Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #422344 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "HGW..." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-06-12 20:18 +1000 |
| Last post | 2017-06-23 21:14 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 216 — 28 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-12 20:18 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-12 15:43 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Selina Dieter <uiueeits@wlwtwstd.ci> - 2017-06-12 17:43 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-06-12 21:57 +0200
Re: What Happened to Seto? Python <python@example.invalid> - 2017-06-12 18:03 +0200
Re: What Happened to Seto? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-12 09:34 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-13 04:39 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Selina Dieter <uiueeits@wlwtwstd.ci> - 2017-06-12 18:40 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-13 05:26 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-12 13:57 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-13 05:28 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-13 15:14 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-13 07:17 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-13 15:16 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-14 08:58 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-14 10:45 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-14 07:26 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-14 15:00 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-14 11:30 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-15 06:15 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-14 15:48 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-15 06:54 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-14 15:56 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-15 01:55 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-15 20:54 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-15 13:01 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-16 03:41 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Kotovanich Nzerovu <ivhvruo@wovewvw.ev> - 2017-06-15 17:49 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-16 04:28 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-15 16:44 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? Nými Icelulózy <ejienm@wzsfwe.ul> - 2017-06-16 11:28 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Nými Icelulózy <ejienm@wzsfwe.ul> - 2017-06-16 18:27 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-15 16:37 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-16 07:23 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-16 07:21 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-15 07:25 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-15 10:24 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-16 06:08 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-16 08:23 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-16 06:28 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-16 08:37 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-16 06:47 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-16 15:25 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-16 15:02 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-17 07:35 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-17 11:48 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-17 12:03 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-17 22:21 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-18 04:27 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-06-18 13:52 +0200
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-19 05:09 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Rhett Doucet <ttdh@etoe.ee> - 2017-06-19 12:42 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2017-06-19 17:26 +0200
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-18 12:32 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-19 05:16 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-19 12:38 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-19 13:03 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-19 11:24 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-19 13:30 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-21 06:16 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-21 11:08 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-22 07:45 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-22 15:28 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-24 05:46 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-24 17:05 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-24 15:49 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? shuba <thailao2558@gmail.com> - 2017-07-04 16:06 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-07-05 02:50 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-07-04 22:58 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-07-05 20:22 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Oveho Trofyzikovu <zfeuur@ceuuwi.ku> - 2017-07-05 11:08 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Oveho Trofyzikovu <zfeuur@ceuuwi.ku> - 2017-07-05 11:06 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-07-05 04:26 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Oveho Trofyzikovu <zfeuur@ceuuwi.ku> - 2017-07-06 13:19 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Oveho Trofyzikovu <zfeuur@ceuuwi.ku> - 2017-07-05 11:05 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-07-05 04:20 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 12:44 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-19 11:25 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-19 20:26 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-19 16:12 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-21 06:23 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-21 11:10 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-22 09:00 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-22 01:16 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-22 15:29 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-22 01:56 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-22 12:43 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-22 05:49 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-22 06:54 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-22 15:58 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-23 09:30 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-06-23 09:18 +0200
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-23 23:34 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-25 09:26 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-25 00:55 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Julianna Eliason <nujasenea@wiwnwajau.nc> - 2017-06-18 14:20 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-18 08:45 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Julianna Eliason <nujasenea@wiwnwajau.nc> - 2017-06-18 15:47 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-18 16:10 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-18 16:08 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Julianna Eliason <nujasenea@wiwnwajau.nc> - 2017-06-18 16:54 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-18 03:15 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Nými Icelulózy <ejienm@wzsfwe.ul> - 2017-06-16 13:52 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-15 07:21 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-15 10:23 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-16 06:05 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-16 08:21 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-16 15:44 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-15 11:14 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-16 06:23 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-16 08:26 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-16 08:11 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-17 15:02 