Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #470005 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-08-31 08:07 -0700 |
| Last post | 2018-12-07 09:49 +0000 |
| Articles |
20 on this page of 1000+
— 28 participants
Thread has 1627 articles; only the first 1000 are indexed. |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity | Browse in flat view
Thread has 1627 articles; showing the first 1000 in depth-first order. Use the flat group view to see the rest.
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: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 08:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 15:46 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-31 10:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 17:22 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-31 11:09 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 18:40 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-31 12:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 21:22 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-31 21:52 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 14:01 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-01 09:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-09-02 11:23 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-02 09:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-09-02 14:44 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-02 11:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-09-02 15:57 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-02 13:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-09-02 17:25 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-02 14:45 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Volney <volney@volney.invalid> - 2018-09-02 19:51 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-02 22:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-08-31 20:37 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-08-31 12:15 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 12:52 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 21:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 16:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-01 00:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 18:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 01:21 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 20:48 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 01:18 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-08-31 20:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-01 03:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 05:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Fattore Nzavecchia <avcir@valecw.ba> - 2018-09-01 12:46 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 09:31 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-01 06:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 09:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-01 11:32 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 12:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 13:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 22:02 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-01 16:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-01 22:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-02 04:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-02 05:24 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-02 05:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-02 06:16 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Jeanclaude Erald <urdu@iufienv.vu> - 2018-09-02 12:36 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 07:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 07:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 18:57 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 12:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 20:46 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-02 19:31 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-02 21:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-03 03:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-03 05:39 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-03 10:40 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-03 18:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-03 19:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-03 19:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-03 20:12 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-03 20:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-04 03:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-04 07:15 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-04 14:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-04 16:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-04 23:38 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-04 18:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 00:33 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-04 18:04 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 11:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 08:39 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 15:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 09:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 19:32 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 13:46 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-05 14:38 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 17:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-05 19:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 21:40 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 17:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 19:03 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 14:10 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 22:17 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 15:36 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 22:57 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-06 23:12 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-05 22:11 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 17:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-06 02:53 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 20:57 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-06 05:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 07:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-06 07:35 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-06 07:39 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-06 16:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-06 10:34 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Haných Ltskáš <lnni@yawlucla.ha> - 2018-09-06 15:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 13:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-06 21:08 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 14:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-06 22:36 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-06 23:09 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-06 14:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 15:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-06 15:45 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 15:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-06 15:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-06 22:47 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 16:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-07 00:53 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 21:57 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-07 17:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 13:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-07 00:45 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 15:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-07 01:04 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-06 16:32 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 14:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 22:17 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 15:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 22:43 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-05 16:06 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 09:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-05 17:32 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 11:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 19:48 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 13:57 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 22:06 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-05 17:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 19:24 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 15:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 22:28 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 15:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 22:57 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 16:04 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 00:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-06 21:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 12:22 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-07 05:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 07:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 17:04 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 11:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 19:20 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 13:16 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 22:25 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 15:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 00:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 17:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-08 12:20 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 06:55 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-08 16:13 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 12:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 07:38 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-07 16:51 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 11:55 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-08 12:19 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 17:04 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 12:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-07 14:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 15:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-07 16:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 17:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-07 20:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 06:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-08 07:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 09:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-08 18:53 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 10:19 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-09 05:21 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 23:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-09 10:36 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-08 17:06 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 12:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-09 05:22 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 23:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-09 10:40 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 05:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-09 16:51 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 13:09 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 20:32 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-08 10:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 13:02 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-08 14:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 23:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-09 04:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Lorent Regoires <ewab@ewgvpq.gn> - 2018-09-09 11:22 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 06:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 05:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-09 12:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 17:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-09 19:23 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 19:38 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-09 20:53 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 21:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-10 04:56 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-10 05:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-10 06:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 08:24 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-10 08:45 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 09:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 03:02 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-10 12:56 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-10 06:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 09:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Wilbur Foley <boue@eywffl.uf> - 2018-09-10 16:48 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 10:10 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Wilbur Foley <boue@eywffl.uf> - 2018-09-10 17:18 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-10 09:55 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 10:20 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 09:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-11 04:05 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 21:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-11 12:17 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 08:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-11 10:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Wilbur Foley <boue@eywffl.uf> - 2018-09-10 16:40 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Wilbur Foley <boue@eywffl.uf> - 2018-09-10 16:44 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-07 21:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 22:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 15:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 00:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 17:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 01:26 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-07 18:55 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 13:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 06:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 15:19 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 09:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-08 17:15 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 12:20 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 17:48 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 13:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 22:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 23:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-09 04:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Lorent Regoires <ewab@ewgvpq.gn> - 2018-09-09 11:28 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 06:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 18:25 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 13:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 20:46 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 18:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 01:12 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 18:43 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 02:15 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 19:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 12:49 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 09:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-11 03:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 21:45 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-09-12 13:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 21:21 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-09-12 14:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 01:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-09-12 18:52 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 02:20 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-09-12 20:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-13 12:10 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-09-13 17:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 18:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-19 22:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 05:57 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 15:49 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 13:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-09 05:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-09 14:45 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-09 23:23 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-10 12:43 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 08:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 16:41 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 10:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 17:23 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 12:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 21:07 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 15:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 15:55 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 23:09 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 16:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 00:27 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 20:39 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 11:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 07:48 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-10 21:32 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-12 12:36 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 06:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-10 09:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 10:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 10:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 17:32 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 12:35 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 21:07 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 15:35 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 23:00 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 16:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 