Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #427580 > unrolled thread

What Do Dingleberries Actually Mean When They Claim Moving Clocks Run Slow?

Started by	"HGW..." <hgw@....>
First post	2017-08-07 18:12 +1000
Last post	2017-08-20 15:35 -0700
Articles	20 on this page of 237 — 18 participants

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

Page 3 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 12 Next page →

#429302

From	Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date	2017-08-18 20:12 +0000
Message-ID	<on7hnr$19pq$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#429246

<mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 14:53:49 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> 
>> You're standing on the median of a north-south highway. Cars headed 
>> north and cars headed south have equal speeds in this reference frame.
>> Now get in one of the cars headed north. Now the speed of the cars 
>> headed south is much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
> 
> And your own car doesn't move at all. Gurus said!
> Gurus can't be wrong! It's speedometer obviously lies.
> 

Well if the speedometer reads 0 when it's parked in the driveway, and I
know the driveway is moving at 500mph as the earth rotates under the sun,
then yes, either the speedometer is lying or I have to actually recognize
that the speedometer is only telling me how fast the wheels on the car are
turning. 

But I suppose some Polish idiot is going to tell me that those with common
sense believe that speedometers tell the true speed of the car. 

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

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

#429303

From	Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date	2017-08-18 15:15 -0500
Message-ID	<on7htt$19si$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#429302

On 8/18/17 3:12 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 14:53:49 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>
>>> You're standing on the median of a north-south highway. Cars headed
>>> north and cars headed south have equal speeds in this reference frame.
>>> Now get in one of the cars headed north. Now the speed of the cars
>>> headed south is much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
>>
>> And your own car doesn't move at all. Gurus said!
>> Gurus can't be wrong! It's speedometer obviously lies.
>>
> 
> Well if the speedometer reads 0 when it's parked in the driveway, and I
> know the driveway is moving at 500mph as the earth rotates under the sun,
> then yes, either the speedometer is lying or I have to actually recognize
> that the speedometer is only telling me how fast the wheels on the car are
> turning.
> 
> But I suppose some Polish idiot is going to tell me that those with common
> sense believe that speedometers tell the true speed of the car.
> 

Or maybe some Polish idiot is going to tell me that the whole idea of 
reference frames and motions with respect to those frames (an idea 
raised by Galileo) is nonsense, and that the only common-sense reference 
frame that is reliable is the frame tied to the Earth's surface. Because 
THAT makes a whole bunch of physical sense doesn't it?

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

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

#429304

From	Elma Sneijders <elsn@uejdui.fe>
Date	2017-08-18 20:27 +0000
Message-ID	<on7ijc$17gu$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#429303

Odd Bodkin wrote:

> Or maybe some Polish idiot is going to tell me that the whole idea of
> reference frames and motions with respect to those frames (an idea
> raised by Galileo) is nonsense, and that the only common-sense reference
> frame that is reliable is the frame tied to the Earth's surface. Because
> THAT makes a whole bunch of physical sense doesn't it?

You are a racist, are depressed and overeating.

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

#429370

From	mlwozniak@wp.pl
Date	2017-08-18 23:46 -0700
Message-ID	<0e1c506d-7695-4df7-878e-d3a01776475f@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#429302

W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 22:12:48 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> > W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 14:53:49 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> > 
> >> You're standing on the median of a north-south highway. Cars headed 
> >> north and cars headed south have equal speeds in this reference frame.
> >> Now get in one of the cars headed north. Now the speed of the cars 
> >> headed south is much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
> > 
> > And your own car doesn't move at all. Gurus said!
> > Gurus can't be wrong! It's speedometer obviously lies.
> > 
> 
> Well if the speedometer reads 0 when it's parked in the driveway, and I
> know the driveway is moving at 500mph as the earth rotates under the sun,

But, of course, sitting in a car moving north you
would never know you're sitting in a car moving
north.

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

#429382

From	Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date	2017-08-19 11:13 +0000
Message-ID	<on96hk$1hdv$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#429370

<mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 22:12:48 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 14:53:49 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>> 
>>>> You're standing on the median of a north-south highway. Cars headed 
>>>> north and cars headed south have equal speeds in this reference frame.
>>>> Now get in one of the cars headed north. Now the speed of the cars 
>>>> headed south is much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
>>> 
>>> And your own car doesn't move at all. Gurus said!
>>> Gurus can't be wrong! It's speedometer obviously lies.
>>> 
>> 
>> Well if the speedometer reads 0 when it's parked in the driveway, and I
>> know the driveway is moving at 500mph as the earth rotates under the sun,
> 
> But, of course, sitting in a car moving north you
> would never know you're sitting in a car moving
> north.
> 

I would know that the car is moving relative to the earth's surface, which
common sense tells you is also moving, and about which the speedometer is
telling you nothing. Remind me again why common sense would rightfully tell
you that the only sensible reference frame is the one tied to the earth's
surface. 

Have your common sense tell me something sensible. So far it hasn't. 

