-29 21:44 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-29 15:28 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-30 07:17 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-30 08:11 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ernest Rivers <erwm@weicnne.ac> - 2017-05-30 19:02 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math shuba <thailao2558@gmail.com> - 2017-05-31 06:24 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-28 17:44 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-29 14:39 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-30 07:18 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-30 09:36 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-30 12:28 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-30 19:41 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Ernest Schwanenflügel <erwm@wanenf.oa> - 2017-05-30 19:54 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-30 22:35 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-05-30 20:04 -0400
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-31 00:38 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-31 06:42 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-31 09:01 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-31 09:18 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-31 07:53 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-31 10:39 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-31 08:54 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-31 17:08 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-05-31 15:28 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-31 16:55 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math sdru.product@gmail.com - 2017-05-31 12:11 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-31 14:52 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Michael Moroney <moroney@TheWorld.com> - 2017-05-30 15:41 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-28 19:42 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-28 14:36 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-28 23:04 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-25 02:38 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-24 16:46 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-22 13:00 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-22 21:41 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 07:30 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-23 11:27 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-22 15:40 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-28 05:51 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-28 17:44 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-28 12:18 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-19 07:04 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-19 10:04 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-19 10:04 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Seki Ushisa <sis@iscauhw.ea> - 2017-05-22 12:33 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-16 18:54 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 10:57 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-16 19:31 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-17 12:53 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-18 05:05 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-18 05:31 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-18 06:20 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-18 06:23 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-18 06:40 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-18 06:30 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-18 06:51 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-21 05:53 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-21 07:10 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Seki Ushisa <sis@iscauhw.ea> - 2017-05-21 14:21 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-21 13:35 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-22 04:54 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-22 08:28 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-05-22 09:02 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-22 11:46 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-20 18:55 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-17 12:51 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-17 15:31 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-17 23:11 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-18 20:21 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-18 12:44 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-18 19:14 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-18 17:26 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-18 23:29 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-17 14:27 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-17 14:39 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-17 14:53 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-17 14:29 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 09:03 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-17 13:01 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-16 21:43 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-16 16:11 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-16 22:31 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-17 20:53 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 15:37 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-18 20:20 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-09 09:35 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 09:45 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-09 10:01 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 13:08 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-09 13:52 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-09 13:52 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 15:03 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-09 15:13 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-09 16:19 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 08:17 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-05-10 09:11 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 09:34 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-10 12:59 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 12:04 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-10 18:51 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-10 23:31 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-05-10 11:55 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-10 14:10 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-11 15:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-10 17:10 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 08:35 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-10 17:31 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-11 08:20 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-11 16:30 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-11 16:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-12 06:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-12 07:47 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-12 09:23 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-05-12 09:31 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-12 10:18 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-12 15:12 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-12 10:24 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-12 11:45 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-12 14:03 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-12 17:12 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-12 17:14 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-12 15:40 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-13 07:18 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-13 08:17 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-13 08:34 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-13 08:43 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-13 09:13 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-13 12:14 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 15:27 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 13:47 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-14 