Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #460339 > unrolled thread
| Started by | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-06-04 16:31 -0700 |
| Last post | 2018-06-05 08:43 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 565 — 22 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-04 16:31 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-05 00:16 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-05 08:12 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-05 16:23 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-05 13:56 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-05 22:32 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-05 19:12 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-06 02:48 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-06 06:10 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-06 05:48 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-05 14:19 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-05 10:24 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-05 18:00 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-06-05 11:04 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-05 15:25 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-05 14:28 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-05 08:22 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-05 12:05 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-05 14:12 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-05 19:10 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-06 05:38 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-06 12:45 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-06 06:08 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-06 14:00 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-06 14:07 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-06 17:22 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-07 07:58 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-06 21:34 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-07 07:40 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-07 13:49 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-07 21:27 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-08 08:39 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-06 12:45 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-06 06:17 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-06 14:30 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-06 14:33 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-06 21:38 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-07 07:26 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-07 16:08 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-07 10:02 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-07 17:51 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-07 13:57 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-06 16:59 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-07 06:52 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-07 13:38 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-08 06:38 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-08 13:46 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-08 07:22 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-08 16:50 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Zandra Sobczak <acako@raswa.bo> - 2018-06-08 16:56 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-08 14:21 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-08 22:31 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-09 05:17 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-09 13:47 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-09 08:00 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-09 16:39 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-10 06:12 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-10 09:46 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-10 07:32 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 15:59 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-10 09:49 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 19:18 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-11 04:52 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 05:01 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 18:40 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-10 14:04 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-10 13:58 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 21:19 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-11 08:33 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 08:48 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 16:36 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-12 08:26 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-12 12:26 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 10:28 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-12 12:12 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 12:58 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 15:12 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-06-13 11:11 -0500
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-12 17:46 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 22:41 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-15 04:31 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-15 14:31 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-15 08:37 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-15 16:13 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-13 07:14 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-13 08:52 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-13 12:27 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-13 13:38 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Pasquale Broman <lqs@basq.ce> - 2018-06-13 20:43 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-13 13:57 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Pasquale Broman <lqs@basq.ce> - 2018-06-13 21:26 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-14 13:28 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 13:45 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-14 18:18 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-15 14:31 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-15 08:32 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-15 15:45 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-15 09:55 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 14:41 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 14:50 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-14 18:28 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-14 19:15 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 22:46 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-15 04:30 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-15 05:12 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-15 05:41 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-15 09:39 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-15 19:13 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-15 19:16 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-15 09:43 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 05:31 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-14 11:37 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 11:56 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-15 09:40 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-15 13:27 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-15 15:03 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-16 05:40 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 07:53 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-16 13:18 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-16 17:08 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 18:34 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 02:08 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-17 06:36 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-06-17 15:44 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-17 09:04 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-06-17 18:16 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-17 13:33 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-17 16:46 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-06-17 14:23 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-18 09:11 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-06-18 09:32 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Zprávn Udoucih <zpnvn@nwinst.ce> - 2018-06-18 17:26 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 17:59 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-18 14:04 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 18:09 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-18 14:58 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 22:43 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-18 22:47 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-20 08:10 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 16:10 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-20 12:12 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-20 13:41 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 13:56 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-20 17:18 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 14:57 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-21 10:42 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 21:43 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 21:48 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 09:31 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 05:46 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-18 09:02 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 09:17 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-06-17 17:21 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 07:30 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Zprávn Udoucih <zpnvn@nwinst.ce> - 2018-06-17 14:40 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 17:59 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Zprávn Udoucih <zpnvn@nwinst.ce> - 2018-06-18 11:39 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-18 09:08 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Zprávn Udoucih <zpnvn@nwinst.ce> - 2018-06-18 15:49 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-17 09:18 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-06-17 17:23 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 18:14 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-17 13:17 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-06-17 22:23 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-18 06:55 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 15:44 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-18 08:57 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-06-18 17:39 