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-17 11:56 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-14 09:21 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-14 07:12 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-15 06:34 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-06-14 10:17 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? gehan.ameresekere@gmail.com - 2017-07-13 23:47 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-07-15 08:49 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-07-16 00:57 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-07-15 08:51 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? gehan.ameresekere@gmail.com - 2017-07-13 23:59 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-07-15 08:23 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-07-14 18:50 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-07-15 08:38 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-07-17 08:25 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-07-17 02:10 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-07-17 07:11 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-07-18 08:53 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-07-18 05:52 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-07-18 14:50 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-07-19 09:48 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-07-19 01:42 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-07-19 19:33 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-07-19 19:45 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-07-20 08:14 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-07-20 08:42 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-07-21 14:37 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-07-21 19:18 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-07-22 08:15 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-07-21 15:47 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-07-21 21:18 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? gehan.ameresekere@gmail.com - 2017-07-22 03:16 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-07-23 07:00 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 02:16 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2017-07-26 20:07 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-07-26 20:39 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-07-25 10:19 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-07-26 12:12 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-07-26 13:21 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-07-27 19:58 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 10:39 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-07-27 16:25 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 10:11 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 13:01 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-07-27 11:53 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 19:35 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-07-27 13:11 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 19:38 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-07-28 03:54 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-08-03 19:35 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-08-04 00:04 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-07-28 09:48 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-07-28 13:54 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-07-29 00:46 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-07-30 09:04 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-07-30 23:17 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-07-31 10:40 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-07-31 10:08 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-08-01 09:57 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-01 03:11 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-08-02 08:31 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Jeèným Ludnými <hovae@ieuuio.org> - 2017-08-02 09:04 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-02 11:00 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-08-03 07:15 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-03 10:27 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-08-04 11:48 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-04 02:34 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-07-31 09:01 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? shuba <thailao2558@gmail.com> - 2017-07-31 14:42 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-08-01 03:02 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-01 13:57 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-08-01 10:43 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-08-01 09:56 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-02 10:08 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 19:33 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-07-22 02:49 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? shuba <thailao2558@gmail.com> - 2017-07-23 08:43 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? shuba <thailao2558@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 19:46 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? gehan.ameresekere@gmail.com - 2017-07-15 02:12 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? gehan.ameresekere@gmail.com - 2017-07-15 02:14 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Garfield Dieter <igdle@rdlge.rf> - 2017-07-15 10:41 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-07-15 08:27 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-07-15 09:05 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? gehan.ameresekere@gmail.com - 2017-07-16 21:39 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-07-16 22:16 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? gehan.ameresekere@gmail.com - 2017-07-17 00:08 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-07-17 08:00 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-07-17 09:39 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? gehan.ameresekere@gmail.com - 2017-07-18 21:18 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-07-20 14:47 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-07-20 19:16 -0400
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-07-21 12:59 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-07-17 07:51 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-07-17 07:45 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? gehan.ameresekere@gmail.com - 2017-07-17 20:02 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? gehan.ameresekere@gmail.com - 2017-07-17 20:19 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-20 11:39 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Lipek Mniak <iluka@sskwpiw.pp> - 2017-06-21 11:43 +0000
Re: What Happened to Seto? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-21 23:10 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-21 06:28 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-21 11:06 -0500
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-22 07:50 -0700
Re: What Happened to Seto? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-24 11:11 +1000
Re: What Happened to Seto? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2017-06-23 21:14 -0700
Page 6 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 11 Next page →
| From | Julianna Eliason <nujasenea@wiwnwajau.nc> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-18 16:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oi6b83$hu4$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422909 |