04:03 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-13 12:07 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-13 22:37 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-13 14:45 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-13 20:21 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-13 21:02 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-13 22:27 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 11:34 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-14 05:22 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-14 05:51 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 19:57 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-14 12:13 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-14 13:12 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-15 21:34 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-15 13:47 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-15 15:45 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-15 16:53 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-15 23:16 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-16 04:40 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-16 06:20 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-16 06:58 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Houchiko Inatsuki <uatci@swckskuwe.io> - 2017-05-14 10:49 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Houchiko Inatsuki <uatci@swckskuwe.io> - 2017-05-13 14:37 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-13 17:21 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Houchiko Inatsuki <uatci@swckskuwe.io> - 2017-05-13 18:33 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Marc Lichtenstein <eruamcn@cillnnwms.cc> - 2017-05-20 13:32 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-05-20 21:17 -0400
Re: Reality versus Math Ndrijving Pruiten <ui@jsweiw.ke> - 2017-05-20 16:43 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-12 16:22 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-12 21:11 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-09 16:13 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 08:41 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 08:57 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 09:23 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 09:33 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 10:43 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-09 17:07 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-09 17:09 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 08:12 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 08:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-10 17:41 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-10 17:42 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 08:45 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 11:54 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 10:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 11:56 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 12:26 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 12:32 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 13:38 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-10 22:45 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Jean-Pierre Framboise <nctede@pmdcehr.cc> - 2017-05-10 21:00 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 14:29 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 20:10 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-11 08:29 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-11 17:39 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 08:43 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 17:52 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-11 09:19 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 18:25 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-11 09:30 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-11 18:30 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-11 09:36 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-11 19:21 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math shuba <thailao2558@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 22:03 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-12 11:45 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-05-12 03:06 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 18:28 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-12 06:52 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-12 09:21 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-12 09:33 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-12 10:04 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-05-12 19:39 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-12 10:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-12 15:13 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-12 20:50 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 18:47 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-05-11 19:19 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 18:28 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 18:25 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 16:27 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 15:31 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-05-09 16:50 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-11 19:57 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 14:24 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-12 21:47 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-12 16:27 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-12 23:40 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 08:33 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-13 22:26 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 19:16 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 10:57 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-14 16:46 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-15 21:55 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-15 16:46 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-16 21:59 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-15 16:47 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-16 21:43 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-18 15:50 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-19 20:22 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-19 12:31 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-19 12:33 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-19 12:39 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-20 10:27 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-20 05:09 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-20 17:37 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Ndrijving Pruiten <ui@jsweiw.ke> - 2017-05-20 16:46 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-21 00:09 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Ndrijving Pruiten <ui@jsweiw.ke> - 2017-05-21 10:16 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-21 15:58 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-20 10:03 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ndrijving Pruiten <ui@jsweiw.ke> - 2017-05-20 17:09 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 08:33 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-13 22:05 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 19:03 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-14 11:24 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-14 16:49 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-06-04 21:02 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-05 08:51 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-06-10 17:05 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-06-10 18:58 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-10 10:17 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-10 13:14 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-11 08:01 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-11 15:54 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-13 07:34 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-13 15:20 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-14 06:34 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-14 10:43 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Lolek Atoru <oitiruc@rwuca.oa> - 