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 17:59 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-18 11:57 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 12:27 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 20:48 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-20 07:05 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 14:26 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-20 13:09 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 13:38 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 21:08 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-20 18:14 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 15:18 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-21 11:29 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-21 10:26 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 17:44 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-21 14:22 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 14:30 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 14:36 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-22 06:23 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 06:47 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-22 07:22 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 12:20 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-23 04:39 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 06:53 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 21:25 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-06-23 04:42 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-23 05:12 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-06-24 00:20 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 22:31 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 10:03 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 10:11 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-21 14:34 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 22:31 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 22:37 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 02:53 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-24 10:00 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-24 10:37 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-30 00:56 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-30 01:19 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-30 06:33 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-01 07:17 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-01 17:37 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-02 06:31 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-02 13:56 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-02 07:56 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-02 15:07 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-02 08:04 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-07-02 08:35 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-02 09:07 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-02 10:17 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-02 10:47 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-02 08:10 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-02 15:24 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-02 08:28 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-02 16:07 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-02 11:05 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-02 11:30 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-02 15:50 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-02 22:55 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-02 16:10 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-03 06:45 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-07-03 14:55 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-03 14:00 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-07-03 21:37 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-03 14:42 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-03 15:49 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-07-07 15:31 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-03 08:03 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-03 15:32 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-03 08:49 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-03 14:56 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-03 15:02 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-03 17:45 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-03 20:02 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-04 06:20 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-07-04 09:30 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-05 06:42 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-07-05 09:40 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-05 15:22 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-07-05 14:21 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-05 12:06 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-07-05 15:31 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-05 16:02 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-07-05 21:07 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-07 09:37 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-07-07 17:33 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-06 20:41 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-06 14:21 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-07 00:51 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-07-07 17:41 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-04 06:42 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-05 06:54 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-05 07:46 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-05 08:25 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-05 08:31 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-07-05 09:34 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-03 22:06 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-03 17:50 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-05 17:36 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-06 15:31 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-06 15:33 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-09 05:18 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-09 05:24 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 02:46 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 15:06 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 09:13 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-07-17 10:05 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 17:39 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 12:20 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 23:00 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-25 00:40 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-07-25 09:51 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-25 10:29 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-26 22:49 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-27 23:37 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-28 00:02 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-29 05:55 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-30 00:03 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-30 03:10 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-31 02:13 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-31 07:54 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-08-01 07:38 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-08-04 09:15 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-08-11 18:19 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-08-12 02:08 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-02 18:41 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-05 10:38 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-07-05 14:32 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-06 05:57 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-07-06 15:41 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-05 17:32 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-07-05 17:42 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 02:48 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 13:46 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 09:05 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 10:18 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-23 17:28 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 15:26 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 15:33 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 18:36 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 18:38 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 22:33 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-24 00:52 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-22 06:32 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 13:58 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-06-22 14:02 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 14:44 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-22 08:46 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 16:44 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-23 04:31 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 14:47 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 10:08 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-23 04:34 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-06-23 14:55 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 06:48 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 14:47 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-06-24 17:50 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 06:05 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-18 09:14 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Zprávn Udoucih <zpnvn@nwinst.ce> - 2018-06-18 16:28 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 17:59 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 22:47 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 18:10 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 17:49 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-16 13:12 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-17 06:26 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 13:33 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 17:53 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-11 12:18 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-12 07:39 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-12 12:16 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 16:30 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-10 17:26 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Zandra Sobczak <acako@raswa.bo> - 2018-06-10 21:31 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-10 17:47 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Zandra Sobczak <acako@raswa.bo> - 2018-06-10 21:51 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 18:56 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Zandra Sobczak <acako@raswa.bo> - 2018-06-12 18:44 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-11 06:41 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-11 10:42 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-11 08:57 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-06-11 18:04 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-11 16:15 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-06-12 01:47 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-12 06:07 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-06-12 15:10 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-12 07:50 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-06-12 18:20 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 13:37 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-11 12:37 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-12 08:28 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-12 12:19 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-13 09:44 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 14:50 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 19:00 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 05:55 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-12 12:31 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 13:05 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-06-12 17:50 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 18:39 -0700