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

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

#429436

From	mlwozniak@wp.pl
Date	2017-08-19 10:40 -0700
Message-ID	<59380036-fe7b-43c6-b8e6-72d94e89a0c4@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#429382

W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 13:13:58 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> > W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 22:12:48 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 14:53:49 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>> 
> >>>> You're standing on the median of a north-south highway. Cars headed 
> >>>> north and cars headed south have equal speeds in this reference frame.
> >>>> Now get in one of the cars headed north. Now the speed of the cars 
> >>>> headed south is much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
> >>> 
> >>> And your own car doesn't move at all. Gurus said!
> >>> Gurus can't be wrong! It's speedometer obviously lies.
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> Well if the speedometer reads 0 when it's parked in the driveway, and I
> >> know the driveway is moving at 500mph as the earth rotates under the sun,
> > 
> > But, of course, sitting in a car moving north you
> > would never know you're sitting in a car moving
> > north.
> > 
> 
> I would know that the car is moving relative to the earth's surface

And you will know that speed of the cars headed south is NOT
much different than the speed of the cars headed north.

, which
> common sense tells you is also moving, and about which the speedometer is
> telling you nothing. Remind me again why common sense would rightfully tell
> you that the only sensible reference frame is the one tied to the earth's
> surface. 

It is not the only, poor idiot. there are 3 or 4 others.
Still, your gurus observercentrical approach is obviously
the most primitive possible and totally useless.

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

#429452

From	Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date	2017-08-19 19:19 +0000
Message-ID	<ona30b$vfm$2@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#429436

<mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 13:13:58 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 22:12:48 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 14:53:49 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> You're standing on the median of a north-south highway. Cars headed 
>>>>>> north and cars headed south have equal speeds in this reference frame.
>>>>>> Now get in one of the cars headed north. Now the speed of the cars 
>>>>>> headed south is much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
>>>>> 
>>>>> And your own car doesn't move at all. Gurus said!
>>>>> Gurus can't be wrong! It's speedometer obviously lies.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Well if the speedometer reads 0 when it's parked in the driveway, and I
>>>> know the driveway is moving at 500mph as the earth rotates under the sun,
>>> 
>>> But, of course, sitting in a car moving north you
>>> would never know you're sitting in a car moving
>>> north.
>>> 
>> 
>> I would know that the car is moving relative to the earth's surface
> 
> And you will know that speed of the cars headed south is NOT
> much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
> 
> , which
>> common sense tells you is also moving, and about which the speedometer is
>> telling you nothing. Remind me again why common sense would rightfully tell
>> you that the only sensible reference frame is the one tied to the earth's
>> surface. 
> 
> It is not the only, poor idiot. there are 3 or 4 others.
> Still, your gurus observercentrical approach is obviously
> the most primitive possible and totally useless.
> 
> 

And all of these 3 or 4 are earth-centric, right? And why are those the
most physically sensible frames?

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

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

#429457

From	mlwozniak@wp.pl
Date	2017-08-19 12:43 -0700
Message-ID	<32fb2a62-724c-4431-9c62-e29d446f0650@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#429452

W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 21:19:42 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> > W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 13:13:58 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 22:12:48 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 14:53:49 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>> You're standing on the median of a north-south highway. Cars headed 
> >>>>>> north and cars headed south have equal speeds in this reference frame.
> >>>>>> Now get in one of the cars headed north. Now the speed of the cars 
> >>>>>> headed south is much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> And your own car doesn't move at all. Gurus said!
> >>>>> Gurus can't be wrong! It's speedometer obviously lies.
> >>>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Well if the speedometer reads 0 when it's parked in the driveway, and I
> >>>> know the driveway is moving at 500mph as the earth rotates under the sun,
> >>> 
> >>> But, of course, sitting in a car moving north you
> >>> would never know you're sitting in a car moving
> >>> north.
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> I would know that the car is moving relative to the earth's surface
> > 
> > And you will know that speed of the cars headed south is NOT
> > much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
> > 
> > , which
> >> common sense tells you is also moving, and about which the speedometer is
> >> telling you nothing. Remind me again why common sense would rightfully tell
> >> you that the only sensible reference frame is the one tied to the earth's
> >> surface. 
> > 
> > It is not the only, poor idiot. there are 3 or 4 others.
> > Still, your gurus observercentrical approach is obviously
> > the most primitive possible and totally useless.
> > 
> > 
> 
> And all of these 3 or 4 are earth-centric, right?

No, poor idiot, not all of them. But most
important of them.

> And why are those the
> most physically sensible frames?

You surely know how important observers are 
for your moronic physics, don't you? Both in your
precious QM and in your precious relativity.
And it happens that in real world all observers
we know about are living on Earth. What's more
important, the culture that is training them to
observe is also living on Earth.


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

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

#429478

From	Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date	2017-08-19 21:06 +0000
Message-ID	<ona99c$19d0$2@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#429457

<mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 21:19:42 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 13:13:58 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 22:12:48 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>>>>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 14:53:49 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> You're standing on the median of a north-south highway. Cars headed 
>>>>>>>> north and cars headed south have equal speeds in this reference frame.
>>>>>>>> Now get in one of the cars headed north. Now the speed of the cars 
>>>>>>>> headed south is much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> And your own car doesn't move at all. Gurus said!
>>>>>>> Gurus can't be wrong! It's speedometer obviously lies.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Well if the speedometer reads 0 when it's parked in the driveway, and I
>>>>>> know the driveway is moving at 500mph as the earth rotates under the sun,
>>>>> 
>>>>> But, of course, sitting in a car moving north you
>>>>> would never know you're sitting in a car moving
>>>>> north.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I would know that the car is moving relative to the earth's surface
>>> 
>>> And you will know that speed of the cars headed south is NOT
>>> much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
>>> 
>>> , which
>>>> common sense tells you is also moving, and about which the speedometer is
>>>> telling you nothing. Remind me again why common sense would rightfully tell
>>>> you that the only sensible reference frame is the one tied to the earth's
>>>> surface. 
>>> 
>>> It is not the only, poor idiot. there are 3 or 4 others.
>>> Still, your gurus observercentrical approach is obviously
>>> the most primitive possible and totally useless.
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> And all of these 3 or 4 are earth-centric, right?
> 
> No, poor idiot, not all of them. But most
> important of them.