2017-06-14 19:13 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Lolek Atoru <oitiruc@rwuca.oa> - 2017-06-14 19:14 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-15 06:48 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-15 08:54 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-19 05:37 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-19 12:58 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Ivovanho Títu <ivotatu@ufroaw.ho> - 2017-06-19 18:05 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-06-18 18:23 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-19 12:58 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-14 16:50 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-06-18 18:23 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-19 12:56 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-21 11:13 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Jean-Pierre Framboise <nctede@pmdcehr.cc> - 2017-05-11 19:33 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-11 13:08 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Houchiko Inatsuki <uatci@swckskuwe.io> - 2017-05-11 21:16 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemovAT@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2017-05-12 20:56 +0100
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-11 13:05 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-11 16:07 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 15:07 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Larry Harson <johnmcandrew66@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 13:14 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 15:20 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-08 13:31 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 15:35 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Larry Harson <johnmcandrew66@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 15:27 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 08:08 -0700
Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-09 08:27 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-09 09:23 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-09 17:23 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-10 08:04 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2017-05-10 15:35 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2017-05-11 08:03 -0700
Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-25 11:16 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Eckard B <eckard.blumschein@arcor.de> - 2017-06-05 22:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-06-06 07:56 +0200
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-05 23:28 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Groupie <einstein.groupie69@gmail.com> - 2017-06-06 02:21 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-06 02:37 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math einstein.groupie69@gmail.com - 2017-06-06 09:30 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-06 10:44 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Wozniak <einstein.groupie69@gmail.com> - 2017-06-06 11:32 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-06 11:42 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-06-06 15:25 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-06 22:53 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-06-07 12:52 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Ernardin Regoire <eeug@dnne.ri> - 2017-06-07 20:01 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-06-07 13:51 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-07 14:11 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-07 14:16 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-06-07 14:30 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-07 14:45 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-07 13:22 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-06-07 13:52 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-07 15:49 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-07 14:09 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-08 06:27 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-08 12:16 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-08 12:52 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-08 15:27 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-08 23:13 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-09 07:55 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Jim Limey <eeug@dnne.ri> - 2017-06-09 15:18 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-09 15:58 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-09 14:02 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math Kitubu Nkyaku <akntuu@buwkau.kk> - 2017-06-09 19:10 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Kitubu Nkyaku <akntuu@buwkau.kk> - 2017-06-09 19:12 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-10 16:26 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-06-09 12:54 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-10 09:15 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-08 15:29 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-08 23:23 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-06-08 11:56 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-08 13:30 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-08 21:00 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-08 16:35 -0500
Re: Reality versus Math JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-06-08 15:00 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-09 00:15 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-06-09 12:49 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-09 07:25 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-06-09 08:06 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-06-09 12:51 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math Jim Limey <eeug@dnne.ri> - 2017-06-09 14:35 +0000
Re: Reality versus Math Groupie <einstein.groupie69@gmail.com> - 2017-06-06 17:15 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-06 21:41 -0400
Re: Reality versus Math mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-06 22:53 -0700
Re: Reality versus Math JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-06-07 12:53 -0700
Page 12 of 27 — ← Prev page 1 … 10 11 [12] 13 14 … 27 Next page →
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-31 14:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ogmlbq$d0d$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #421186 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >> >> Then again, you are distorting reality. Anyone can self-publish a book. >> >> Self-publishing a book in a particular area does NOT qualify you as a >> >> professional or an expert in that area. >> > How would you know? You are not a physicist so you don't have the >> > qualification to evaluate my work. >> Neither are you, Ken. >I published three books on physics and cosmology.....what have you done? Nothing. Publishing three vanity books doesn't make you a physicist, Stupid Ken. All it proves is that you have more money than brains, and you found a "publisher" who was willing to "help" you with that issue. The real question is how is the world better off because of what you have done. >Physicists ignored my work for the following reasons: 1. Model Mechanics and IRT are complete, total, absolute failures. 2. Model Mechanics is a total Embarrassment. 3. Nobody wants to go to that dark, dusty corner of the copyright office warehouse where k00kbooks go to die. 4. Physicists are interested in math more advanced than third grade.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Moroney <moroney@TheWorld.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-30 15:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ogk3qq$9d1$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #421049 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >On Monday, May 29, 2017 at 3:39:49 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> When you tell a string of lies in a short period of time, you know what >> that does to your reputation, right Ken? >I have no problem.....my reputation is intact. You sure got that correct, Ken. You have a reputation here of being a raving kook who doesn't know the first thing about SR, can't handle third grade mathematics yet you somehow believe you are a physicist who can replace SR (which you don't understand and refuse to learn) just because you wasted a ton of money self-publishing a book nobody will buy, a book that was sufficiently unique to obtain a copyright from a reviewer who doesn't know physics. This "reputation" is intact, all right.