OT: programming languages in physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-06-13 12:07 -0500
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-13 15:33 -0700
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-06-14 11:24 -0500
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Werner Ballard <db@ocowak.br> - 2018-06-14 16:47 +0000
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-06-14 22:02 +0200
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Werner Ballard <db@ocoak.bn> - 2018-06-14 20:43 +0000
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-06-14 23:18 +0200
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Werner Ballard <db@ocoak.bn> - 2018-06-14 22:11 +0000
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-06-15 00:32 +0200
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Werner Ballard <db@ocoak.bn> - 2018-06-15 14:40 +0000
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-15 09:51 -0700
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-06-16 12:40 +0200
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Werner Ballard <db@ocoak.bn> - 2018-06-16 13:44 +0000
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Zprávn Udoucih <zpnvn@nwinst.ce> - 2018-06-18 11:48 +0000
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Werner Ballard <db@ocoak.bn> - 2018-06-16 13:52 +0000
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-06-16 15:59 +0200
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Werner Ballard <db@ocoak.bn> - 2018-06-16 14:10 +0000
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-16 13:00 -0400
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Werner Ballard <db@ocoak.bn> - 2018-06-16 17:22 +0000
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-06-17 03:31 +0200
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Werner Ballard <db@ocoak.bn> - 2018-06-17 11:41 +0000
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-18 09:05 -0400
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Zprávn Udoucih <zpnvn@nwinst.ce> - 2018-06-18 15:56 +0000
Re: OT: programming languages in physics Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 10:58 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 18:24 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 15:55 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-10 09:51 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 17:55 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-06-18 19:25 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-18 11:19 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 11:38 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-06-18 22:33 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 14:27 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-20 07:53 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-20 12:03 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-20 13:16 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-20 17:42 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-21 11:16 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-06-22 10:50 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 02:27 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Zprávn Udoucih <zpnvn@nwinst.ce> - 2018-06-22 11:36 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-06-22 13:57 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-22 08:25 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-06-22 22:56 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-23 04:52 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-06-24 00:10 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-06-23 17:26 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-06-24 18:19 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-24 12:09 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-06-25 19:22 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-25 11:27 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-06-25 21:48 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-26 06:08 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-06-27 20:40 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-28 06:57 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-28 14:13 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-29 01:10 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-29 06:50 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-29 08:11 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-29 09:39 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-29 09:50 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-29 13:39 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-29 14:12 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-30 06:00 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-30 06:41 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-06-30 23:21 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-30 19:17 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-07-01 03:42 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-01 07:58 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-07-01 15:19 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-01 13:34 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-01 10:00 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-01 19:41 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-07-01 15:24 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-06-30 16:39 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Oren Woodcock <uw@osiweoq.lp> - 2018-06-30 17:16 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-30 16:03 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-07-02 18:46 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-02 10:24 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-02 18:04 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-07-03 20:46 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-06-25 19:40 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-23 05:09 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 16:10 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-20 13:28 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 13:39 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 21:55 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-20 18:25 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 12:19 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-21 12:45 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 17:54 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 09:38 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 17:44 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-21 11:22 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 21:02 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-22 06:59 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 07:53 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-22 08:49 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 08:58 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 16:12 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-23 05:35 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 14:33 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-23 16:55 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-06-24 00:35 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-24 13:17 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-24 07:36 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-24 09:24 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 14:07 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-25 11:10 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 20:44 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-26 06:13 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-06-26 13:37 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-26 14:29 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-26 17:32 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-27 00:45 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-26 17:46 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-27 01:38 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-27 07:00 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-27 14:40 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-28 07:15 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-28 14:31 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-28 08:23 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-28 16:09 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-28 11:07 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-28 19:48 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-29 07:04 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-29 16:02 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-29 14:10 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-29 21:56 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-29 15:50 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-30 06:18 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-30 06:28 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-30 16:31 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-01 13:28 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-07-03 08:52 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-03 15:01 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-03 22:11 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-07-03 22:23 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-07-05 