00:27 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 20:36 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 14:00 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 08:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 17:05 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 11:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 19:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 18:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-11 18:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 23:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-12 04:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 02:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 23:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 11:02 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 06:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 13:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 07:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 14:47 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 05:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 13:04 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-13 06:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 08:39 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 19:18 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 14:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 22:35 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 15:48 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-13 23:15 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 16:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-14 01:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 18:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-14 03:49 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-14 01:09 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 18:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-13 20:32 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 21:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-14 05:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-14 07:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-14 14:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-14 10:46 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-14 20:19 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-14 13:31 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-14 20:56 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-14 14:24 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-14 21:53 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-14 16:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-15 11:15 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-15 09:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-16 00:17 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-15 22:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-16 08:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-16 23:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 13:14 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-16 15:38 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 07:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 17:15 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 12:53 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 19:57 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 13:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 21:09 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 17:40 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 01:02 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 18:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 12:05 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-09-16 23:18 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 17:42 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-16 19:53 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-16 20:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 16:35 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 12:15 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 21:37 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 15:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 23:36 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 22:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 11:36 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 13:20 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 07:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 15:26 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 13:16 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 21:24 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 07:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-18 07:57 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 08:24 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-18 11:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 13:52 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-18 13:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 15:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-19 03:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 16:02 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 13:35 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 21:24 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 16:12 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 08:15 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 16:22 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-18 10:43 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 13:45 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 21:24 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 15:57 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-19 00:42 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 18:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-19 04:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-19 07:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-19 08:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-19 09:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-19 09:42 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-19 10:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-19 12:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-19 08:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-19 09:35 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-19 12:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-19 13:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-19 16:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-19 20:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-19 20:19 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-19 20:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-19 20:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-20 13:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-20 14:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-20 14:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaws.np> - 2018-09-20 22:03 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-20 15:40 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-20 15:35 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-20 17:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-20 17:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-20 19:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-20 20:45 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-21 05:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaws.np> - 2018-09-21 16:18 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 09:24 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-21 12:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 16:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-21 18:40 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 02:23 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-22 06:56 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 15:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 04:11 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 22:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 05:32 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 11:43 +0100
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 12:01 +0100
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 15:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-22 07:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-22 07:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 04:07 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 22:12 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 21:54 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 18:09 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 15:17 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 11:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 19:45 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 04:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 22:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 05:47 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-23 03:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Rhett Joyner <udof@rsrrfirwv.on> - 2018-09-23 10:58 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 10:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 04:44 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-22 21:55 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 22:23 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 06:06 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 03:52 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 15:03 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 12:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 20:38 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 18:05 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-24 02:18 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 21:52 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-24 07:31 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 11:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-24 15:16 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 16:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 16:01 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 12:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 19:45 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 15:53 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 23:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 19:20 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 14:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 08:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 17:49 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 23:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 14:42 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 07:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-26 15:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 21:24 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-27 04:48 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 10:52 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-27 11:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 21:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 17:55 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 12:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 12:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 22:05 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 17:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 12:48 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-29 06:15 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 14:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 22:03 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 22:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 12:43 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 07:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 18:11 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 13:04 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 21:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 18:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 13:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 21:41 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 15:48 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 03:22 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 22:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 06:30 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 01:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 12:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 07:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 17:18 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 12:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 21:17 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 15:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 06:12 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 00:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:36 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 12:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 12:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 21:19 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 15:38 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 06:12 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 00:34 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 12:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 21:17 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 15:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 06:12 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 00:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:31 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 02:36 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:06 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 07:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 21:00 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 15:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 05:57 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 00:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 16:01 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 09:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 16:31 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:19 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 05:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 23:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 06:22 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 06:29 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 06:42 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:28 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 09:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 19:26 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 06:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:28 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 09:48 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 19:26 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 08:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 21:01 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 05:35 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 06:22 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 00:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:55 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 09:02 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 16:24 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 05:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 22:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 06:12 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 06:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:25 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 09:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 19:22 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-10-04 08:15 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 06:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@python.invalid> - 2018-10-04 21:48 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:09 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Python <python@example.invalid> - 2018-10-06 15:27 +0200