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-28 19:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ogf983$55p$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #420843 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >I am a Chemical Engineer But not a physicist. >and I cam up with a physical theory of everything >called Model Mechanics. The main feature of Model Mechanics are as follows: >_ It offers a realistic origin of the universe. And it failed at that. >_ It offers realistic processes for the origin of all visible matters. And it failed at that as well. >_ It explains the cell division and the consciousness processes. And failed here, too. >_ It provides a mechanism to unify all the forces of nature. Which it failed to do so. >_ It can be validated experimentally. And the validatation refutes it. >_ It gives rise to an Improved Relativity Theory (IRT). Which is another failure. >_ It gives rise to a new theory of gravity called Doppler Theory of Gravity > (DTG) Which is yet another failure. >_ It includes Special Theory of Relativity and General Theory of Relativity > as subsets. Since it conflicts with them, it fails at including them as subsets, as well. >_ It provides physical models for all the math of Quantum Mechanics. Which it fails at. >_ It postulates a new repulsive fifth force identified as the CRE force. Which is another failure of it. >_ It gives a physical explanation for the charge of a particle. And fails here, as well. >_ It gives physical explanations all the weird results of all quantum experiments. Another failure. >_ It explains the structures of atoms. And yet another failure. Congratulations, Ken! There is something that Model Mechanics doesn't fail at. It doesn't fail at failing!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-28 14:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fc3f405a-0b79-4c38-9f57-b279c7fd1a67@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #420876 |
W dniu niedziela, 28 maja 2017 21:43:00 UTC+2 użytkownik Michael Moroney napisał: > Congratulations, Ken! There is something that Model Mechanics doesn't > fail at. It doesn't fail at failing! A poor idiot is trying to be funny. Being funny also requires some intellect, poor idiot.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-28 23:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ogfl19$gdo$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #420878 |
mlwozniak@wp.pl writes: >W dniu niedziela, 28 maja 2017 21:43:00 UTC+2 użytkownik Michael Moron>ey napisał: >> Congratulations, Ken! There is something that Model Mechanics doesn't >> fail at. It doesn't fail at failing! >A poor idiot is trying to be funny. >Being funny also requires some intellect, Which us why you'll never be funny, poor idiot.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-25 02:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <og5g2l$dfs$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #420547 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 10:36:45 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 5/24/17 7:16 AM, kenseto wrote: >> >>>>> The copyright reviewer is a physicist and she think that I have a solid idea. >> >>>> >> >>>> No, Ken, the copyright reviewer is NOT a physicist. >> >>> >> >>> Yes she is. >> >> >> >> Prove it. What's her name? >> >> Copyright reviewers are rarely if ever professionals in the field. >> > You are wrong.....reviewers for physics book need to understand physics. >> No sir. >Then you have no clue who copyright works. It is you who has no clue how copyright works, Stupid Ken. Read this, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_United_States Idea.expression dichotomy[edit] Copyright law protects the "expression" of an idea, but copyright does not protect the "idea" itself. This distinction is called the idea-expression dichotomy.[8] The distinction between "idea" and "expression" is fundamental to copyright law. From the Copyright Act of 1976 (17 U.S.C. § 102): In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work. For example, a paper describing a political theory is copyrightable. The paper is the expression of the author's ideas about the political theory. But the theory itself is just an idea, and is not copyrightable. Another author is free to describe the same theory in their own words without infringing on the original author's copyright.[9] Just replace "political theory" with "physics theory", Stupid Ken, and see what you get. Or better yet, replace it with "failed physics theory". In other words, if someone was stupid enough, that stupid person could write his own book on IRT/Model Mechanics and get that book copyrighted by the very same lady. Just as long as that stupid person's book was original and not copied from your stupid book. Do you think Einstein got a copyright on Special Relativity or General Relativity? No. But his actual papers were copyrighted until the copyright expired.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-24 16:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <og4dd6$7n7$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #420485 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 3:30:46 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 5/23/17 1:34 PM, kenseto wrote: >> > On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 2:04:28 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> >> On 5/23/17 8:57 AM, kenseto wrote: >> >>> The copyright reviewer is a physicist and she think that I have a solid idea. >> >> >> >> No, Ken, the copyright reviewer is NOT a physicist. >> > >> > Yes she is. >> >> Prove it. What's her name? >> Copyright reviewers are rarely if ever professionals in the field. >You are wrong.....reviewers for physics book need to understand physics. Otherwise >how do they know if the work they are reviewing is copyrightable? Stupid Ken, her job is to determine if your k00kbook is original and creative, not to determine whether its physics are correct or not. There is no reason for her to know any physics or to try to determine whether the physics are correct or not. >> > In the FQXi group many physicists endorsed my theory. >> >> What makes you think they are physicists? Because they said so? You say >> you're a physicist too, but you know that's a lie. You've not studied >> physics. How can you be a physicist? >> >Any poster commenting on my essays also submitted an essay of his own. >In his essay his bio is included. Of course any comment that reads "The Model Mechanics being discussed is a complete, total, absolute disaster of a failure!" is still a comment... (and, of course, accurate)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-22 13:00 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <YtWdnVZvMsumur7EnZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #420246 |
On 5/22/17 5/22/17 - 11:13 AM, kenseto wrote:
> On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 9:43:21 AM UTC-4, tjrob137 wrote:
>> On 5/22/17 5/22/17 6:45 AM, kenseto wrote:
>>> Time dilation is a permanent effect.
>>
>> No, it is NOT. "Time dilation" is a DIFFERENTIAL effect which varies with
>> relative velocity, just like “length contraction".
>
> Clocks in relative motions will accumulate different number of clock seconds between meetings and that effect is permanent as shown on each clock. Whereas a meter stick will maintain the same length between meetings.....this means that the predicted length contraction effect is not permanent.
As I keep saying, you are comparing apples and oranges. The correct analogy to
the different TOTAL clock readings in a twin scenario is the different TOTAL
odometer readings for traveling over one side and two sides of a triangle.
Neither "time dilation" nor "length contraction" is permanent:
* Measure the tick rate of a moving clock, and it will be slow;
bring it to rest and that slowness is NOT permanent, the clock
will then be measured to tick at its usual rate.
* Measure the length of a moving rod and it will be short;
bring it to rest and that shortness is NOT permanent, the
rod will then measure its usual length.