09:20 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-05 15:47 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-29 09:33 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-29 16:51 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-29 09:58 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-29 13:57 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-29 21:56 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-30 06:12 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-30 17:10 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-30 06:15 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-30 15:05 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-30 22:08 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-07-01 03:44 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-01 13:34 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-07-01 09:54 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Oren Woodcock <uw@osiweoq.lp> - 2018-07-01 17:03 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-07-01 18:59 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-07-01 19:41 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-07-01 14:48 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-06-24 00:24 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 09:59 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 10:42 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-20 14:00 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 14:05 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 16:10 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-21 10:34 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 14:19 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-22 07:03 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-20 18:31 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 12:19 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-21 12:49 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 17:54 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-21 12:00 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-20 13:50 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 14:02 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-21 10:20 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 10:26 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-21 14:17 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 14:37 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-06-09 17:26 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-10 06:45 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-06-10 19:22 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-10 13:44 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 18:22 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-08 13:30 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-07 11:09 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-07 09:44 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Zandra Sobczak <acako@raswa.bo> - 2018-06-07 16:49 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-06-07 13:23 -0400
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-08 06:59 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-06-08 18:40 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-08 13:26 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-08 13:36 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-09 05:45 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-06-09 17:22 +0200
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-10 06:22 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-06-06 18:01 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-06-05 05:51 -0700
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-06-05 12:55 +0000
Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-06-05 08:43 -0700
Page 23 of 29 — ← Prev page 1 … 21 22 [23] 24 25 … 29 Next page →
| From | Volney <volney@volney.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-01 15:24 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <phb9o2$f7o$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #463172 |
On 7/1/2018 1:00 PM, kenseto wrote: > On Sunday, July 1, 2018 at 9:34:54 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>> The E-Matrix is nothing like the mathematical hypothetical spacetime. >>> Spacetime has no structure like the E-Matrix. Furthermore, the concept of >>> gravity lensing is completely incompatible with the SR concept of light >>> particles (he photons). >> >> You do know that the concept of photons is not an SR concept, right? > > Moron Einstein got his Nobel on the photoelectric effect. Gee you are so fucking stupid.....no wonder you are just a woodworker. You do realize that the photoelectric effect is NOT SR, even if the same person came up with both concepts? > >> >> You know that Einstein did more physics than relativity, right? I guess you missed reading this sentence. >> >> You see the problem with being uneducated in physics, right? You do seem rather uneducated in physics, Ken.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-30 16:39 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <NCMZC.976328$jZ.100385@fx20.am4> |
| In reply to | #462933 |
Den 29.06.2018 15.50, skrev kenseto: > On Friday, June 29, 2018 at 4:10:02 AM UTC-4, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: >> On Monday, June 25, 2018 at 1:27:20 PM UTC-5, kenseto wrote: >>> On Monday, June 25, 2018 at 1:22:17 PM UTC-4, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> >>>> An analogy: . >>>> Ken is standing on the floor in a spaceship . >>>> in interstellar space. A rocket engine . >>>> is giving the spaceship an upwards (on the drawing) . >>>> acceleration a. . >>>> >>>> / \ . >>>> / \ . >>>> | O | . >>>> | /|\ | . >>>> | | | . >>>> | / \ | . >>>> ------- . >>>> ^ . >>>> | . >>>> F . >>>> >> >> . . An analogy: . >> . . Ken is standing on the wall of a spaceship . >> . . in interstellar space. The spaceship is rotating . >> . . along its long axis. The radius of the spaceship . >> . . is r and the wall velocity is v. . >> . . >> . . _________ >> . . / \ >> . . / \ >> . . | | >> . . | | >> . . | | >> . . \ / >> . . \____K____/ >> >> >>>> Explanation #1: . >>>> The floor is exerting a real upwards force on Ken, . >>>> giving Ken an upwards acceleration a in . >>>> accordance with Newton’s second law. . >> >> . . Explanation #1: . >> . . The wall is exerting a real "towards the center" . >> . . force on Ken, giving Ken a radially directed . >> . . acceleration v^2/r in accordance with Newton's . >> . . second law. . >> >>> In this case the floor of the rocket initiated the . >>> movement so it exerts a real upward force on Ken. And . >>> Ken feels heavier due to the upward force of the floor. . >> >> . In this case the wall of the rocket initiated the . >> . movement so it exerts a real centripetal force on Ken. . >> . And Ken feels heavier due to the centripetal force of . >> . the wall. . >> >>>> Explanation #2: . >>>> A real downwards force is acting on Ken, giving Ken . >>>> a downwards acceleration towards the floor. . >>>> This acceleration is trying to make him go through . >>>> the floor and the floor is preventing him from doing so. . >>>> That’s the artificial gravity Ken is experiencing. . >> >> . . Explanation #2: . >> . . A real centrifugal force is acting on Ken, giving Ken . >> . . a radially directed outwards acceleration towards the . >> . . wall. This acceleration is trying to make him go through . >> . . the wall and the wall is preventing him from doing so. . >> . . That's the artificial gravity Ken is experiencing. . >> >>> No Ken is not exerting a downward force on the floor..... . >>> Ken has no way of generating a downward force. . >> >> . No Ken is not exerting a centrifugal force against the wall..... . >> . Ken has no way of generating a centrifugal force. . > > You mixed things up. So I don’t know what you are talking about. > During acceleration vertically, the floor of the rocket is exerting an upward force on Ken. This makes Ken heavier. Quite right, Ken. Since the floor (wall) is exerting an upwards (towards the centre of the ship) force on Ken, he is accelerating upwards (towards the centre of the ship) in accordance with Newton's second law, and in accordance with Newton's third law Ken is exerting a downwards force (away from the centre) on the floor (wall). > After vertical acceleration, the ship and Ken inside the ship are in a state of rotation, Ken’s rotating motion is trying to spin out of the ship and this caused him to exert a force on the wall of the ship and that’s the artificial gravity Ken is experiencing. Quite right again, Ken. The force Ken exerts on the wall is away from the centre. So, in accordance with Newton's third law, the force the wall is exerting on Ken is towards the centre, and Ken is accelerating towards the centre of the ship in accordance with Newton's second law. So in both cases the force exerted on Ken is centripetal, and in both cases an accelerometer would show the same: a centripetal acceleration. Glad to see that you finally have realized this. -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Oren Woodcock <uw@osiweoq.lp> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-30 17:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ph8dti$v22$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #463059 |
Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> After vertical acceleration, the ship and Ken inside the ship are in a >> state of rotation, Ken’s rotating motion is trying to spin out of the >> ship and this caused him to exert a force on the wall of the ship and >> that’s the artificial gravity Ken is experiencing. > > Quite right again, Ken. > The force Ken exerts on the wall is away from the centre. > So, in accordance with Newton's third law, the force the wall is > exerting on Ken is towards the centre, and Ken is accelerating towards > the centre of the ship in accordance with Newton's second law. > So in both cases the force exerted on Ken is centripetal, > and in both cases an accelerometer would show the same: > a centripetal acceleration. Another one not understanding relativity detected. Much less what accelerometers shows.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-30 16:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <174128e9-3137-494f-8a1a-3eab870e3594@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #463059 |