Based on what criteria of importance?

> 
>> And why are those the
>> most physically sensible frames?
> 
> You surely know how important observers are 
> for your moronic physics, don't you? Both in your
> precious QM and in your precious relativity.
> And it happens that in real world all observers
> we know about are living on Earth. What's more
> important, the culture that is training them to
> observe is also living on Earth.

And do the laws of physics pertain everywhere or just in the area where
physicists live? 

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



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

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

#429487

From	mlwozniak@wp.pl
Date	2017-08-19 14:39 -0700
Message-ID	<e7384d4c-9d18-482b-9e49-5fdc13a15238@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#429478

W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 23:06:56 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> > W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 21:19:42 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 13:13:58 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 22:12:48 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>>>>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 14:53:49 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> You're standing on the median of a north-south highway. Cars headed 
> >>>>>>>> north and cars headed south have equal speeds in this reference frame.
> >>>>>>>> Now get in one of the cars headed north. Now the speed of the cars 
> >>>>>>>> headed south is much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> And your own car doesn't move at all. Gurus said!
> >>>>>>> Gurus can't be wrong! It's speedometer obviously lies.
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Well if the speedometer reads 0 when it's parked in the driveway, and I
> >>>>>> know the driveway is moving at 500mph as the earth rotates under the sun,
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> But, of course, sitting in a car moving north you
> >>>>> would never know you're sitting in a car moving
> >>>>> north.
> >>>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> I would know that the car is moving relative to the earth's surface
> >>> 
> >>> And you will know that speed of the cars headed south is NOT
> >>> much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
> >>> 
> >>> , which
> >>>> common sense tells you is also moving, and about which the speedometer is
> >>>> telling you nothing. Remind me again why common sense would rightfully tell
> >>>> you that the only sensible reference frame is the one tied to the earth's
> >>>> surface. 
> >>> 
> >>> It is not the only, poor idiot. there are 3 or 4 others.
> >>> Still, your gurus observercentrical approach is obviously
> >>> the most primitive possible and totally useless.
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> And all of these 3 or 4 are earth-centric, right?
> > 
> > No, poor idiot, not all of them. But most
> > important of them.
> 
> Based on what criteria of importance?

:)
Common sense criteria. Do you know any other 
criteria of importance, poor idiot?

> > You surely know how important observers are 
> > for your moronic physics, don't you? Both in your
> > precious QM and in your precious relativity.
> > And it happens that in real world all observers
> > we know about are living on Earth. What's more
> > important, the culture that is training them to
> > observe is also living on Earth.
> 
> And do the laws of physics pertain everywhere or just in the area where
> physicists live? 

Laws of physics, poor idiot, pertain the brains
of physicists and other brains taught physics.
They are phrases constructed of words, you know.
As for now, a human's brain is the only device
able to interprete such kind of information.
Nothing you could possibly understand, however.

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

#429495

From	Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date	2017-08-19 22:47 +0000
Message-ID	<onaf6o$1j69$3@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#429487

<mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 23:06:56 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 21:19:42 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>>>> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 13:13:58 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>>>>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 22:12:48 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>>>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 14:53:49 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> You're standing on the median of a north-south highway. Cars headed 
>>>>>>>>>> north and cars headed south have equal speeds in this reference frame.
>>>>>>>>>> Now get in one of the cars headed north. Now the speed of the cars 
>>>>>>>>>> headed south is much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> And your own car doesn't move at all. Gurus said!
>>>>>>>>> Gurus can't be wrong! It's speedometer obviously lies.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Well if the speedometer reads 0 when it's parked in the driveway, and I
>>>>>>>> know the driveway is moving at 500mph as the earth rotates under the sun,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> But, of course, sitting in a car moving north you
>>>>>>> would never know you're sitting in a car moving
>>>>>>> north.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I would know that the car is moving relative to the earth's surface
>>>>> 
>>>>> And you will know that speed of the cars headed south is NOT
>>>>> much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
>>>>> 
>>>>> , which
>>>>>> common sense tells you is also moving, and about which the speedometer is
>>>>>> telling you nothing. Remind me again why common sense would rightfully tell
>>>>>> you that the only sensible reference frame is the one tied to the earth's
>>>>>> surface. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> It is not the only, poor idiot. there are 3 or 4 others.
>>>>> Still, your gurus observercentrical approach is obviously
>>>>> the most primitive possible and totally useless.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> And all of these 3 or 4 are earth-centric, right?
>>> 
>>> No, poor idiot, not all of them. But most
>>> important of them.
>> 
>> Based on what criteria of importance?
> 
> :)
> Common sense criteria. Do you know any other 
> criteria of importance, poor idiot?

What? In other words, because it FEELS right? What's the rationale that
common sense provides for this claim? Or do you not even ask common sense
to provide the rationale?