[All the usual caveats and conditions apply.]
That is: tick rate and length are DIFFERENTIAL MEASUREMENTS and apply only to a
single instant of measurement -- they depend ONLY on the relative velocity AT
THAT INSTANT. Total elapsed proper time and total trip length are INTEGRAL
MEASUREMENTS, and they depend on THE ENTIRE TRIP.
IOW: "time dilation" is the name given to the effect of motion on the TICK RATE
of a clock at the instant of measurement, not the value it displays. "length
contraction" is the name given to the effect of motion on the LENGTH of a rod at
the instant of measurement, not an odometer reading over a path.
Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-22 21:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f3fe66d5-2239-49b2-a899-cfff2e067972@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #420269 |
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 2:00:33 PM UTC-4, tjrob137 wrote: > On 5/22/17 5/22/17 - 11:13 AM, kenseto wrote: > > On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 9:43:21 AM UTC-4, tjrob137 wrote: > >> On 5/22/17 5/22/17 6:45 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>> Time dilation is a permanent effect. > >> > >> No, it is NOT. "Time dilation" is a DIFFERENTIAL effect which varies with > >> relative velocity, just like “length contraction". > > > > Clocks in relative motions will accumulate different number of clock seconds between meetings and that effect is permanent as shown on each clock. Whereas a meter stick will maintain the same length between meetings.....this means that the predicted length contraction effect is not permanent. > > As I keep saying, you are comparing apples and oranges. The correct analogy to > the different TOTAL clock readings in a twin scenario is the different TOTAL > odometer readings for traveling over one side and two sides of a triangle. Odometer readings are not the same as clock readings. Odometer reading is dependent on the miles the car travelled wrt the road. Clock readings is dependent on the speed of arrival of the required energy to affect a transition of the Cs 133 atom. > > Neither “time dilation" nor "length contraction" is permanent: I disagree. > * Measure the tick rate of a moving clock, and it will be slow; > bring it to rest and that slowness is NOT permanent, yes but the accumulated clock seconds during relative motion is permanent. > will then be measured to tick at its usual rate. When the traveling clock rejoins the stay at home clock they will again start accumulating clock seconds at the same rate. But during relative motion they definitely are accumulating clock seconds at different rates. > * Measure the length of a moving rod and it will be short; > bring it to rest and that shortness is NOT permanent, the > rod will then measure its usual length. The physical length of a moving meter stick is not measurable. Its light-path length is predicted to be shortened by a factor of 1/gamma. This prediction is based on the assumption that the light-path length of the observer’s meter stick is its material length. > > [All the usual caveats and conditions apply.] > > That is: tick rate and length are DIFFERENTIAL MEASUREMENTS and apply only to a > single instant of measurement -- they depend ONLY on the relative velocity AT > THAT INSTANT. Total elapsed proper time and total trip length are INTEGRAL > MEASUREMENTS, and they depend on THE ENTIRE TRIP. > > IOW: "time dilation" is the name given to the effect of motion on the TICK RATE > of a clock at the instant of measurement, not the value it displays. "length > contraction" is the name given to the effect of motion on the LENGTH of a rod at > the instant of measurement, not an odometer reading over a path. > > Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-23 07:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4a02be4a-5dd6-42e1-8947-2c9841eb7ab8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #420246 |
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 12:13:20 PM UTC-4, kenseto wrote: > Clocks in relative motions will accumulate different number of clock > seconds between meetings and that effect is permanent as shown on > each clock. Whereas a meter stick will maintain the same length > between meetings.....this means that the predicted length > contraction effect is not permanent. Idiot ken, If two clocks are in relative motion, one will "tick slower" than the other. When not in relative motion, they tick the same. If two rulers are in relative motion, one will be "shorter" than the other. When not in relative motion, they are the same length. IOW, the same thing happens to clocks & rulers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-23 11:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <54237b58-08ec-4a66-ada4-b9984b5ca915@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #420368 |
On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 10:30:52 AM UTC-4, rotchm wrote: > On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 12:13:20 PM UTC-4, kenseto wrote: > > > Clocks in relative motions will accumulate different number of clock > > seconds between meetings and that effect is permanent as shown on > > each clock. Whereas a meter stick will maintain the same length > > between meetings.....this means that the predicted length > > contraction effect is not permanent. > > Idiot ken, If two clocks are in relative motion, one will "tick slower" than the other. Idiot.....the point is that they will accumulate different number of clock seconds when they meet again. That means that they were accumulating clock seconds at different rates and thus refuting the SR claim that they were accumulating clock second at their normal rates. >When not in relative motion, they tick the same. Right....they accumulate clock seconds at the same rate because they are in the same state of absolute motion. >If two rulers are in relative motion, one will be "shorter" than the other. When not in relative motion, they are the same length. One will be shorter is a prediction and not measurable. Two meter sticks will have the same length whether they are at rest wrt each other or moving wrt each other. Why? Because they show the same length between meetings....IOW no residual effect as does the clocks. > > IOW, the same thing happens to clocks & rulers. No.....clocks show residual effectt whereas meter sticks show no residual effect.