On Saturday, June 30, 2018 at 10:39:43 AM UTC-4, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > Den 29.06.2018 15.50, skrev kenseto: > > On Friday, June 29, 2018 at 4:10:02 AM UTC-4, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > >> On Monday, June 25, 2018 at 1:27:20 PM UTC-5, kenseto wrote: > >>> On Monday, June 25, 2018 at 1:22:17 PM UTC-4, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > >> > >>>> An analogy: . > >>>> Ken is standing on the floor in a spaceship . > >>>> in interstellar space. A rocket engine . > >>>> is giving the spaceship an upwards (on the drawing) . > >>>> acceleration a. . > >>>> > >>>> / \ . > >>>> / \ . > >>>> | O | . > >>>> | /|\ | . > >>>> | | | . > >>>> | / \ | . > >>>> ------- . > >>>> ^ . > >>>> | . > >>>> F . > >>>> > >> > >> . . An analogy: . > >> . . Ken is standing on the wall of a spaceship . > >> . . in interstellar space. The spaceship is rotating . > >> . . along its long axis. The radius of the spaceship . > >> . . is r and the wall velocity is v. . > >> . . > >> . . _________ > >> . . / \ > >> . . / \ > >> . . | | > >> . . | | > >> . . | | > >> . . \ / > >> . . \____K____/ > >> > >> > >>>> Explanation #1: . > >>>> The floor is exerting a real upwards force on Ken, . > >>>> giving Ken an upwards acceleration a in . > >>>> accordance with Newton’s second law. . > >> > >> . . Explanation #1: . > >> . . The wall is exerting a real "towards the center" . > >> . . force on Ken, giving Ken a radially directed . > >> . . acceleration v^2/r in accordance with Newton's . > >> . . second law. . > >> > >>> In this case the floor of the rocket initiated the . > >>> movement so it exerts a real upward force on Ken. And . > >>> Ken feels heavier due to the upward force of the floor. . > >> > >> . In this case the wall of the rocket initiated the . > >> . movement so it exerts a real centripetal force on Ken. . > >> . And Ken feels heavier due to the centripetal force of . > >> . the wall. . > >> > >>>> Explanation #2: . > >>>> A real downwards force is acting on Ken, giving Ken . > >>>> a downwards acceleration towards the floor. . > >>>> This acceleration is trying to make him go through . > >>>> the floor and the floor is preventing him from doing so. . > >>>> That’s the artificial gravity Ken is experiencing. . > >> > >> . . Explanation #2: . > >> . . A real centrifugal force is acting on Ken, giving Ken . > >> . . a radially directed outwards acceleration towards the . > >> . . wall. This acceleration is trying to make him go through . > >> . . the wall and the wall is preventing him from doing so. . > >> . . That's the artificial gravity Ken is experiencing. . > >> > >>> No Ken is not exerting a downward force on the floor..... . > >>> Ken has no way of generating a downward force. . > >> > >> . No Ken is not exerting a centrifugal force against the wall..... . > >> . Ken has no way of generating a centrifugal force. . > > > > You mixed things up. So I don’t know what you are talking about. > > During acceleration vertically, the floor of the rocket is exerting an upward force on Ken. This makes Ken heavier. > > Quite right, Ken. > Since the floor (wall) is exerting an upwards (towards > the centre of the ship) force on Ken, he is accelerating > upwards (towards the centre of the ship) in accordance with > Newton's second law, and in accordance with Newton's third law > Ken is exerting a downwards force (away from the centre) on > the floor (wall). No, Ken is not accelerating upwards toward the center of the ship. This is demonstrated by the fact that Ken remains at the same distance away from the center of the ship. Ken gets heavier by resisting the accelerating motion the floor applied on him. > > > After vertical acceleration, the ship and Ken inside the ship are in a state of rotation, Ken’s rotating motion is trying to spin out of the ship and this caused him to exert a force on the wall of the ship and that’s the artificial gravity Ken is experiencing. > > > Quite right again, Ken. > The force Ken exerts on the wall is away from the centre. Right. > So, in accordance with Newton's third law, the force the wall > is exerting on Ken is towards the centre, and Ken is accelerating > towards the centre of the ship in accordance with Newton’s second law. Wrong. The wall cannot apply a force on Ken because it is not free to move wrt Ken. The only force is that Ken applied to the wall because he is in a state of accelerating rotating motion. The wall resists Ken’s application of the force on it. > > So in both cases the force exerted on Ken is centripetal, > and in both cases an accelerometer would show the same: > a centripetal acceleration. No there is no centripetal force in this example at all. In one case the floor of the rocket an upward accelerating force on Ken. In the other case Ken is applying a centrifugal force pn the wall and the wall is resisting Ken’s accelerating motion and that’s breasts the artificial gravity is experiencing by ken.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-02 18:46 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <3Gs_C.718076$Vs7.683327@fx41.am4> |
| In reply to | #463128 |
Den 01.07.2018 01.03, skrev kenseto: > On Saturday, June 30, 2018 at 10:39:43 AM UTC-4, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> Den 29.06.2018 15.50, skrev kenseto: >>> During acceleration vertically, the floor of the rocket is exerting an upward force on Ken. >> >> Quite right, Ken. >> Since the floor is exerting an upwards >> force on Ken, he is accelerating upwards > > No, Ken is not accelerating upwards :-D >>> After vertical acceleration, the ship and Ken inside the ship are in a state of rotation, Ken’s rotating motion is trying to spin out of the ship and >>> this caused Ken to exert a force on the wall of the ship >> >> Quite right again, Ken. >> The force Ken exerts on the wall is away from the centre. > > Right. > >> So, in accordance with Newton's third law, the force the wall >> is exerting on Ken is towards the centre, > > Wrong. The wall cannot apply a force on Ken because it is not free to move wrt Ken. :-D 'nuff said! -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-02 10:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <edd4573b-fdef-46ce-9913-1b0ee6da0964@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #463267 |
On Monday, July 2, 2018 at 12:46:57 PM UTC-4, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > Den 01.07.2018 01.03, skrev kenseto: > > On Saturday, June 30, 2018 at 10:39:43 AM UTC-4, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > >> Den 29.06.2018 15.50, skrev kenseto: > >>> During acceleration vertically, the floor of the rocket is exerting an upward force on Ken. > >> > >> Quite right, Ken. > >> Since the floor is exerting an upwards > >> force on Ken, he is accelerating upwards > > > > No, Ken is not accelerating upwards > > :-D > > >>> After vertical acceleration, the ship and Ken inside the ship are in a state of rotation, Ken’s rotating motion is trying to spin out of the ship and > >>> this caused Ken to exert a force on the wall of the ship > >> > >> Quite right again, Ken. > >> The force Ken exerts on the wall is away from the centre. > > > > Right. > > > >> So, in accordance with Newton's third law, the force the wall > >> is exerting on Ken is towards the centre, > > > > Wrong. The wall cannot apply a force on Ken because it is not free to move wrt Ken. > :-D > > ‘nuff said! That’s right. Just like a hammer hitting the head of a nail. 1. The hammer is applying a force on the head of the nail. 2. The head of the nail is resisting the applied force by the hammer....clearly that’s not the nail is applying a force on the hammer. ‘nuff said!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-02 18:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <phdpfv$1b7d$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #463270 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > On Monday, July 2, 2018 at 12:46:57 PM UTC-4, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> Den 01.07.2018 01.03, skrev kenseto: >>> On Saturday, June 30, 2018 at 10:39:43 AM UTC-4, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>>> Den 29.06.2018 15.50, skrev kenseto: >>>>> During acceleration vertically, the floor of the rocket is exerting >>>>> an upward force on Ken. >>>> >>>> Quite right, Ken. >>>> Since the floor is exerting an upwards >>>> force on Ken, he is accelerating upwards >>> >>> No, Ken is not accelerating upwards >> >> :-D >> >>>>> After vertical acceleration, the ship and Ken inside the ship are in >>>>> a state of rotation, Ken’s rotating motion is trying to spin out of the ship and >>>>> this caused Ken to exert a force on the wall of the ship >>>> >>>> Quite right again, Ken. >>>> The force Ken exerts on the wall is away from the centre. >>> >>> Right. >>> >>>> So, in accordance with Newton's third law, the force the wall >>>> is exerting on Ken is towards the centre, >>> >>> Wrong. The wall cannot apply a force on Ken because it is not free to move wrt Ken. >> :-D >> >> ‘nuff said! > > That’s right. Just like a hammer hitting the head of a nail. > 1. The hammer is applying a force on the head of the nail. > 2. The head of the nail is resisting the applied force by the > hammer....clearly that’s not the nail is applying a force on the hammer. > > ‘nuff said! > > And so Ken has lost track of Newton’s 3rd law of motion. I’m sure Ken has a comment that in the hammer/nail case Newton did not realize that gravity is a compound force, that centrifugal force acting on the hammer is real, and that why they call it a nail. -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-03 20:46 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <EwP_C.2$Lp4.0@fx03.am4> |
| In reply to | #463270 |
Den 02.07.2018 19.24, skrev kenseto: > On Monday, July 2, 2018 at 12:46:57 PM UTC-4, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> Den 01.07.2018 01.03, skrev kenseto: >>> On Saturday, June 30, 2018 at 10:39:43 AM UTC-4, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>>> Den 29.06.2018 15.50, skrev kenseto: >>>>> During acceleration vertically, the floor of the rocket is exerting an upward force on Ken. >>>> >>>> Quite right, Ken. >>>> Since the floor is exerting an upwards >>>> force on Ken, he is accelerating upwards >>> >>> No, Ken is not accelerating upwards >> >> :-D >> >>>>> After vertical acceleration, the ship and Ken inside the ship are in a state of rotation, Ken’s rotating motion is trying to spin out of the ship and >>>>> this caused Ken to exert a force on the wall of the ship >>>> >>>> Quite right again, Ken. >>>> The force Ken exerts on the wall is away from the centre. >>> >>> Right. >>> >>>> So, in accordance with Newton's third law, the force the wall >>>> is exerting on Ken is towards the centre, >>> >>> Wrong. The wall cannot apply a force on Ken because it is not free to move wrt Ken. >> :-D >> >> ‘nuff said! > > That’s right. Just like a hammer hitting the head of a nail. > 1. The hammer is applying a force on the head of the nail. > 2. The head of the nail is resisting the applied force by the hammer....clearly that’s not the nail is applying a force on the hammer. > > ‘nuff said! > Indeed! :-D -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-25 19:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <8O9YC.594930$tw.127632@fx42.am4> |
| In reply to | #462470 |
Den 24.06.2018 21.09, skrev kenseto:
> On Sunday, June 24, 2018 at 12:19:44 PM UTC-4, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>> Den 23.06.2018 13.52, skrev kenseto:
>>> On Friday, June 22, 2018 at 4:56:22 PM UTC-4, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>> Den 22.06.2018 17.25, skrev kenseto:
>>>>> On Friday, June 22, 2018 at 4:50:43 AM UTC-4, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://paulba.no/Spaceship.html
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ralph is travelling in his spaceship in interplanetary space on
his way to Mars. The interior of the ship is cylindrical with radius 10
metres. The ship is rotating with the angular velocity 1 radian per
second, which >gives a centripetal acceleration of 10 m/s2 on the inner
wall. So Ralph can walk around on the inner wall, always feeling that
the gravitation is 1 g. Since there are no portholes in the ship, Ralph
isn’t aware that the >spaceship is rotating; he thinks there is some
form of artificial gravity made with Star Trek technology.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ralph is rotating with the ship and he is experiencing the CF
force and this causes him to accelerate toward the wall and the wall is
preventing him to accelerate further and that’s the artificial gravity
he is experiencing.
>>>>
>>>> The only force that is acting on Ralph is the force
>>>> from the wall pushing him toward the centre.
>>>> The centripetal force.
>>>
>>> No, the wall is not moving so it can’t exert any CP force on Ralph.
Ralph is in a state of CF accelerating motion toward the wall and the
wall prevents him from going further and that’s the artificial gravity.
There is no CP force.
>>
>> Ken, Ken, Ken ...
>>
>> In which direction did you say Ralph is accelerating?
>> Is he going through the wall?
>>
>> https://paulba.no/div/CentripetalAcc.pdf
>
> Yes, Ralph’s CF motion is trying to make him going through the wall
and the wall is preventing him to do so. That’s the artificial gravity
Ralph is experiencing.
>
An analogy:
Ken is standing on the floor in a spaceship
in interstellar space. A rocket engine
is giving the spaceship an upwards (on the drawing)
acceleration a.
/ \
/ \
| O |
| /|\ |
| | |
| / \ |
-------
^
|
F
Explanation #1:
The floor is exerting a real upwards force on Ken,
giving Ken an upwards acceleration a in
accordance with Newton's second law.
Explanation #2:
A real downwards force is acting on Ken, giving Ken
a downwards acceleration towards the floor.
This acceleration is trying to make him go through
the floor and the floor is preventing him from doing so.
That’s the artificial gravity Ken is experiencing.
Question #1:
Which explanation is correct?
Question #2:
What would an accelerometer show the
direction of the acceleration to be?
Upwards or downwards?
Question #3
What would an accelerometer on the wall
of the rotating spaceship show the
direction of the acceleration to be?
Towards the wall, or towards the centre?
--
Paul
https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-23 05:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b95dee25-ecdf-4f84-9229-600c5b17f5c9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #462237 |
On Friday, June 22, 2018 at 4:56:22 PM UTC-4, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > Den 22.06.2018 17.25, skrev kenseto: > > On Friday, June 22, 2018 at 4:50:43 AM UTC-4, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > >> > >> https://paulba.no/Spaceship.html > > > >> Ralph is travelling in his spaceship in interplanetary space on his way to Mars. The interior of the ship is cylindrical with radius 10 metres. The ship is rotating with the angular velocity 1 radian per second, which >gives a centripetal acceleration of 10 m/s2 on the inner wall. So Ralph can walk around on the inner wall, always feeling that the gravitation is 1 g. Since there are no portholes in the ship, Ralph isn’t aware that the >spaceship is rotating; he thinks there is some form of artificial gravity made with Star Trek technology. > > > > Ralph is rotating with the ship and he is experiencing the CF force and this causes him to accelerate toward the wall and the wall is preventing him to accelerate further and that’s the artificial gravity he is experiencing. > > The only force that is acting on Ralph is the force > from the wall pushing him toward the centre. > The centripetal force. > > > > > > >> Ralph playing with his ball > >> To pass the time on his long journey, Ralph is sometimes playing with a ball. He is puzzled by the weird >behaviour of the ball. When he drops the ball, it falls towards the inner wall, as expected, but it is also >veering a little to the left. > > > > The ball is also in a state of CF rotating acceleration and thus it also falls toward the wall. Also, the whole ship is accelerating toward the right and that’s why the ball is veering to the left. > > There is no force acting on the ball > (except when it is thrown and when it bounces off the wall). > That’s why it always is moving along a straight line. Any object (the ball) inside the ship is in a state of CF acceleration and the wall is not moving and that’s why the ball will move toward the wall and the wall prevents it from moving further and that’s artificial gravity. > > > > >> If he hold the ball 2 metres above the wall, and throws it to the left with the initial velocity 8 m/s, the ball >doesn't fall at all, it moves around the spaceship at 2 metres height above the wall, with the constant >speed 8 m/s. If he on the other hand throws it to the right with the same speed, the ball falls much faster >to the wall than expected. > > > > The throwing of the ball to the left cancels out the ship’s and the ball’s CF acceleration toward the wall and that’s why it doesn’t fall at all. > No forces are acting on the ball, so it stays stationary relative > to the centre of the ship while the wall is rotating around it. No, any object, including the ball, inside the ship is also rotating. This means that the ball is in a state of continuous CF acceleration motion. That’s why when Ralph drops the ball the ball will accelerate toward the wall.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-20 16:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pgdu97$33f$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #461828 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 5:27:14 PM UTC-4, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: >> On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 1:19:03 PM UTC-5, kenseto wrote: >> >>> If gravity is strictly attractive, what is stopping the body go all the >>> way to the center of the orbit? The answer: centrifugal force. >> >> [replacement for a deleted post where I made an extremely silly typo] >> >> Centrifugal force does not exist when you describe a system in an inertial >> (non-rotating) frame of reference. > > Assertion is not a valid argument. Centrifugal force exists. There are > countless applications using CF force...eg: centrifuges to separate > material of different densities, gas centrifuges to separate different > isotopes to make atomic bombs. This has been explained to you many times. If you read design articles about centrifuges you would see that they fully attribute the operation of those devices to CENTRIPETAL accelerations and forces, not centrifugal. I know your common sense, everyday experience says they are based on centrifugal force. That common sense is wrong, and to correct that error requires that you educate yourself by reading and to stop relying on your common sense for everything. > >> In an inertial frame, what appears to >> be an outwards-directed force in the rotating frame, is nothing more than >> a consequence of the fact that the trajectory of a moving body will be >> straight unless a force is applied that has a component perpendicular to its >> direction of motion. > > So that means that in the case of the earth and the moon, there exists a > CF force to prevent the moon from crashing into the earth due to the > attractive force of gravity. The combination of the FP and CF forces is > what enables the moon have a stable orbit around the earth. > Currently there is no mechanism for the origin of these CP and CF forces. > That’s why I invented the DTG. DTG says: > 1. the CP force is an attractive EM force arise from the fact that the > earth and the moon are expanding i the same direction in the E-Matrix as > the universe expands. > 2. the CF force is a repulsive effect exists between the earth and the > moon because the earth and the moon are confined to the divergent > structure of the E-Matrix as the universe expands. > >> >> The concept of centrifugal force *does* have utility when analyzing systems >> in rotating frames, but that is *not* what we are dealing with here. > > Current physics has it wrong.....the CF force and the CP force are in > equal footing. In fact there are more practical of the CF force than the > CP force. Come to think of it, I can’t think of an application for the CP > force other than in orbital mechanics.....can you? > > -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-20 13:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <edba35d4-0c21-4e31-a685-a575ab15baa0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #461848 |
On Wednesday, June 20, 2018 at 12:10:19 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > > On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 5:27:14 PM UTC-4, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > >> On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 1:19:03 PM UTC-5, kenseto wrote: > >> > >>> If gravity is strictly attractive, what is stopping the body go all the > >>> way to the center of the orbit? The answer: centrifugal force. > >> > >> [replacement for a deleted post where I made an extremely silly typo] > >> > >> Centrifugal force does not exist when you describe a system in an inertial > >> (non-rotating) frame of reference. > > > > Assertion is not a valid argument. Centrifugal force exists. There are > > countless applications using CF force...eg: centrifuges to separate > > material of different densities, gas centrifuges to separate different > > isotopes to make atomic bombs. > > This has been explained to you many times. If you read design articles > about centrifuges you would see that they fully attribute the operation of > those devices to CENTRIPETAL accelerations and forces, not centrifugal. I > know your common sense, everyday experience says they are based on > centrifugal force. That common sense is wrong, and to correake ct that error > requires that you educate yourself by reading and to stop relying on your > common sense for everything. Repeating nonsense does not make it true. CP acceleration does not make the amusement rides work.....it is the CF force that make them work. The stope CF force accelerates the rider toward the fence and the fence stops the rider from being throwing off the ride. I don’t know what is the reason why physicists reject the notion of a CF force when there are hundreds of application for such force. In fact I can think of one application that uses the CP force....can you? > > > > > >> In an inertial frame, what appears to > >> be an outwards-directed force in the rotating frame, is nothing more than > >> a consequence of the fact that the trajectory of a moving body will be > >> straight unless a force is applied that has a component perpendicular to its > >> direction of motion. > > > > So that means that in the case of the earth and the moon, there exists a > > CF force to prevent the moon from crashing into the earth due to the > > attractive force of gravity. The combination of the FP and CF forces is > > what enables the moon have a stable orbit arou...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-20 13:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3ff7f297-1226-4777-91a9-ca32b5badd52@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #461899 |