> 
>>> You surely know how important observers are 
>>> for your moronic physics, don't you? Both in your
>>> precious QM and in your precious relativity.
>>> And it happens that in real world all observers
>>> we know about are living on Earth. What's more
>>> important, the culture that is training them to
>>> observe is also living on Earth.
>> 
>> And do the laws of physics pertain everywhere or just in the area where
>> physicists live? 
> 
> Laws of physics, poor idiot, pertain the brains
> of physicists and other brains taught physics.

Really? So they didn't apply before they were discovered? Energy wasn't
conserved before someone conceived of conservation of momentum? So laws of
physics can't explain anything before human civilization because no human
brain held them? Really???

> They are phrases constructed of words, you know.
> As for now, a human's brain is the only device
> able to interprete such kind of information.
> Nothing you could possibly understand, however.
> 
> 
> 



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

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

#429503

From	mlwozniak@wp.pl
Date	2017-08-20 00:32 -0700
Message-ID	<0bf9bb54-5e5d-4396-b134-ff10f7680b8c@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#429495

W dniu niedziela, 20 sierpnia 2017 00:47:56 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> > W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 23:06:56 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 21:19:42 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>>>> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 13:13:58 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>>>>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 22:12:48 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>>>>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 14:53:49 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>> You're standing on the median of a north-south highway. Cars headed 
> >>>>>>>>>> north and cars headed south have equal speeds in this reference frame.
> >>>>>>>>>> Now get in one of the cars headed north. Now the speed of the cars 
> >>>>>>>>>> headed south is much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> And your own car doesn't move at all. Gurus said!
> >>>>>>>>> Gurus can't be wrong! It's speedometer obviously lies.
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> Well if the speedometer reads 0 when it's parked in the driveway, and I
> >>>>>>>> know the driveway is moving at 500mph as the earth rotates under the sun,
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> But, of course, sitting in a car moving north you
> >>>>>>> would never know you're sitting in a car moving
> >>>>>>> north.
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> I would know that the car is moving relative to the earth's surface
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> And you will know that speed of the cars headed south is NOT
> >>>>> much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> , which
> >>>>>> common sense tells you is also moving, and about which the speedometer is
> >>>>>> telling you nothing. Remind me again why common sense would rightfully tell
> >>>>>> you that the only sensible reference frame is the one tied to the earth's
> >>>>>> surface. 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> It is not the only, poor idiot. there are 3 or 4 others.
> >>>>> Still, your gurus observercentrical approach is obviously
> >>>>> the most primitive possible and totally useless.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> And all of these 3 or 4 are earth-centric, right?
> >>> 
> >>> No, poor idiot, not all of them. But most
> >>> important of them.
> >> 
> >> Based on what criteria of importance?
> > 
> > :)
> > Common sense criteria. Do you know any other 
> > criteria of importance, poor idiot?
> 
> What? In other words, because it FEELS right? 

Yeah, I know. According to you I should follow
your moronic gurus feelings, instead my own.
Just like you do.
Well, both approaches have advantages and
disadvantages. 


> What's the rationale that
> common sense provides for this claim? 

Odd, poor idiot.There is no way to calculate importance.
There is no way to measure it. So, the choice is:
feelings or nothing. Feelings can fail. Nothing 
will fail for sure.  Have you heard of game theory?
Is it "rationale" enough for you?


> 
> > 
> >>> You surely know how important observers are 
> >>> for your moronic physics, don't you? Both in your
> >>> precious QM and in your precious relativity.
> >>> And it happens that in real world all observers
> >>> we know about are living on Earth. What's more
> >>> important, the culture that is training them to
> >>> observe is also living on Earth.
> >> 
> >> And do the laws of physics pertain everywhere or just in the area where
> >> physicists live? 
> > 
> > Laws of physics, poor idiot, pertain the brains
> > of physicists and other brains taught physics.
> 
> Really? So they didn't apply before they were discovered? 

Odd, poor idiot. "fifrac=faflic*furfus". Does it apply?
1000 years ago "E=mc^2" was samely meaningless. in
1000 years  "fifrac=faflic*furfus" may become a law
of physics. Why not? So, does it apply?
Laws of physics are NOT discovered. They are constructed.


> Energy wasn't
> conserved before someone conceived of conservation of momentum? So laws of
> physics can't explain anything before human civilization because no human
> brain held them? Really???

Of course they can explain it NOW. But 1000 years
ago "E=mc^2" cold explain nothing to anyone.

To take it generally:
"[something] at time t" is true now
doesn't imply
"something" was true at time t.

Truth is a bit complicated construct, however,
and you're just a poor woodworker following some
crazy gurus.

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

#429510

From	Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date	2017-08-20 12:50 +0000
Message-ID	<onc0ja$1j72$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#429503

<mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> W dniu niedziela, 20 sierpnia 2017 00:47:56 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 23:06:56 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>>>> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 21:19:42 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>>>>>> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 13:13:58 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>>>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 22:12:48 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>>>>>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 14:53:49 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> You're standing on the median of a north-south highway. Cars headed 
>>>>>>>>>>>> north and cars headed south have equal speeds in this reference frame.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Now get in one of the cars headed north. Now the speed of the cars 
>>>>>>>>>>>> headed south is much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> And your own car doesn't move at all. Gurus said!
>>>>>>>>>>> Gurus can't be wrong! It's speedometer obviously lies.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Well if the speedometer reads 0 when it's parked in the driveway, and I
>>>>>>>>>> know the driveway is moving at 500mph as the earth rotates under the sun,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> But, of course, sitting in a car moving north you
>>>>>>>>> would never know you're sitting in a car moving
>>>>>>>>> north.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I would know that the car is moving relative to the earth's surface
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> And you will know that speed of the cars headed south is NOT
>>>>>>> much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> , which
>>>>>>>> common sense tells you is also moving, and about which the speedometer is
>>>>>>>> telling you nothing. Remind me again why common sense would rightfully tell
>>>>>>>> you that the only sensible reference frame is the one tied to the earth's
>>>>>>>> surface. 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> It is not the only, poor idiot. there are 3 or 4 others.
>>>>>>> Still, your gurus observercentrical approach is obviously
>>>>>>> the most primitive possible and totally useless.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> And all of these 3 or 4 are earth-centric, right?
>>>>> 
>>>>> No, poor idiot, not all of them. But most
>>>>> important of them.
>>>> 
>>>> Based on what criteria of importance?
>>> 
>>> :)
>>> Common sense criteria. Do you know any other 
>>> criteria of importance, poor idiot?
>> 
>> What? In other words, because it FEELS right? 
> 
> Yeah, I know. According to you I should follow
> your moronic gurus feelings, instead my own.
> Just like you do.
> Well, both approaches have advantages and
> disadvantages. 
> 
> 
>> What's the rationale that
>> common sense provides for this claim? 
> 
> Odd, poor idiot.There is no way to calculate importance.
> There is no way to measure it. So, the choice is:
> feelings or nothing. Feelings can fail. Nothing 
> will fail for sure.  Have you heard of game theory?
> Is it "rationale" enough for you?
> 
> 
>> 
>>> 
>>>>> You surely know how important observers are 
>>>>> for your moronic physics, don't you? Both in your
>>>>> precious QM and in your precious relativity.
>>>>> And it happens that in real world all observers
>>>>> we know about are living on Earth. What's more
>>>>> important, the culture that is training them to
>>>>> observe is also living on Earth.
>>>> 
>>>> And do the laws of physics pertain everywhere or just in the area where
>>>> physicists live? 
>>> 
>>> Laws of physics, poor idiot, pertain the brains
>>> of physicists and other brains taught physics.
>> 
>> Really? So they didn't apply before they were discovered? 
> 
> Odd, poor idiot. "fifrac=faflic*furfus". Does it apply?
> 1000 years ago "E=mc^2" was samely meaningless. in
> 1000 years  "fifrac=faflic*furfus" may become a law
> of physics. Why not? So, does it apply?
> Laws of physics are NOT discovered. They are constructed.
> 
> 
>> Energy wasn't
>> conserved before someone conceived of conservation of momentum? So laws of
>> physics can't explain anything before human civilization because no human
>> brain held them? Really???
> 
> Of course they can explain it NOW. But 1000 years
> ago "E=mc^2" cold explain nothing to anyone.
> 
> To take it generally:
> "[something] at time t" is true now
> doesn't imply
> "something" was true at time t.
> 
> Truth is a bit complicated construct, however,
> and you're just a poor woodworker following some
> crazy gurus.
> 

Every week I realize even more how far apart our world views are.

You, with your view of science not being about matching theoretical
predictions with experiment.
You, who thinks the gauges of truth are feelings or nothing.
You, who thinks the laws of physics did not operate or even exist before
humans were around.

Wow. Just wow.

And you're here why?


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

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

#429511

From	mlwozniak@wp.pl
Date	2017-08-20 06:17 -0700
Message-ID	<fedc5dc7-f73e-4f71-a7cf-5492319cc5aa@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#429510