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-22 15:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ofv0oo$6cd$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #420208 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >> You're looking for some permanent effect. >Time dilation is a permanent effect. >>That's not necessary. Length >> contraction only applies when the object is moving, not after you've >> brought it to a stop. >So length contraction only when the object is moving wrt the observer? And >after it return to the observer it expanded toits original length? I think >you are just making things up. Stupid Ken, the fact that you wrote what you wrote here just proves that you simply have no clue whatsoever how SR works. Why do you refuse to learn SR?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-28 05:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <279a0825-4997-433d-ac9c-13f627931ddf@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #419961 |
On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 5:17:07 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 5/19/17 3:09 PM, kenseto wrote: > > On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 1:05:36 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 5/19/17 9:01 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>>> SRians are saying that the PROCEDURE is the same for each observer: Take > >>>> a clock that is 1) local to you (and you only), 2) at rest relative to > >>>> you, and 3) is standardized. This PROCEDURE is the same for all > >>>> observers, and THIS is what they mean by it being universal. > >>> So that means that the speed of light is NOT a universal constant but only a local constant.....right? > >>> > >> > >> No, it does NOT mean that. > >> As pointed out to you before, a speed is a ratio of distance and time. > >> 6/3 and 8/4 are the SAME ratios -- they are equal, even though the > >> numerators and the denominators are different. > >> > >> So if there is a speed and there is a time of 3 to one observer and a > >> time of 4 for a different observer, the RATIO is still the same as long > >> as the distance is 6 for the first observer and 8 for the different > >> observer. And this is precisely what happens. The times between events > >> are different, but the RATIO of distance and time are still the same. > > > > But material length of a meter stick is a universal constant. > > The length of a meter stick is NOT constant, no it is not. That is your > belief, but it is not true. Experiment has already shown that to be a > false statement. The length of a meter stick is certainly constant......that’s why we use it to measure distance everyday. > > > In order to get the constant ratio as you asserted physicists had to invent a new meter stick: > > 1 meter=1/299,792,458 light-seconds. > > Such ad hoc invention is not doing physics. It is an invention made to save SR. > > Ken, this came with SR from its INCEPTION. Time dilation and length > contraction came TOGETHER when SR was introduced. It is not true that > time dilation was developed first and then length contraction was > invented later to save the constancy of the speed of light. The > constancy of the speed of light forces BOTH time dilation AND length > contraction as an immediate logical consequence. Separate those two and > you no longer have special relativity. You have some bastard monster you > dreamed up. > > > -- > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-28 17:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ogf294$vki$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #420840 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 5:17:07 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 5/19/17 3:09 PM, kenseto wrote: >>> On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 1:05:36 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> On 5/19/17 9:01 AM, kenseto wrote: >>>>>> SRians are saying that the PROCEDURE is the same for each observer: Take >>>>>> a clock that is 1) local to you (and you only), 2) at rest relative to >>>>>> you, and 3) is standardized. This PROCEDURE is the same for all >>>>>> observers, and THIS is what they mean by it being universal. >>>>> So that means that the speed of light is NOT a universal constant but >>>>> only a local constant.....right? >>>>> >>>> >>>> No, it does NOT mean that. >>>> As pointed out to you before, a speed is a ratio of distance and time. >>>> 6/3 and 8/4 are the SAME ratios -- they are equal, even though the >>>> numerators and the denominators are different. >>>> >>>> So if there is a speed and there is a time of 3 to one observer and a >>>> time of 4 for a different observer, the RATIO is still the same as long >>>> as the distance is 6 for the first observer and 8 for the different >>>> observer. And this is precisely what happens. The times between events >>>> are different, but the RATIO of distance and time are still the same. >>> >>> But material length of a meter stick is a universal constant. >> >> The length of a meter