Michael Moroney wrote: > Julianna Eliason <nujasenea@wiwnwajau.nc> writes: > >>kenseto wrote: > >>> Moron you can’t equate physicists to medical doctors. Doctors don’t >>> operate on non-existing models whereas physicists dream up >>> non-existing models such as extra dimensions, virtual particles, >>> curvature in spacetime.....etc. > >>Doctors never operate, surgeons does. > > Stupid nymshifter, a surgeon is a kind of doctor. lol, what a marooon. Your head seams surrounded by asshole.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-18 03:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oi4r7k$1aj$3@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #422798 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >On Friday, June 16, 2017 at 4:02:26 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> > Not at all.....I don't need anybody to teach me physics. I invented a >> > new theory of everything. >> It's the mind of a psychopath who believes that he can dream up an >> influential and important physics theory without ever learning any physics. >It's done..... So are you agreeing with Odd that you have the mind of a psychopath because you believe you can dream up an influential and important physics theory without ever learning any physics? >it's the only theory that has the following main features: It's a complete, total, absolute failure. It's a total, absolute, complete failure. It's an absolute, complete, total failure. >Moron I have to know something about physics in order to write a book on >physics.....gee you are so fucking stupid. No, Stupid Ken. In these days of self-publishing, anyone with more money than brains can babble forth a book of nonsense and say it's about physics. You do have to know something about physics in order to write a useful or accurate book on physics. James McGinn wrote a couple of books on tornadoes, does that mean he knows something about tornadoes and weather? How about if, tomorrow, I write a book on brain surgery? Would that make me a brain surgeon tomorrow night? (speaking of which, why won't you answer Odd's question about the quack doctor?)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nými Icelulózy <ejienm@wzsfwe.ul> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-16 13:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oi0nqi$pd3$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422720 |
kenseto wrote: >> > Yes I do know.....every time I ask you a question on physics, you >> > tell me to go and read a book. >> >> Yup, because that’s what people do to learn a subject. > > Then why do you keep on saying that I am wrong when you don’t know any > physics????? It must be just because to annoy people. That's what trolls does, I read somewhere. Keep up the good work.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-15 07:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fe3386de-b575-45d9-99e8-587e70c52f6a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #422567 |
On Wednesday, June 14, 2017 at 12:30:31 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 6/14/17 9:26 AM, kenseto wrote: > > On Tuesday, June 13, 2017 at 4:17:01 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 6/13/17 9:17 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>> On Monday, June 12, 2017 at 6:18:33 AM UTC-4, HGW... wrote: > >>>> Maybe he died. Maybe he has changed his nickname because he was so > >>>> ashamed of his theory. > >>> > >>> I am tired of the low level of the intelligence that exists in this NG. I published a new book of the universe (http://www.modelmechanics.org/2016ibook.pdf) that includes the following items......no body in this NG bothers to give any intelligent comment: > >> > >> Seto, isn't it revealing to you that you translate lack of attention > >> being paid to you as a low level of intelligence? > > > > Yes, when the lack of attention is because Model Mechanics disagree with SR/GR. > > > >> > >> As though, if anyone were at all intelligent, they would pay attention > >> to you? > > > > They should pay attention when Model mechanics provides solutions for all the problems of current theories. > > I think it's fascinating that you believe that people should pay > attention to your ideas because YOU think they are good ideas. You > honestly cannot think of any other reason why people would ignore you? > > > > >> > >> You're going to die thinking that the whole world is full of idiots > >> because you were ignored. Does that sound mentally healthy to you? > > > > I don’t think that at all. I think that they don’t pay attention to Model Mechanics because of the following reasons: > > 1. Afraid that Model Mechanics will spread wildly in the internet. > > 2. Don’t want to rock the boat. > > 3. Money. > > 4. Avoid embarrassment. > > > > You honestly don't think there's another possibility for why you're > being ignored, Ken? > > Could it be because you > - don't know what the concepts of physics mean > - haven't read anything about physics > - can't do 4th grade arithmetic > - believe that physics should be understandable to the common man, > regardless of background and training > ? > > Tell me, Ken. Suppose you developed a bad cough and were spitting up > blood. Then someone you know told you that he could fix you right up. > You ask him if he's a doctor, and he says "Yes, I'm a doctor, but I > don't have a license." You ask him if he ever went to medical school, > and he says he doesn't need to go to medical school to have new ideas > about medicine. You ask him how he can be a doctor if he doesn't have a > license. He says, "I've written a book about medicine, which is more > than what most doctors have done, and my theories about medicine make it > completely understandable to the common man." You say, "But no doctors > have bought your book," and he says, "That's because doctors are > threatened by my revolutionary theories about medicine." Now, would you > pay this man to treat your bad cough? Would you consider him a doctor > because he says he is? This sounds like you. You are not a physicist and you keep on telling me and anybody who disagree with you are not a physicists. <sad>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-15 10:23 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ohu8po$14l9$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422629 |
On 6/15/17 9:21 AM, kenseto wrote: >> Tell me, Ken. Suppose you developed a bad cough and were spitting up >> blood. Then someone you know told you that he could fix you right up. >> You ask him if he's a doctor, and he says "Yes, I'm a doctor, but I >> don't have a license." You ask him if he ever went to medical school, >> and he says he doesn't need to go to medical school to have new ideas >> about medicine. You ask him how he can be a doctor if he doesn't have a >> license. He says, "I've written a book about medicine, which is more >> than what most doctors have done, and my theories about medicine make it >> completely understandable to the common man." You say, "But no doctors >> have bought your book," and he says, "That's because doctors are >> threatened by my revolutionary theories about medicine." Now, would you >> pay this man to treat your bad cough? Would you consider him a doctor >> because he says he is? > This sounds like you. You are not a physicist and you keep on telling me and anybody who disagree with you are not a physicists. <sad> Project if you must. I think the answer is that you would not pay this man to treat your bad cough. It's true that I am not a physicist, and if you only want to listen to physicists, then good luck in even getting their attention. You haven't so far. Fact remains that YOU are not a physicist, any more than the guy above is a doctor, just because he says he is, or because he wrote a book, or because he's made it more understandable to the common man. Don't pretend. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-16 06:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9f3f9192-7d9e-4907-a2e8-a91a21194fe1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #422631 |