On Wednesday, June 20, 2018 at 3:28:34 PM UTC-5, kenseto wrote: > Repeating nonsense does not make it true. EXACTLY, Ken. You keep repeating yourself.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-20 21:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pgeihf$15l9$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #461899 |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: > On Wednesday, June 20, 2018 at 12:10:19 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>> On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 5:27:14 PM UTC-4, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: >>>> On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 1:19:03 PM UTC-5, kenseto wrote: >>>> >>>>> If gravity is strictly attractive, what is stopping the body go all the >>>>> way to the center of the orbit? The answer: centrifugal force. >>>> >>>> [replacement for a deleted post where I made an extremely silly typo] >>>> >>>> Centrifugal force does not exist when you describe a system in an inertial >>>> (non-rotating) frame of reference. >>> >>> Assertion is not a valid argument. Centrifugal force exists. There are >>> countless applications using CF force...eg: centrifuges to separate >>> material of different densities, gas centrifuges to separate different >>> isotopes to make atomic bombs. >> >> This has been explained to you many times. If you read design articles >> about centrifuges you would see that they fully attribute the operation of >> those devices to CENTRIPETAL accelerations and forces, not centrifugal. I >> know your common sense, everyday experience says they are based on >> centrifugal force. That common sense is wrong, and to correake ct that error >> requires that you educate yourself by reading and to stop relying on your >> common sense for everything. > > > Repeating nonsense does not make it true. Ken, if you’re going to claim that all of the basic physics textbooks in the world are repeating nonsense, and that you (someone completely uneducated in physics) know the truth based on your common experience, then you shouldn’t be surprised if the only reaction you get is laughter. > CP acceleration does not make the amusement rides work.....it is the CF > force that make them work. That is an incorrect and uneducated assertion. Read a textbook to find out what makes amusement rides work. Not a dictionary. A textbook. > The stope CF force accelerates the rider toward the fence and the fence > stops the rider from being throwing off the ride. > I don’t know what is the reason why physicists reject the notion of a CF > force when there are hundreds of application for such force. In fact I > can think of one application that uses the CP force....can you? >> >> >>> >>>> In an inertial frame, what appears to >>>> be an outwards-directed force in the rotating frame, is nothing more than >>>> a consequence of the fact that the trajectory of a moving body will be >>>> straight unless a force is applied that has a component perpendicular to its >>>> direction of motion. >>> >>> So that means that in the case of the earth and the moon, there exists a >>> CF force to prevent the moon from crashing into the earth due to the >>> attractive force of gravity. The combination of the FP and CF forces is >>> what enables the moon have a stable orbit arou... > -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-20 18:25 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <0vAWC.289813$Hv4.51354@fx39.iad> |
| In reply to | #461922 |
On 6/20/2018 5:55 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >> On Wednesday, June 20, 2018 at 12:10:19 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>> On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 5:27:14 PM UTC-4, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: >>>>> On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 1:19:03 PM UTC-5, kenseto wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> If gravity is strictly attractive, what is stopping the body go all the >>>>>> way to the center of the orbit? The answer: centrifugal force. >>>>> >>>>> [replacement for a deleted post where I made an extremely silly typo] >>>>> >>>>> Centrifugal force does not exist when you describe a system in an inertial >>>>> (non-rotating) frame of reference. >>>> >>>> Assertion is not a valid argument. Centrifugal force exists. There are >>>> countless applications using CF force...eg: centrifuges to separate >>>> material of different densities, gas centrifuges to separate different >>>> isotopes to make atomic bombs. >>> >>> This has been explained to you many times. If you read design articles >>> about centrifuges you would see that they fully attribute the operation of >>> those devices to CENTRIPETAL accelerations and forces, not centrifugal. I >>> know your common sense, everyday experience says they are based on >>> centrifugal force. That common sense is wrong, and to correake ct that error >>> requires that you educate yourself by reading and to stop relying on your >>> common sense for everything. >> >> >> Repeating nonsense does not make it true. > > Ken, if you’re going to claim that all of the basic physics textbooks in > the world are repeating nonsense, and that you (someone completely > uneducated in physics) know the truth based on your common experience, then > you shouldn’t be surprised if the only reaction you get is laughter. Odd if you are going to claim that everything you read in your precious books is all absolute truth no matter how illogical it is, then don't be surprised if the only reaction you get from real scientists with actual degrees and experience working in science is they all laugh at you and call you a kook. >> CP acceleration does not make the amusement rides work.....it is the CF >> force that make them work. > > That is an incorrect and uneducated assertion. Read a textbook to find out > what makes amusement rides work. Not a dictionary. A textbook. You are incorrect and uneducated. In what frame is an amusement ride experienced? Common sense does not come out of a textbook. OK? >> The stope CF force accelerates the rider toward the fence and the fence >> stops the rider from being throwing off the ride. >> I don’t know what is the reason why physicists reject the notion of a CF >> force when there are hundreds of application for such force. In fact I >> can think of one application that uses the CP force....can you? >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> In an inertial frame, what appears to >>>>> be an outwards-directed force in the rotating frame, is nothing more than >>>>> a consequence of the fact that the trajectory of a moving body will be >>>>> straight unless a force is applied that has a component perpendicular to its >>>>> direction of motion. >>>> >>>> So that means that in the case of the earth and the moon, there exists a >>>> CF force to prevent the moon from crashing into the earth due to the >>>> attractive force of gravity. The combination of the FP and CF forces is >>>> what enables the moon have a stable orbit arou... >> > > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-21 12:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pgg54l$1jhi$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #461932 |
benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: > On 6/20/2018 5:55 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>> On Wednesday, June 20, 2018 at 12:10:19 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>> On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 5:27:14 PM UTC-4, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: >>>>>> On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 1:19:03 PM UTC-5, kenseto wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> If gravity is strictly attractive, what is stopping the body go all the >>>>>>> way to the center of the orbit? The answer: centrifugal force. >>>>>> >>>>>> [replacement for a deleted post where I made an extremely silly typo] >>>>>> >>>>>> Centrifugal force does not exist when you describe a system in an inertial >>>>>> (non-rotating) frame of reference. >>>>> >>>>> Assertion is not a valid argument. Centrifugal force exists. There are >>>>> countless applications using CF force...eg: centrifuges to separate >>>>> material of different densities, gas centrifuges to separate different >>>>> isotopes to make atomic bombs. >>>> >>>> This has been explained to you many times. If you read design articles >>>> about centrifuges you would see that they fully attribute the operation of >>>> those devices to CENTRIPETAL accelerations and forces, not centrifugal. I >>>> know your common sense, everyday experience says they are based on >>>> centrifugal force. That common sense is wrong, and to correake ct that error >>>> requires that you educate yourself by reading and to stop relying on your >>>> common sense for everything. >>> >>> >>> Repeating nonsense does not make it true. >> >> Ken, if you’re going to claim that all of the basic physics textbooks in >> the world are repeating nonsense, and that you (someone completely >> uneducated in physics) know the truth based on your common experience, then >> you shouldn’t be surprised if the only reaction you get is laughter. > > Odd if you are going to claim that everything you read in your precious > books is all absolute truth no matter how illogical it is, then don't be > surprised if the only reaction you get from real scientists with actual > degrees and experience working in science is they all laugh at you and > call you a kook. Oh, Ben. Ok so tell me something in a current basic physics textbook that you know is illogical and wrong. > >>> CP acceleration does not make the amusement rides work.....it is the CF >>> force that make them work. >> >> That is an incorrect and uneducated assertion. Read a textbook to find out >> what makes amusement rides work. Not a dictionary. A textbook. > > You are incorrect and uneducated. In what frame is an amusement ride > experienced? Common sense does not come out of a textbook. OK? That’s right. And common sense is commonly wrong. > >>> The stope CF force accelerates the rider toward the fence and the fence >>> stops the rider from being throwing off the ride. >>> I don’t know what is the reason why physicists reject the notion of a CF >>> force when there are hundreds of application for such force. In fact I >>> can think of one application that uses the CP force....can you? >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> In an inertial frame, what appears to >>>>>> be an outwards-directed force in the rotating frame, is nothing more than >>>>>> a consequence of the fact that the trajectory of a moving body will be >>>>>> straight unless a force is applied that has a component perpendicular to its >>>>>> direction of motion. >>>>> >>>>> So that means that in the case of the earth and the moon, there exists a >>>>> CF force to prevent the moon from crashing into the earth due to the >>>>> attractive force of gravity. The combination of the FP and CF forces is >>>>> what enables the moon have a stable orbit arou... >>> >> >> >> > > -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-21 12:45 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <QCQWC.350574$DS3.350275@fx42.iad> |