W dniu niedziela, 20 sierpnia 2017 14:50:55 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> > W dniu niedziela, 20 sierpnia 2017 00:47:56 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 23:06:56 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>>>> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 21:19:42 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>>>>>> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 13:13:58 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>>>>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 22:12:48 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>>>>>>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 14:53:49 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> You're standing on the median of a north-south highway. Cars headed 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> north and cars headed south have equal speeds in this reference frame.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Now get in one of the cars headed north. Now the speed of the cars 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> headed south is much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> And your own car doesn't move at all. Gurus said!
> >>>>>>>>>>> Gurus can't be wrong! It's speedometer obviously lies.
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Well if the speedometer reads 0 when it's parked in the driveway, and I
> >>>>>>>>>> know the driveway is moving at 500mph as the earth rotates under the sun,
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> But, of course, sitting in a car moving north you
> >>>>>>>>> would never know you're sitting in a car moving
> >>>>>>>>> north.
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> I would know that the car is moving relative to the earth's surface
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> And you will know that speed of the cars headed south is NOT
> >>>>>>> much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> , which
> >>>>>>>> common sense tells you is also moving, and about which the speedometer is
> >>>>>>>> telling you nothing. Remind me again why common sense would rightfully tell
> >>>>>>>> you that the only sensible reference frame is the one tied to the earth's
> >>>>>>>> surface. 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> It is not the only, poor idiot. there are 3 or 4 others.
> >>>>>>> Still, your gurus observercentrical approach is obviously
> >>>>>>> the most primitive possible and totally useless.
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> And all of these 3 or 4 are earth-centric, right?
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> No, poor idiot, not all of them. But most
> >>>>> important of them.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Based on what criteria of importance?
> >>> 
> >>> :)
> >>> Common sense criteria. Do you know any other 
> >>> criteria of importance, poor idiot?
> >> 
> >> What? In other words, because it FEELS right? 
> > 
> > Yeah, I know. According to you I should follow
> > your moronic gurus feelings, instead my own.
> > Just like you do.
> > Well, both approaches have advantages and
> > disadvantages. 
> > 
> > 
> >> What's the rationale that
> >> common sense provides for this claim? 
> > 
> > Odd, poor idiot.There is no way to calculate importance.
> > There is no way to measure it. So, the choice is:
> > feelings or nothing. Feelings can fail. Nothing 
> > will fail for sure.  Have you heard of game theory?
> > Is it "rationale" enough for you?
> > 
> > 
> >> 
> >>> 
> >>>>> You surely know how important observers are 
> >>>>> for your moronic physics, don't you? Both in your
> >>>>> precious QM and in your precious relativity.
> >>>>> And it happens that in real world all observers
> >>>>> we know about are living on Earth. What's more
> >>>>> important, the culture that is training them to
> >>>>> observe is also living on Earth.
> >>>> 
> >>>> And do the laws of physics pertain everywhere or just in the area where
> >>>> physicists live? 
> >>> 
> >>> Laws of physics, poor idiot, pertain the brains
> >>> of physicists and other brains taught physics.
> >> 
> >> Really? So they didn't apply before they were discovered? 
> > 
> > Odd, poor idiot. "fifrac=faflic*furfus". Does it apply?
> > 1000 years ago "E=mc^2" was samely meaningless. in
> > 1000 years  "fifrac=faflic*furfus" may become a law
> > of physics. Why not? So, does it apply?
> > Laws of physics are NOT discovered. They are constructed.
> > 
> > 
> >> Energy wasn't
> >> conserved before someone conceived of conservation of momentum? So laws of
> >> physics can't explain anything before human civilization because no human
> >> brain held them? Really???
> > 
> > Of course they can explain it NOW. But 1000 years
> > ago "E=mc^2" cold explain nothing to anyone.
> > 
> > To take it generally:
> > "[something] at time t" is true now
> > doesn't imply
> > "something" was true at time t.
> > 
> > Truth is a bit complicated construct, however,
> > and you're just a poor woodworker following some
> > crazy gurus.
> > 
> 
> Every week I realize even more how far apart our world views are.
> 
> You, with your view of science not being about matching theoretical
> predictions with experiment.
> You, who thinks the gauges of truth are feelings or nothing.

Science is making information. This information, when
loaded into brains, give them some new abilities. Science
is doing the same thing I do - some object-oriented
software.

> You, who thinks the laws of physics did not operate or even exist before
> humans were around.

Some smarter ones of your gurus have already noticed the
last one too.
 
> Wow. Just wow.
> 
> And you're here why?

Why not?

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

#429513

From	kenseto <setoken@att.net>
Date	2017-08-20 06:49 -0700
Message-ID	<5e37c502-9e16-4ff7-bb6c-48b5806dc757@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#429510

On Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 8:50:55 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> > W dniu niedziela, 20 sierpnia 2017 00:47:56 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 23:06:56 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>>>> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 21:19:42 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>>>>>> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 13:13:58 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>>>>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 22:12:48 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>>>>>>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 14:53:49 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> You're standing on the median of a north-south highway. Cars headed 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> north and cars headed south have equal speeds in this reference frame.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Now get in one of the cars headed north. Now the speed of the cars 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> headed south is much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> And your own car doesn't move at all. Gurus said!
> >>>>>>>>>>> Gurus can't be wrong! It's speedometer obviously lies.
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Well if the speedometer reads 0 when it's parked in the driveway, and I
> >>>>>>>>>> know the driveway is moving at 500mph as the earth rotates under the sun,
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> But, of course, sitting in a car moving north you
> >>>>>>>>> would never know you're sitting in a car moving
> >>>>>>>>> north.
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> I would know that the car is moving relative to the earth's surface
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> And you will know that speed of the cars headed south is NOT
> >>>>>>> much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> , which
> >>>>>>>> common sense tells you is also moving, and about which the speedometer is
> >>>>>>>> telling you nothing. Remind me again why common sense would rightfully tell
> >>>>>>>> you that the only sensible reference frame is the one tied to the earth's
> >>>>>>>> surface. 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> It is not the only, poor idiot. there are 3 or 4 others.
> >>>>>>> Still, your gurus observercentrical approach is obviously
> >>>>>>> the most primitive possible and totally useless.
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> And all of these 3 or 4 are earth-centric, right?
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> No, poor idiot, not all of them. But most
> >>>>> important of them.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Based on what criteria of importance?
> >>> 
> >>> :)
> >>> Common sense criteria. Do you know any other 
> >>> criteria of importance, poor idiot?
> >> 
> >> What? In other words, because it FEELS right? 
> > 
> > Yeah, I know. According to you I should follow
> > your moronic gurus feelings, instead my own.
> > Just like you do.
> > Well, both approaches have advantages and
> > disadvantages. 
> > 
> > 
> >> What's the rationale that
> >> common sense provides for this claim? 
> > 
> > Odd, poor idiot.There is no way to calculate importance.
> > There is no way to measure it. So, the choice is:
> > feelings or nothing. Feelings can fail. Nothing 
> > will fail for sure.  Have you heard of game theory?
> > Is it "rationale" enough for you?
> > 
> > 
> >> 
> >>> 
> >>>>> You surely know how important observers are 
> >>>>> for your moronic physics, don't you? Both in your
> >>>>> precious QM and in your precious relativity.
> >>>>> And it happens that in real world all observers
> >>>>> we know about are living on Earth. What's more
> >>>>> important, the culture that is training them to
> >>>>> observe is also living on Earth.
> >>>> 
> >>>> And do the laws of physics pertain everywhere or just in the area where
> >>>> physicists live? 
> >>> 
> >>> Laws of physics, poor idiot, pertain the brains
> >>> of physicists and other brains taught physics.
> >> 
> >> Really? So they didn't apply before they were discovered? 
> > 
> > Odd, poor idiot. "fifrac=faflic*furfus". Does it apply?
> > 1000 years ago "E=mc^2" was samely meaningless. in
> > 1000 years  "fifrac=faflic*furfus" may become a law
> > of physics. Why not? So, does it apply?
> > Laws of physics are NOT discovered. They are constructed.
> > 
> > 
> >> Energy wasn't
> >> conserved before someone conceived of conservation of momentum? So laws of
> >> physics can't explain anything before human civilization because no human
> >> brain held them? Really???
> > 
> > Of course they can explain it NOW. But 1000 years
> > ago "E=mc^2" cold explain nothing to anyone.
> > 
> > To take it generally:
> > "[something] at time t" is true now
> > doesn't imply
> > "something" was true at time t.
> > 
> > Truth is a bit complicated construct, however,
> > and you're just a poor woodworker following some
> > crazy gurus.
> > 
> 
> Every week I realize even more how far apart our world views are.