On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 11:23:40 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 6/15/17 9:21 AM, kenseto wrote: > >> Tell me, Ken. Suppose you developed a bad cough and were spitting up > >> blood. Then someone you know told you that he could fix you right up. > >> You ask him if he's a doctor, and he says "Yes, I'm a doctor, but I > >> don't have a license." You ask him if he ever went to medical school, > >> and he says he doesn't need to go to medical school to have new ideas > >> about medicine. You ask him how he can be a doctor if he doesn't have a > >> license. He says, "I've written a book about medicine, which is more > >> than what most doctors have done, and my theories about medicine make it > >> completely understandable to the common man." You say, "But no doctors > >> have bought your book," and he says, "That's because doctors are > >> threatened by my revolutionary theories about medicine." Now, would you > >> pay this man to treat your bad cough? Would you consider him a doctor > >> because he says he is? > > This sounds like you. You are not a physicist and you keep on telling me and anybody who disagree with you are not a physicists. <sad> > > Project if you must. > > I think the answer is that you would not pay this man to treat your bad > cough. > > It's true that I am not a physicist, and if you only want to listen to > physicists, then good luck in even getting their attention. You haven't > so far. Idiot.... I don’t want to listen to physicists or any body. I invented a new theory of everything and I posted it in the internet. If physicists don’t want to read it, then it’s their lost. > gory > Fact remains that YOU are not a physicist, any more than the guy above > is a doctor, just because he says he is, or because he wrote a book, or > because he's made it more understandable to the common man. Don't pretend. > > -- > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-16 08:21 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <oi0m0r$mvt$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422714 |
On 6/16/17 8:05 AM, kenseto wrote: > diot.... I don’t want to listen to physicists or any body. I invented a new theory of everything and I posted it in the internet. If physicists don’t want to read it, then it’s their lost. Alrighty then. So it's acknowledged by you that you don't want to listen to physicists or anybody, and physicists nor anybody else want to listen to you. So you have done something by yourself, for yourself, about which nobody cares except for you. You will take pride in what you think you've accomplished, even if nobody else ever pays any attention to it. And of course, when you die, your pride in yourself will vaporize, and whatever you did will gather dust in obscurity. FINE legacy, Ken. Is that what you set out to do? -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-16 15:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oi0udr$100$4@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #422716 |
Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> writes: >Alrighty then. So it's acknowledged by you that you don't want to listen >to physicists or anybody, and physicists nor anybody else want to listen >to you. >So you have done something by yourself, for yourself, about which nobody >cares except for you. You will take pride in what you think you've >accomplished, even if nobody else ever pays any attention to it. >And of course, when you die, your pride in yourself will vaporize, and >whatever you did will gather dust in obscurity. >FINE legacy, Ken. Is that what you set out to do? That's right, Ken. You won't listen to physicists, and you don't care or expect physicists to ever listen to you. So once you croak, your "legacy" will be the occupation of a few cubic inches in a dusty, obscure warehouse of the Library of Congress. Right next to thousands of other books which all claim to replace SR and GR (most of which conflict with each other, and with yours). A proper legacy would be the ability to say the world is better off than it would have been if you had never existed, even if your name isn't well known. Can you say that? And no, occupation of a few cubic inches in a warehouse doesn't qualify.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-15 11:14 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ohubp0$1a59$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422629 |
On 6/15/17 9:21 AM, kenseto wrote: > On Wednesday, June 14, 2017 at 12:30:31 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 6/14/17 9:26 AM, kenseto wrote: >>> On Tuesday, June 13, 2017 at 4:17:01 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> On 6/13/17 9:17 AM, kenseto wrote: >>>>> On Monday, June 12, 2017 at 6:18:33 AM UTC-4, HGW... wrote: >>>>>> Maybe he died. Maybe he has changed his nickname because he was so >>>>>> ashamed of his theory. >>>>> >>>>> I am tired of the low level of the intelligence that exists in this NG. I published a new book of the universe (http://www.modelmechanics.org/2016ibook.pdf) that includes the following items......no body in this NG bothers to give any intelligent comment: >>>> >>>> Seto, isn't it revealing to you that you translate lack of attention >>>> being paid to you as a low level of intelligence? >>> >>> Yes, when the lack of attention is because Model Mechanics disagree with SR/GR. >>> >>>> >>>> As though, if anyone were at all intelligent, they would pay attention >>>> to you? >>> >>> They should pay attention when Model mechanics provides solutions for all the problems of current theories. >> >> I think it's fascinating that you believe that people should pay >> attention to your ideas because YOU think they are good ideas. You >> honestly cannot think of any other reason why people would ignore you? >> >>> >>>> >>>> You're going to die thinking that the whole world is full of idiots >>>> because you were ignored. Does that sound mentally healthy to you? >>> >>> I don’t think that at all. I think that they don’t pay attention to Model Mechanics because of the following reasons: >>> 1. Afraid that Model Mechanics will spread wildly in the internet. >>> 2. Don’t want to rock the boat. >>> 3. Money. >>> 4. Avoid embarrassment. >>> >> >> You honestly don't think there's another possibility for why you're >> being ignored, Ken? >> >> Could it be because you >> - don't know what the concepts of physics mean >> - haven't read anything about physics >> - can't do 4th grade arithmetic >> - believe that physics should be understandable to the common man, >> regardless of background and training >> ? >> >> Tell me, Ken. Suppose you developed a bad cough and were spitting up >> blood. Then someone you know told you that he could fix you right up. >> You ask him if he's a doctor, and he says "Yes, I'm a doctor, but I >> don't have a license." You ask him if he ever went to medical school, >> and he says he doesn't need to go to medical school to have new ideas >> about medicine. You ask him how he can be a doctor if he doesn't have a >> license. He says, "I've written a book about medicine, which is more >> than what most doctors have done, and my theories about medicine make it >> completely understandable to the common man." You say, "But no doctors >> have bought your book," and he says, "That's because doctors are >> threatened by my revolutionary theories about medicine." Now, would you >> pay this man to treat your bad cough? Would you consider him a doctor >> because he says he is? > > This sounds like you. You are not a physicist and you keep on telling me and anybody who disagree with you are not a physicists. <sad> > So Seto, it appears you're in a dead alley. First let's say you'll only listen to physicists. But then you say that physicists won't pay any attention to you because they don't want to rock the boat and are avoiding embarrassment. OK, so physicists aren't going to interact with you. So this leaves non-physicists to interact with you. But you won't pay any attention to what someone says if they're not a physicist. So you're not going to get interactions with non-physicists, either. So you're not going to get any useful interactions from either physicists or non-physicists, by your own account. And this is in fact what has happened with your book, with nobody paying any attention to it and it gathering dust in some archive or copies sitting in your closet. So you are going to be universally ignored. Is that what you set out to do? -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-16 06:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <722ec361-0688-4aa6-b931-e5157373cac7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #422640 |