stick is NOT constant, no it is not. That is your >> belief, but it is not true. Experiment has already shown that to be a >> false statement. > > The length of a meter stick is certainly constant......that’s why we use > it to measure distance everyday. Not so. The reason why we use one everyday is that, to the precision needed for everyday uses, the changes in the length of the meter stick are not enough to matter in those uses. It's even true that we don't worry about temperature changes and we use the same meter siting on days when it is 30 F and when it is 90 F. For steel this is 0.001 % per degree C. For a 60 F = 35 C temperature change, this is a change in length of a meter stick of 0.035% or over a third of a millimeter. This is trivially easy to measure in the lab, but for everyday uses we just don't care. Same is true for other effects like length contraction -- verified in the lab but for everyday applications we don't care. Just because we don't care in everyday uses doesn't mean it doesn't happen. > >> >>> In order to get the constant ratio as you asserted physicists had to >>> invent a new meter stick: >>> 1 meter=1/299,792,458 light-seconds. >>> Such ad hoc invention is not doing physics. It is an invention made to save SR. >> >> Ken, this came with SR from its INCEPTION. Time dilation and length >> contraction came TOGETHER when SR was introduced. It is not true that >> time dilation was developed first and then length contraction was >> invented later to save the constancy of the speed of light. The >> constancy of the speed of light forces BOTH time dilation AND length >> contraction as an immediate logical consequence. Separate those two and >> you no longer have special relativity. You have some bastard monster you >> dreamed up. >> >> >> -- >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-28 12:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <179e66c3-8952-4fb0-a235-872e5fa7b409@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #420867 |
W dniu niedziela, 28 maja 2017 19:44:08 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: > kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > > On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 5:17:07 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 5/19/17 3:09 PM, kenseto wrote: > >>> On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 1:05:36 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> On 5/19/17 9:01 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>>>>> SRians are saying that the PROCEDURE is the same for each observer: Take > >>>>>> a clock that is 1) local to you (and you only), 2) at rest relative to > >>>>>> you, and 3) is standardized. This PROCEDURE is the same for all > >>>>>> observers, and THIS is what they mean by it being universal. > >>>>> So that means that the speed of light is NOT a universal constant but > >>>>> only a local constant.....right? > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> No, it does NOT mean that. > >>>> As pointed out to you before, a speed is a ratio of distance and time. > >>>> 6/3 and 8/4 are the SAME ratios -- they are equal, even though the > >>>> numerators and the denominators are different. > >>>> > >>>> So if there is a speed and there is a time of 3 to one observer and a > >>>> time of 4 for a different observer, the RATIO is still the same as long > >>>> as the distance is 6 for the first observer and 8 for the different > >>>> observer. And this is precisely what happens. The times between events > >>>> are different, but the RATIO of distance and time are still the same. > >>> > >>> But material length of a meter stick is a universal constant. > >> > >> The length of a meter stick is NOT constant, no it is not. That is your > >> belief, but it is not true. Experiment has already shown that to be a > >> false statement. > > > > The length of a meter stick is certainly constant......that’s why we use > > it to measure distance everyday. > > Not so. The reason why we use one everyday is that, to the precision > needed for everyday uses, the changes in the length of the meter stick are > not enough to matter in those uses. Oh, oh, nothing is precise in this imperfect world - with a single exception of The Shit of Great Guru.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-19 07:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ee330599-2226-45f9-881b-d0074069695e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #419910 |
W dniu piątek, 19 maja 2017 15:39:20 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: > On 5/19/17 8:22 AM, kenseto wrote: > > On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 5:10:48 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 5/16/17 3:03 PM, Ed Lake wrote: > >>> I know that this could just be a trick to get me to post here again, after I said that it was a waste of time, but the question is a good one. > >>> > >>> According to the US Government's National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the length of a second is officially defined as "the duration of > >>> 9,192,631,770 cycles of microwave light absorbed or emitted by the hyperfine transition of cesium-133 atoms in their ground state undisturbed by external > >>> fields." > >> > >> What's not stated in this definition is that this is the the definition > >> of a second for such a clock that is local and at rest. A cesium atom > >> traveling with any significant speed would violate the standard. A > >> cesium atom at a significant distance away in a gravitational field > >> would violate the standard. > > > > Local and at rest wrt what? > > Local and at rest with respect to the observer. > > > Does that mean that the observer’s clock second is the standard? > > For