That doesn’t mean that your world view is more solid. 
> 
> You, with your view of science not being about matching theoretical
> predictions with experiment.

Sure his world view is also matching theoretical predictions with experiment. For example: SR copied LET math to give the exact same predictions that are confirmed by experiments. This means that the same math can have different explanations (different world view).
The SR explanation is based on the two postulates that give rise to all sorts of paradoxes.....the aether explanations have no paradox. Therefore the aether explanation is preferred.

> You, who thinks the gauges of truth are feelings or nothing.
> You, who thinks the laws of physics did not operate or even exist before
> humans were around.
> 
> Wow. Just wow.
> 
> And you're here why?
> 
> 
> -- 
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

#429555

From	Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date	2017-08-20 17:39 -0500
Message-ID	<ond329$1ae7$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#429513

On 8/20/17 8:49 AM, kenseto wrote:
> On Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 8:50:55 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>> W dniu niedziela, 20 sierpnia 2017 00:47:56 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>>>> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 23:06:56 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>>>>>> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 21:19:42 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>>>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> W dniu sobota, 19 sierpnia 2017 13:13:58 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>>>>>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 22:12:48 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>>>>>>>>>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> W dniu piątek, 18 sierpnia 2017 14:53:49 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You're standing on the median of a north-south highway. Cars headed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> north and cars headed south have equal speeds in this reference frame.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Now get in one of the cars headed north. Now the speed of the cars
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> headed south is much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And your own car doesn't move at all. Gurus said!
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gurus can't be wrong! It's speedometer obviously lies.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Well if the speedometer reads 0 when it's parked in the driveway, and I
>>>>>>>>>>>> know the driveway is moving at 500mph as the earth rotates under the sun,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But, of course, sitting in a car moving north you
>>>>>>>>>>> would never know you're sitting in a car moving
>>>>>>>>>>> north.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I would know that the car is moving relative to the earth's surface
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And you will know that speed of the cars headed south is NOT
>>>>>>>>> much different than the speed of the cars headed north.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> , which
>>>>>>>>>> common sense tells you is also moving, and about which the speedometer is
>>>>>>>>>> telling you nothing. Remind me again why common sense would rightfully tell
>>>>>>>>>> you that the only sensible reference frame is the one tied to the earth's
>>>>>>>>>> surface.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It is not the only, poor idiot. there are 3 or 4 others.
>>>>>>>>> Still, your gurus observercentrical approach is obviously
>>>>>>>>> the most primitive possible and totally useless.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And all of these 3 or 4 are earth-centric, right?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, poor idiot, not all of them. But most
>>>>>>> important of them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Based on what criteria of importance?
>>>>>
>>>>> :)
>>>>> Common sense criteria. Do you know any other
>>>>> criteria of importance, poor idiot?
>>>>
>>>> What? In other words, because it FEELS right?
>>>
>>> Yeah, I know. According to you I should follow
>>> your moronic gurus feelings, instead my own.
>>> Just like you do.
>>> Well, both approaches have advantages and
>>> disadvantages.
>>>
>>>
>>>> What's the rationale that
>>>> common sense provides for this claim?
>>>
>>> Odd, poor idiot.There is no way to calculate importance.
>>> There is no way to measure it. So, the choice is:
>>> feelings or nothing. Feelings can fail. Nothing
>>> will fail for sure.  Have you heard of game theory?
>>> Is it "rationale" enough for you?
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> You surely know how important observers are
>>>>>>> for your moronic physics, don't you? Both in your
>>>>>>> precious QM and in your precious relativity.
>>>>>>> And it happens that in real world all observers
>>>>>>> we know about are living on Earth. What's more
>>>>>>> important, the culture that is training them to
>>>>>>> observe is also living on Earth.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And do the laws of physics pertain everywhere or just in the area where
>>>>>> physicists live?
>>>>>
>>>>> Laws of physics, poor idiot, pertain the brains
>>>>> of physicists and other brains taught physics.
>>>>
>>>> Really? So they didn't apply before they were discovered?
>>>
>>> Odd, poor idiot. "fifrac=faflic*furfus". Does it apply?
>>> 1000 years ago "E=mc^2" was samely meaningless. in
>>> 1000 years  "fifrac=faflic*furfus" may become a law
>>> of physics. Why not? So, does it apply?
>>> Laws of physics are NOT discovered. They are constructed.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Energy wasn't
>>>> conserved before someone conceived of conservation of momentum? So laws of
>>>> physics can't explain anything before human civilization because no human
>>>> brain held them? Really???
>>>
>>> Of course they can explain it NOW. But 1000 years
>>> ago "E=mc^2" cold explain nothing to anyone.
>>>
>>> To take it generally:
>>> "[something] at time t" is true now
>>> doesn't imply
>>> "something" was true at time t.
>>>
>>> Truth is a bit complicated construct, however,
>>> and you're just a poor woodworker following some
>>> crazy gurus.
>>>
>>
>> Every week I realize even more how far apart our world views are.
> 
> That doesn’t mean that your world view is more solid.