On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 12:14:29 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 6/15/17 9:21 AM, kenseto wrote: > > On Wednesday, June 14, 2017 at 12:30:31 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 6/14/17 9:26 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>> On Tuesday, June 13, 2017 at 4:17:01 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> On 6/13/17 9:17 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>>>> On Monday, June 12, 2017 at 6:18:33 AM UTC-4, HGW... wrote: > >>>>>> Maybe he died. Maybe he has changed his nickname because he was so > >>>>>> ashamed of his theory. > >>>>> > >>>>> I am tired of the low level of the intelligence that exists in this NG. I published a new book of the universe (http://www.modelmechanics.org/2016ibook.pdf) that includes the following items......no body in this NG bothers to give any intelligent comment: > >>>> > >>>> Seto, isn't it revealing to you that you translate lack of attention > >>>> being paid to you as a low level of intelligence? > >>> > >>> Yes, when the lack of attention is because Model Mechanics disagree with SR/GR. > >>> > >>>> > >>>> As though, if anyone were at all intelligent, they would pay attention > >>>> to you? > >>> > >>> They should pay attention when Model mechanics provides solutions for all the problems of current theories. > >> > >> I think it's fascinating that you believe that people should pay > >> attention to your ideas because YOU think they are good ideas. You > >> honestly cannot think of any other reason why people would ignore you? > >> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> You're going to die thinking that the whole world is full of idiots > >>>> because you were ignored. Does that sound mentally healthy to you? > >>> > >>> I don’t think that at all. I think that they don’t pay attention to Model Mechanics because of the following reasons: > >>> 1. Afraid that Model Mechanics will spread wildly in the internet. > >>> 2. Don’t want to rock the boat. > >>> 3. Money. > >>> 4. Avoid embarrassment. > >>> > >> > >> You honestly don't think there's another possibility for why you're > >> being ignored, Ken? > >> > >> Could it be because you > >> - don't know what the concepts of physics mean > >> - haven't read anything about physics > >> - can't do 4th grade arithmetic > >> - believe that physics should be understandable to the common man, > >> regardless of background and training > >> ? > >> > >> Tell me, Ken. Suppose you developed a bad cough and were spitting up > >> blood. Then someone you know told you that he could fix you right up. > >> You ask him if he's a doctor, and he says "Yes, I'm a doctor, but I > >> don't have a license." You ask him if he ever went to medical school, > >> and he says he doesn't need to go to medical school to have new ideas > >> about medicine. You ask him how he can be a doctor if he doesn't have a > >> license. He says, "I've written a book about medicine, which is more > >> than what most doctors have done, and my theories about medicine make it > >> completely understandable to the common man." You say, "But no doctors > >> have bought your book," and he says, "That's because doctors are > >> threatened by my revolutionary theories about medicine." Now, would you > >> pay this man to treat your bad cough? Would you consider him a doctor > >> because he says he is? > > > > This sounds like you. You are not a physicist and you keep on telling me and anybody who disagree with you are not a physicists. <sad> > > > > So Seto, it appears you’re in a dead alley. Not at all.....if my work is valid some future bright physicists will discover it and do the experiments I proposed in the book and get a Nobel Prize. > > First let's say you'll only listen to physicists. But then you say that > physicists won't pay any attention to you because they don't want to > rock the boat and are avoiding embarrassment. OK, so physicists aren't > going to interact with you. > > So this leaves non-physicists to interact with you. But you won't pay > any attention to what someone says if they're not a physicist. So you're > not going to get interactions with non-physicists, either. > > So you're not going to get any useful interactions from either > physicists or non-physicists, by your own account. > > And this is in fact what has happened with your book, with nobody paying > any attention to it and it gathering dust in some archive or copies > sitting in your closet. > > So you are going to be universally ignored. Is that what you set out to do? > > -- > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-16 08:26 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <oi0mb0$mvt$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422718 |
On 6/16/17 8:23 AM, kenseto wrote: > On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 12:14:29 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 6/15/17 9:21 AM, kenseto wrote: >>> On Wednesday, June 14, 2017 at 12:30:31 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> On 6/14/17 9:26 AM, kenseto wrote: >>>>> On Tuesday, June 13, 2017 at 4:17:01 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> On 6/13/17 9:17 AM, kenseto wrote: >>>>>>> On Monday, June 12, 2017 at 6:18:33 AM UTC-4, HGW... wrote: >>>>>>>> Maybe he died. Maybe he has changed his nickname because he was so >>>>>>>> ashamed of his theory. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am tired of the low level of the intelligence that exists in this NG. I published a new book of the universe (http://www.modelmechanics.org/2016ibook.pdf) that includes the following items......no body in this NG bothers to give any intelligent comment: >>>>>> >>>>>> Seto, isn't it revealing to you that you translate lack of attention >>>>>> being paid to you as a low level of intelligence? >>>>> >>>>> Yes, when the lack of attention is because Model Mechanics disagree with SR/GR. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> As though, if anyone were at all intelligent, they would pay attention >>>>>> to you? >>>>> >>>>> They should pay attention when Model mechanics provides solutions for all the problems of current theories. >>>> >>>> I think it's fascinating that you believe that people should pay >>>> attention to your ideas because YOU think they are good ideas. You >>>> honestly cannot think of any other reason why people would ignore you? >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> You're going to die thinking that the whole world is full of idiots >>>>>> because you were ignored. Does that sound mentally healthy to you? >>>>> >>>>> I don’t think that at all. I think that they don’t pay attention to Model Mechanics because of the following reasons: >>>>> 1. Afraid that Model Mechanics will spread wildly in the internet. >>>>> 2. Don’t want to rock the boat. >>>>> 3. Money. >>>>> 4. Avoid embarrassment. >>>>> >>>> >>>> You honestly don't think there's another possibility for why you're >>>> being ignored, Ken? >>>> >>>> Could it be because you >>>> - don't know what the concepts of physics mean >>>> - haven't read anything about physics >>>> - can't do 4th grade arithmetic >>>> - believe that physics should be understandable to the common man, >>>> regardless of background and training >>>> ? >>>> >>>> Tell me, Ken. Suppose you developed a bad cough and were spitting up >>>> blood. Then someone you know told you that he could fix you right up. >>>> You ask him if he's a doctor, and he says "Yes, I'm a doctor, but I >>>> don't have a license." You ask him if he ever went to medical school, >>>> and he says he doesn't need to go to medical school to have new ideas >>>> about medicine. You ask him how he can be a doctor if he doesn't have a >>>> license. He says, "I've written a book about medicine, which is more >>>> than what most doctors have done, and my theories about medicine make it >>>> completely understandable to the common man." You say, "But no doctors >>>> have bought your book," and he says, "That's because doctors are >>>> threatened by my revolutionary theories about medicine." Now, would you >>>> pay this man