| In reply to | #461978 |
On 6/21/2018 8:19 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >> On 6/20/2018 5:55 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>> On Wednesday, June 20, 2018 at 12:10:19 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>>> On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 5:27:14 PM UTC-4, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: >>>>>>> On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 1:19:03 PM UTC-5, kenseto wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If gravity is strictly attractive, what is stopping the body go all the >>>>>>>> way to the center of the orbit? The answer: centrifugal force. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [replacement for a deleted post where I made an extremely silly typo] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Centrifugal force does not exist when you describe a system in an inertial >>>>>>> (non-rotating) frame of reference. >>>>>> >>>>>> Assertion is not a valid argument. Centrifugal force exists. There are >>>>>> countless applications using CF force...eg: centrifuges to separate >>>>>> material of different densities, gas centrifuges to separate different >>>>>> isotopes to make atomic bombs. >>>>> >>>>> This has been explained to you many times. If you read design articles >>>>> about centrifuges you would see that they fully attribute the operation of >>>>> those devices to CENTRIPETAL accelerations and forces, not centrifugal. I >>>>> know your common sense, everyday experience says they are based on >>>>> centrifugal force. That common sense is wrong, and to correake ct that error >>>>> requires that you educate yourself by reading and to stop relying on your >>>>> common sense for everything. >>>> >>>> >>>> Repeating nonsense does not make it true. >>> >>> Ken, if you’re going to claim that all of the basic physics textbooks in >>> the world are repeating nonsense, and that you (someone completely >>> uneducated in physics) know the truth based on your common experience, then >>> you shouldn’t be surprised if the only reaction you get is laughter. >> >> Odd if you are going to claim that everything you read in your precious >> books is all absolute truth no matter how illogical it is, then don't be >> surprised if the only reaction you get from real scientists with actual >> degrees and experience working in science is they all laugh at you and >> call you a kook. > > Oh, Ben. Ok so tell me something in a current basic physics textbook that > you know is illogical and wrong. "collapsing" probability waves in nothing at all! OK? >>>> CP acceleration does not make the amusement rides work.....it is the CF >>>> force that make them work. >>> >>> That is an incorrect and uneducated assertion. Read a textbook to find out >>> what makes amusement rides work. Not a dictionary. A textbook. >> >> You are incorrect and uneducated. In what frame is an amusement ride >> experienced? Common sense does not come out of a textbook. OK? > > That’s right. And common sense is commonly wrong. Wrong again! True common sense always compares what you think is going on with reality. You know like doing science. Nutjob libs on the other hand think that their fantasies CREATE reality. Here's a quote for you right out of the lib textbook: "No matter how "far-fetched" or '"ridiculous" or "fantasy" your thoughts might be they are right on. Those thoughts aren't out of reality. They are what reality needs to be. Those thoughts are what reality needs to become." Can you imagine fucking mental cases like this given authority over our world and lives? Holy shit! This is what you and Nads and "kensi" and Starfaker and Rolf and Snit and all the other morons here have waiting for all of us should we slip up and mistakenly give them actual rather than imaginary power.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-21 17:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pggopa$oh6$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #462009 |
benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: > On 6/21/2018 8:19 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote: >>> On 6/20/2018 5:55 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday, June 20, 2018 at 12:10:19 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote: >>>>>>> On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 5:27:14 PM UTC-4, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: >>>>>>>> On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 1:19:03 PM UTC-5, kenseto wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If gravity is strictly attractive, what is stopping the body go all the >>>>>>>>> way to the center of the orbit? The answer: centrifugal force. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [replacement for a deleted post where I made an extremely silly typo] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Centrifugal force does not exist when you describe a system in an inertial >>>>>>>> (non-rotating) frame of reference. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Assertion is not a valid argument. Centrifugal force exists. There are >>>>>>> countless applications using CF force...eg: centrifuges to separate >>>>>>> material of different densities, gas centrifuges to separate different >>>>>>> isotopes to make atomic bombs. >>>>>> >>>>>> This has been explained to you many times. If you read design articles >>>>>> about centrifuges you would see that they fully attribute the operation of >>>>>> those devices to CENTRIPETAL accelerations and forces, not centrifugal. I >>>>>> know your common sense, everyday experience says they are based on >>>>>> centrifugal force. That common sense is wrong, and to correake ct that error >>>>>> requires that you educate yourself by reading and to stop relying on your >>>>>> common sense for everything. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Repeating nonsense does not make it true. >>>> >>>> Ken, if you’re going to claim that all of the basic physics textbooks in >>>> the world are repeating nonsense, and that you (someone completely >>>> uneducated in physics) know the truth based on your common experience, then >>>> you shouldn’t be surprised if the only reaction you get is laughter. >>> >>> Odd if you are going to claim that everything you read in your precious >>> books is all absolute truth no matter how illogical it is, then don't be >>> surprised if the only reaction you get from real scientists with actual >>> degrees and experience working in science is they all laugh at you and >>> call you a kook. >> >> Oh, Ben. Ok so tell me something in a current basic physics textbook that >> you know is illogical and wrong. > > "collapsing" probability waves in nothing at all! OK? What textbook are you referring to that uses those words? Not your skewed TRANSLATION of the book’s words. > >>>>> CP acceleration does not make the amusement rides work.....it is the CF >>>>> force that make them work. >>>> >>>> That is an incorrect and uneducated assertion. Read a textbook to find out >>>> what makes amusement rides work. Not a dictionary. A textbook. >>> >>> You are incorrect and uneducated. In what frame is an amusement ride >>> experienced? Common sense does not come out of a textbook. OK? >> >> That’s right. And common sense is commonly wrong. > > Wrong again! True common sense always compares what you think is going > on with reality. You know like doing science. Nutjob libs on the other > hand think that their fantasies CREATE reality. Here's a quote for you > right out of the lib textbook: > > "No matter how "far-fetched" or '"ridiculous" or "fantasy" your thoughts > might be they are right on. Those thoughts aren't out of reality. They > are what reality needs to be. Those thoughts are what reality needs to > become." > > Can you imagine fucking mental cases like this given authority over our > world and lives? Holy shit! This is what you and Nads and "kensi" and > Starfaker and Rolf and Snit and all the other morons here have waiting > for all of us should we slip up and mistakenly give them actual rather > than imaginary power. > > -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-21 09:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c70a74ea-14cd-4ea3-8578-786c25012b5d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #461922 |
On Wednesday, June 20, 2018 at 5:56:03 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > Ken, if you’re going to claim that all of the basic physics textbooks in > the world are repeating nonsense, and that you (someone completely > uneducated in physics) know the truth based on your common experience, then > you shouldn’t be surprised if the only reaction you get is laughter. hi Odd, What is sad is that Mr. Seto should have some physics knowledge. He was a Chemical Engineer. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-21 17:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pggo6m$ngi$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #462005 |
Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, June 20, 2018 at 5:56:03 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> >> Ken, if you’re going to claim that all of the basic physics textbooks in >> the world are repeating nonsense, and that you (someone completely >> uneducated in physics) know the truth based on your common experience, then >> you shouldn’t be surprised if the only reaction you get is laughter. > > hi Odd, > > What is sad is that Mr. Seto should have some physics knowledge. > He was a Chemical Engineer. > Ed > And he has deteriorated badly. He can no longer do algebra correctly, and he can no longer do 4th grade arithmetic. I would be greatly surprised if he could pass a first year chemistry test. -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 23 of 29 — ← Prev page 1 … 21 22 [23] 24 25 … 29 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web