When it comes to physics, the thoughts of a retired, feeble chemical 
engineer and a coder from Poland don't stand up to the thoughts of 
physicists. I'll go with the physicists.

>>
>> You, with your view of science not being about matching theoretical
>> predictions with experiment.
> 
> Sure his world view is also matching theoretical predictions with experiment. 

Now, in what you state below, you're inserting YOUR thoughts into HIS 
mouth. This is a bad habit.

> For example: SR copied LET math to give the exact same predictions that are confirmed by experiments. This means that the same math can have different explanations (different world view).
> The SR explanation is based on the two postulates that give rise to all sorts of paradoxes.....the aether explanations have no paradox. Therefore the aether explanation is preferred.
> 
>> You, who thinks the gauges of truth are feelings or nothing.
>> You, who thinks the laws of physics did not operate or even exist before
>> humans were around.
>>
>> Wow. Just wow.
>>
>> And you're here why?
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables


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

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

#429575

From	mlwozniak@wp.pl
Date	2017-08-20 23:28 -0700
Message-ID	<b9993e25-3f36-477f-92fc-d5146b18b7e3@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#429555

W dniu poniedziałek, 21 sierpnia 2017 00:39:10 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:

> When it comes to physics, the thoughts of a retired, feeble chemical 
> engineer and a coder from Poland don't stand up to the thoughts of 
> physicists. I'll go with the physicists.

Of course you will. Gurus said, you have to obey.

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

#429584

From	Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date	2017-08-21 11:43 +0000
Message-ID	<oneh0e$1dk3$2@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#429575

<mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> W dniu poniedziałek, 21 sierpnia 2017 00:39:10 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> 
>> When it comes to physics, the thoughts of a retired, feeble chemical 
>> engineer and a coder from Poland don't stand up to the thoughts of 
>> physicists. I'll go with the physicists.
> 
> Of course you will. Gurus said, you have to obey.
> 
> 

Nah, this isn't about obedience. It's about knowing who is competent in a
subject. You've already demonstrated amply your incompetence in the
subject. 

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

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

#429590

From	mlwozniak@wp.pl
Date	2017-08-21 05:14 -0700
Message-ID	<7f98b3d3-e15f-42a8-8d7a-b54fb659ac33@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#429584

W dniu poniedziałek, 21 sierpnia 2017 13:43:13 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> > W dniu poniedziałek, 21 sierpnia 2017 00:39:10 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
> > 
> >> When it comes to physics, the thoughts of a retired, feeble chemical 
> >> engineer and a coder from Poland don't stand up to the thoughts of 
> >> physicists. I'll go with the physicists.
> > 
> > Of course you will. Gurus said, you have to obey.
> > 
> > 
> 
> Nah, this isn't about obedience. It's about knowing who is competent in a
> subject. 

You're too dumb to think on your own, so blind
following the authorities is a good choice for 
you. Well, this time your authoity is just an 
insane mumbling idiot. A bad luck. Usually they 
don't become authorities, but it happens.

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

#429593

From	Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date	2017-08-21 12:33 +0000
Message-ID	<onejtt$1ibg$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#429590

<mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
> W dniu poniedziałek, 21 sierpnia 2017 13:43:13 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>>> W dniu poniedziałek, 21 sierpnia 2017 00:39:10 UTC+2 użytkownik Odd Bodkin napisał:
>>> 
>>>> When it comes to physics, the thoughts of a retired, feeble chemical 
>>>> engineer and a coder from Poland don't stand up to the thoughts of 
>>>> physicists. I'll go with the physicists.
>>> 
>>> Of course you will. Gurus said, you have to obey.
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> Nah, this isn't about obedience. It's about knowing who is competent in a
>> subject. 
> 
> You're too dumb to think on your own, so blind
> following the authorities is a good choice for 
> you. 

Reading does not produce blindness. 

>Well, this time your authoity is just an 
> insane mumbling idiot. A bad luck. Usually they 
> don't become authorities, but it happens.
> 

Well, that's your stance, but in the other hand you're incompetent in the
subject, so what value do your comments bring?



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

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

Page 3 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 12 Next page →

csiph-web

What Do Dingleberries Actually Mean When They Claim Moving Clocks Run Slow?

Contents

#429302

#429303

#429304

#429370

#429382

#429436

#429452

#429457

#429478

#429487

#429495

#429503

#429510

#429511

#429513

#429555

#429575

#429584

#429590

#429593