to treat your bad cough? Would you consider him a doctor >>>> because he says he is? >>> >>> This sounds like you. You are not a physicist and you keep on telling me and anybody who disagree with you are not a physicists. <sad> >>> >> >> So Seto, it appears you’re in a dead alley. > > Not at all.....if my work is valid some future bright physicists will discover it and do the experiments I proposed in the book and get a Nobel Prize. See number 36 here: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html Your book will gather dust in a warehouse. Rightfully so. > >> >> First let's say you'll only listen to physicists. But then you say that >> physicists won't pay any attention to you because they don't want to >> rock the boat and are avoiding embarrassment. OK, so physicists aren't >> going to interact with you. >> >> So this leaves non-physicists to interact with you. But you won't pay >> any attention to what someone says if they're not a physicist. So you're >> not going to get interactions with non-physicists, either. >> >> So you're not going to get any useful interactions from either >> physicists or non-physicists, by your own account. >> >> And this is in fact what has happened with your book, with nobody paying >> any attention to it and it gathering dust in some archive or copies >> sitting in your closet. >> >> So you are going to be universally ignored. Is that what you set out to do? >> >> -- >> 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 | 2017-06-16 08:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f9164f6d-a01e-42c4-8521-69b8f97d1098@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #422719 |
W dniu piątek, 16 czerwca 2017 15:26:59 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał: > On 6/16/17 8:23 AM, kenseto wrote: > > On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 12:14:29 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 6/15/17 9:21 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, June 14, 2017 at 12:30:31 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> On 6/14/17 9:26 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>>>> On Tuesday, June 13, 2017 at 4:17:01 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>> On 6/13/17 9:17 AM, kenseto wrote: > >>>>>>> On Monday, June 12, 2017 at 6:18:33 AM UTC-4, HGW... wrote: > >>>>>>>> Maybe he died. Maybe he has changed his nickname because he was so > >>>>>>>> ashamed of his theory. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I am tired of the low level of the intelligence that exists in this NG. I published a new book of the universe (http://www.modelmechanics.org/2016ibook.pdf) that includes the following items......no body in this NG bothers to give any intelligent comment: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Seto, isn't it revealing to you that you translate lack of attention > >>>>>> being paid to you as a low level of intelligence? > >>>>> > >>>>> Yes, when the lack of attention is because Model Mechanics disagree with SR/GR. > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> As though, if anyone were at all intelligent, they would pay attention > >>>>>> to you? > >>>>> > >>>>> They should pay attention when Model mechanics provides solutions for all the problems of current theories. > >>>> > >>>> I think it's fascinating that you believe that people should pay > >>>> attention to your ideas because YOU think they are good ideas. You > >>>> honestly cannot think of any other reason why people would ignore you? > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> You're going to die thinking that the whole world is full of idiots > >>>>>> because you were ignored. Does that sound mentally healthy to you? > >>>>> > >>>>> I don’t think that at all. I think that they don’t pay attention to Model Mechanics because of the following reasons: > >>>>> 1. Afraid that Model Mechanics will spread wildly in the internet. > >>>>> 2. Don’t want to rock the boat. > >>>>> 3. Money. > >>>>> 4. Avoid embarrassment. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> You honestly don't think there's another possibility for why you're > >>>> being ignored, Ken? > >>>> > >>>> Could it be because you > >>>> - don't know what the concepts of physics mean > >>>> - haven't read anything about physics > >>>> - can't do 4th grade arithmetic > >>>> - believe that physics should be understandable to the common man, > >>>> regardless of background and training > >>>> ? > >>>> > >>>> Tell me, Ken. Suppose you developed a bad cough and were spitting up > >>>> blood. Then someone you know told you that he could fix you right up. > >>>> You ask him if he's a doctor, and he says "Yes, I'm a doctor, but I > >>>> don't have a license." You ask him if he ever went to medical school, > >>>> and he says he doesn't need to go to medical school to have new ideas > >>>> about medicine. You ask him how he can be a doctor if he doesn't have a > >>>> license. He says, "I've written a book about medicine, which is more > >>>> than what most doctors have done, and my theories about medicine make it > >>>> completely understandable to the common man." You say, "But no doctors > >>>> have bought your book," and he says, "That's because doctors are > >>>> threatened by my revolutionary theories about medicine." Now, would you > >>>> pay this man to treat your bad cough? Would you consider him a doctor > >>>> because he says he is? > >>> > >>> This sounds like you. You are not a physicist and you keep on telling me and anybody who disagree with you are not a physicists. <sad> > >>> > >> > >> So Seto, it appears you’re in a dead alley. > > > > Not at all.....if my work is valid some future bright physicists will discover it and do the experiments I proposed in the book and get a Nobel Prize. > > See number 36 here: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html > > Your book will gather dust in a warehouse. Rightfully so. Though Ken's chances for legacy in science are rather small, they're still bigger than yours, poor idiot.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW..." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-17 15:02 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <oi2d5p$152e$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422718 |
On 16/06/17 23:23, kenseto wrote: > On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 12:14:29 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> >>> This sounds like you. You are not a physicist and you keep on telling me and anybody who disagree with you are not a physicists. <sad> >>> >> >> So Seto, it appears you’re in a dead alley. > > Not at all.....if my work is valid some future bright physicists will discover it and do the experiments I proposed in the book and get a Nobel Prize. Ken you must be laughing your head off listening to a bunch of desperate dingleberries who wouldn't know how to write a birthday card for a 2yo kid, let alone a scientific paper, criticizing you for actually using your head. That's more than any of them have ever done. All they ever do is shout insults and preach the nonsensical gospel of the Einsteinian church. They remind me of the suicide bomber who screams "god is great' before he blows himself up. Can't you just hear them repeating over and over, "Einstein is great", every night before retiring.... >> So you are going to be universally ignored. Is that what you set out to do? So keep it up Ken. Even though your theory is just LET in disguise, it is providing much free entertainment. >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-17 11:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7e6af3ed-4ea2-4cb8-8be6-133085c5e648@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #422767 |
On Saturday, June 17, 2017 at 1:02:52 AM UTC-4, HGW... wrote:
> On 16/06/17 23:23, kenseto wrote:
> > On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 12:14:29 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
> >>>
> >>> This sounds like you. You are not a physicist and you keep on telling me and anybody who disagree with you are not a physicists. <sad>
> >>>
> >>
> >> So Seto, it appears you’re in a dead alley.