him, yes. > > > But the observer is also in a state of motion according to other observer.....so how can his clock second is the standard? > > The first clock is NOT a standard to the other observer. The other > observer will have to use a clock that is local and standard to him. And if he won't do what he will have to do - poor fanatic idiot Bodkin will cast him out from the society. Keep dreaming of the power, poor fanatic idiot. > That's the point. No clock can serve as a standard for multiple > observers in relative motion. There IS NO SUCH clock in nature. There is no clocks in nature anyway, poor idiot. They all are human made. > SRians are saying that the PROCEDURE is the same for each observer: Take > a clock that is 1) local to you (and you only), 2) at rest relative to > you, and 3) is standardized. This PROCEDURE is the same for all > observers, and THIS is what they mean by it being universal. Let the SRians fuck themselves. No sane people will ever obey their moronic commands. > It would be the same if I were to define a standard hole as being one > that is dug right next to you, is 6 feet deep according to your local > ruler, and is downward according to your local reference. The SRians will surely tell you how to define standard hole. They studied MMX experiment, and they maked fine toys, and are now true masters in proper defining.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-19 10:04 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <hpadnX1yivWplILEnZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #419676 |
On 5/16/17 5/16/17 4:10 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > [NIST / ISO definition of the second] > What's not stated in this definition is that this is the the definition of a > second for such a clock that is local and at rest. It does not need to state that. This definition can only be applied right next to the Cs133 atom(s) involved, because attempting to apply it anywhere else requires SIGNALS, and one must take into account how those signals are affected by their propagation. It is, of course, well known how such signals are affected by cables, relative motion, gravitation, etc., but those things have no place in a definition of the second. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-19 10:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <13604e95-6c13-492f-9550-81a4609e036a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #419916 |
W dniu piątek, 19 maja 2017 17:03:24 UTC+2 użytkownik tjrob137 napisał: > On 5/16/17 5/16/17 4:10 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > [NIST / ISO definition of the second] > > What's not stated in this definition is that this is the the definition of a > > second for such a clock that is local and at rest. > > It does not need to state that. This definition can only be applied right next > to the Cs133 atom(s) involved, because Because idiot physicist decided, and common mortals have to obey.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Seki Ushisa <sis@iscauhw.ea> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-22 12:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ofulqh$1sl0$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #419916 |
Tom Roberts wrote: > It does not need to state that. This definition can only be applied > right next to the Cs133 atom(s) involved, because attempting to apply it > anywhere else requires SIGNALS, and one must take into account how those > signals are affected by their propagation. This must be a paradox which is a paradox, not a paradox which is not a paradox. Since signals are never affected by their propagation in any way. Actually the propagation is intrinsic inherited into all signals. > It is, of course, well known > how such signals are affected by cables, relative motion, gravitation, > etc., but those things have no place in a definition of the second. Yes, but those enlisted things are not propagation. I which case it must be a paradox which is not a paradox.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-16 18:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <70815db2-1697-41af-83bc-04a2ff97765b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #419668 |
On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 4:03:30 PM UTC-4, Ed Lake wrote: <snip> How impolite of you! We try to help you, we reply to you, and what do you do when you are stumped? You sulk away crying on your own personal blog. Then you come back here to discuss a different subject. That is very immature and inconsiderate of you. Do you notice that that is what you portray yourself to be like? Now, continue from where we left off instead of diverting: > And we cannot tell who is moving. "moving" has NOTHING to do with math. In what you are referring to, if x(t) is the position as a function of time of something, then mathematicians dont say that its moving. They say that x=x(t). They can say that x1 <> x2, etc. it is physicist, when using lay language, that will say that x=x(t) is a movement. Still no answer? > From your point of view, you are standing still and I am moving. Mathematicians dont say that. They say that my position wrt me is x=x(t) = 0; Your position wrt me is x=x(t). In physics, or lay language, we can say " From your point of view, you are standing still and I am moving.". No answer? > From my point of view, I am standing still and you are moving. > IT IS PURE FANTASY. Consider two asteroids far in space approaching each other. They skim each other. Is this possible? Now, which one is moving? No answer? Stumped?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 12 of 27 — ← Prev page 1 … 10 11 [12] 13 14 … 27 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web