> >
> > Not at all.....if my work is valid some future bright physicists will discover it and do the experiments I proposed in the book and get a Nobel Prize.
>
> Ken you must be laughing your head off listening to a bunch of desperate
> dingleberries who wouldn't know how to write a birthday card for a 2yo
> kid, let alone a scientific paper, criticizing you for actually using
> your head.
Yeah, Bodkin is an uneducated desperate dingleberry. Maybe he is being paid by the establishment to defend SR/GR.
>That's more than any of them have ever done. All they ever do
> is shout insults and preach the nonsensical gospel of the Einsteinian
> church. They remind me of the suicide bomber who screams "god is great'
> before he blows himself up.
Maybe one of these day he (Bodkin) will commit suicide.....likeone of those suicide bomber.
>
> Can't you just hear them repeating over and over, "Einstein is great",
> every night before retiring....
>
>
> >> So you are going to be universally ignored. Is that what you set out to do?
>
> So keep it up Ken. Even though your theory is just LET in disguise, it
> is providing much free entertainment.
Model Mechanics is much, much, much more than LET. It has the following features and that’s why it is a candidate for a theory of everything:
_ It offers a realistic origin of the universe.
_ It offers realistic processes for the origin of all visible matters.
_ It explains the cell division and the consciousness processes.
_ It provides a mechanism to unify all the forces of nature.
_ It can be validated experimentally.
_ It gives rise to an Improved Relativity Theory (IRT).
_ It gives rise to a new theory of gravity called Doppler Theory of Gravity
(DTG)
_ It includes Special Theory of Relativity and General Theory of Relativity
as subsets.
_ It provides physical models for all the math of Quantum Mechanics.
_ It postulates a new repulsive fifth force identified as the CRE force.
_ It gives a physical explanation for the charge of a particle.
_ It gives physical explanations all the weird results of all quantum
experiments.
_ It explains the structures of atoms.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW..." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-14 09:21 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ohps2j$dgg$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422453 |
On 14/06/17 00:17, kenseto wrote: > On Monday, June 12, 2017 at 6:18:33 AM UTC-4, HGW... wrote: >> Maybe he died. Maybe he has changed his nickname because he was so >> ashamed of his theory. > > I am tired of the low level of the intelligence that exists in this NG. I published a new book of the universe (http://www.modelmechanics.org/2016ibook.pdf) that includes the following items......no body in this NG bothers to give any intelligent comment: > > _ It offers a realistic origin of the universe. > _ It offers realistic processes for the origin of all visible matters. > _ It explains the cell division and the consciousness processes. > _ It provides a mechanism to unify all the forces of nature. > _ It can be validated experimentally. > _ It gives rise to an Improved Relativity Theory (IRT). > _ It gives rise to a new theory of gravity called Doppler Theory of Gravity (DTG) > _ It includes Special Theory of Relativity and General Theory of Relativity as subsets. > _ It provides physical models for all the math of Quantum Mechanics. > _ It postulates a new repulsive fifth force identified as the CRE force. > _ It gives a physical explanation for the charge of a particle. > _ It gives physical explanations all the weird results of all quantum experiments. > _ It explains the structures of atoms. It is little different from other aether theories. You should have read my book before you even started. http://www.scisite.info/books/bath/ballistic light revisited.html --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-14 07:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <aa0a723b-37de-49ff-b89e-613ae376dd87@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #422493 |
On Tuesday, June 13, 2017 at 7:21:59 PM UTC-4, HGW... wrote: > On 14/06/17 00:17, kenseto wrote: > > On Monday, June 12, 2017 at 6:18:33 AM UTC-4, HGW... wrote: > >> Maybe he died. Maybe he has changed his nickname because he was so > >> ashamed of his theory. > > > > I am tired of the low level of the intelligence that exists in this NG. I published a new book of the universe (http://www.modelmechanics.org/2016ibook.pdf) that includes the following items......no body in this NG bothers to give any intelligent comment: > > > > _ It offers a realistic origin of the universe. > > _ It offers realistic processes for the origin of all visible matters. > > _ It explains the cell division and the consciousness processes. > > _ It provides a mechanism to unify all the forces of nature. > > _ It can be validated experimentally. > > _ It gives rise to an Improved Relativity Theory (IRT). > > _ It gives rise to a new theory of gravity called Doppler Theory of Gravity (DTG) > > _ It includes Special Theory of Relativity and General Theory of Relativity as subsets. > > _ It provides physical models for all the math of Quantum Mechanics. > > _ It postulates a new repulsive fifth force identified as the CRE force. > > _ It gives a physical explanation for the charge of a particle. > > _ It gives physical explanations all the weird results of all quantum experiments. > > _ It explains the structures of atoms. > > It is little different from other aether theories. > > You should have read my book before you even started. > http://www.scisite.info/books/bath/ballistic light revisited.html The link is not valid......404 error.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-15 06:34 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ohs6ha$4ki$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422493 |
On 14/06/17 09:21, HGW... wrote: > On 14/06/17 00:17, kenseto wrote: >> On Monday, June 12, 2017 at 6:18:33 AM UTC-4, HGW... wrote: >> force. >> _ It gives a physical explanation for the charge of a particle. >> _ It gives physical explanations all the weird results of all >> quantum experiments. >> _ It explains the structures of atoms. > > It is little different from other aether theories. > > You should have read my book before you even started. > http://www.scisite.info/books/bath/ballistic light revisited.html Spaces were the problem, try this: http://www.scisite.info/books/BaTh/Bath.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-14 10:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3d67e157-d942-4b3e-b51f-264a71275fdf@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #422453 |
On Tuesday, June 13, 2017 at 4:17:16 PM UTC+2, kenseto wrote: > On Monday, June 12, 2017 at 6:18:33 AM UTC-4, HGW... wrote: > > Maybe he died. Maybe he has changed his nickname because he was so > > ashamed of his theory. > > I am tired of the low level of the intelligence that exists in this NG. Is there a mirror in your house? > I published a new book of the universe Surely you jest. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gehan.ameresekere@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-13 23:47 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <55061428-a78f-43d1-9cd9-1ad79f0acb2f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #422453 |
On Tuesday, June 13, 2017 at 7:47:16 PM UTC+5:30, kenseto wrote: > On Monday, June 12, 2017 at 6:18:33 AM UTC-4, HGW... wrote: > > Maybe he died. Maybe he has changed his nickname because he was so > > ashamed of his theory. > > I am tired of the low level of the intelligence that exists in this NG. I published a new book of the universe (http://www.modelmechanics.org/2016ibook.pdf) that includes the following items......no body in this NG bothers to give any intelligent comment: > > _ It offers a realistic origin of the universe. > _ It offers realistic processes for the origin of all visible matters. > _ It explains the cell division and the consciousness processes. > _ It provides a mechanism to unify all the forces of nature. > _ It can be validated experimentally. > _ It gives rise to an Improved Relativity Theory (IRT). > _ It gives rise to a new theory of gravity called Doppler Theory of Gravity (DTG) > _ It includes Special Theory of Relativity and General Theory of Relativity as subsets. > _ It provides physical models for all the math of Quantum Mechanics. > _ It postulates a new repulsive fifth force identified as the CRE force. > _ It gives a physical explanation for the charge of a particle. > _ It gives physical explanations all the weird results of all quantum experiments. > _ It explains the structures of atoms. Hi Ken Reading your book now. Have you got an opinion from scientists on the book?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-15 08:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <340d8bfb-c7dc-45f7-a28f-44efc2b5b5a0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #424814 |
On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 2:47:39 AM UTC-4, gehan.am...@gmail.com wrote: > On Tuesday, June 13, 2017 at 7:47:16 PM UTC+5:30, kenseto wrote: > > On Monday, June 12, 2017 at 6:18:33 AM UTC-4, HGW... wrote: > > > Maybe he died. Maybe he has changed his nickname because he was so > > > ashamed of his theory. > > > > I am tired of the low level of the intelligence that exists in this NG. I published a new book of the universe (http://www.modelmechanics.org/2016ibook.pdf) that includes the following items......no body in this NG bothers to give any intelligent comment: > > > > _ It offers a realistic origin of the universe. > > _ It offers realistic processes for the origin of all visible matters. > > _ It explains the cell division and the consciousness processes. > > _ It provides a mechanism to unify all the forces of nature. > > _ It can be validated experimentally. > > _ It gives rise to an Improved Relativity Theory (IRT). > > _ It gives rise to a new theory of gravity called Doppler Theory of Gravity (DTG) > > _ It includes Special Theory of Relativity and General Theory of Relativity as subsets. > > _ It provides physical models for all the math of Quantum Mechanics. > > _ It postulates a new repulsive fifth force identified as the CRE force. > > _ It gives a physical explanation for the charge of a particle. > > _ It gives physical explanations all the weird results of all quantum experiments. > > _ It explains the structures of atoms. > > Hi Ken > > Reading your book now. Have you got an opinion from scientists on the book? I was granted the copyright for my book and the copyright reviewer commented that my book contains original ideas on physics and cosmology.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web