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 15:01 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity ldzwinn@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 12:52 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity ldzwinn@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 12:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 23:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:36 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 15:57 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 09:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 16:24 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 13:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-28 23:02 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity ldzwinn@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 12:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 20:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 22:56 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 20:36 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-07 14:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 21:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-07 23:42 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-28 15:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 17:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-29 06:29 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 14:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-29 21:25 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 14:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 22:03 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 22:53 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 12:44 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 07:24 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-30 16:59 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 13:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 21:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 18:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 13:19 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 21:41 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 15:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 03:37 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 22:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 06:30 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 02:43 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:06 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 07:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-01 23:16 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-01 23:10 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 18:11 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 22:03 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 22:52 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 12:43 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 07:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-30 16:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 13:12 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-01 00:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 18:11 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 13:06 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 21:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 18:16 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-01 10:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 21:30 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-01 23:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 06:30 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-02 03:34 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-02 06:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:47 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-02 08:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 13:20 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 13:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity ldzwinn@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 12:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-06 19:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-27 21:53 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 15:37 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-26 09:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 23:31 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 14:58 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 21:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-27 04:43 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 10:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 18:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 21:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 17:55 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 08:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 17:49 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 22:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 06:12 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 03:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 15:08 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 12:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 20:25 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 14:48 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-23 23:09 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 18:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-23 19:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 21:48 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 15:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 12:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 19:45 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 15:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 23:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 19:18 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 14:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 07:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 17:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 23:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 14:58 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 19:56 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-26 20:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 21:38 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 18:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 21:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 17:55 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 12:20 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-27 04:40 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-27 05:20 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 10:31 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-27 10:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 20:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 21:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 18:37 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 21:12 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 17:54 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-24 02:31 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 21:56 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 15:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-24 18:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-24 11:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 12:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-24 22:30 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 16:10 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 23:18 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 19:32 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-25 00:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 19:36 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-25 03:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 23:55 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 17:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 23:19 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 14:24 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 07:45 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-26 15:08 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 21:04 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 15:30 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 21:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 18:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 21:23 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 17:54 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 12:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 21:57 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 18:05 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 12:55 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 14:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 22:06 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 22:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 12:43 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-09-30 21:16 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:55 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 13:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 21:41 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 16:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 03:46 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 22:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 05:23 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 02:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:19 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 09:12 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 21:01 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 23:38 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-01 23:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 12:55 +0100
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:19 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-02 08:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 09:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 21:01 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 23:39 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 00:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:21 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 02:19 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 08:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 15:38 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 09:12 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 18:04 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 05:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 17:27 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 04:21 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 21:48 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 23:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 06:48 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-05 00:10 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 12:31 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-05 06:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity ldzwinn@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 11:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 20:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 22:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 19:19 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-07 12:29 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 20:40 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-07 14:05 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 21:13 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-07 23:46 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 13:21 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-08 06:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 13:40 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-08 06:43 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-07 19:24 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 02:59 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-07 23:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-08 08:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 17:09 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-08 15:42 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-09 02:45 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-08 21:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-09 11:56 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-09 05:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-09 12:47 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-09 05:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-09 20:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-10 13:32 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-10 09:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-10 16:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-10 14:05 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-11 13:15 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-11 14:35 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-11 22:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-11 17:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-12 13:04 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-12 09:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-12 17:57 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-12 19:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-13 02:36 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-13 08:10 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-13 16:10 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-13 12:59 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-13 21:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-13 15:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-13 23:12 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-13 16:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-14 13:20 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-14 16:43 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-15 14:48 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-15 08:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-15 18:00 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-15 17:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 02:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-15 21:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 11:24 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 06:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 16:38 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 10:24 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 11:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 21:09 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 18:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 13:03 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 13:08 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-17 08:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 21:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-17 16:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-18 12:33 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-18 08:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-18 18:40 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 17:40 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-17 11:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 21:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-17 21:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-18 15:40 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-18 18:10 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-17 22:04 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-18 15:40 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-18 18:05 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 01:11 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-19 05:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-19 12:31 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-19 15:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 15:36 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-20 09:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 16:30 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-20 10:57 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-20 20:07 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-20 16:13 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-22 09:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-22 18:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-22 12:40 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-22 19:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-22 16:38 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-23 04:02 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-23 08:57 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-23 18:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-24 08:46 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-24 17:26 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-24 18:56 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-24 23:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-25 08:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-31 08:10 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-31 08:57 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-31 10:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-31 17:44 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-31 15:55 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 13:54 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-01 07:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 14:52 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-01 09:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 19:59 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-01 13:04 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-01 14:43 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-02 00:59 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-01 21:02 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-02 11:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-02 07:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-02 15:42 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-02 10:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-02 12:47 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-02 22:38 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-02 19:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-03 13:48 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-03 13:38 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-03 20:55 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-03 14:51 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-03 22:31 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-03 20:10 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-04 12:53 +0100
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Buck Dehner <uktoa@yswdoez.cb> - 2018-11-04 12:20 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-04 13:35 +0100
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-04 11:46 -0800
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-03 16:33 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-03 20:55 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-03 20:06 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-04 00:18 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-03 20:21 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-04 01:17 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-04 02:03 -0500
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-02 17:00 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-02 14:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-02 19:50 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-02 01:12 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-01 09:49 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-31 23:58 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 14:04 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 10:17 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-01 18:24 +0100
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-01 10:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-01 09:44 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 19:59 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-01 13:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 20:06 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-01 13:35 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-01 22:48 +0100
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-11-01 17:09 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-02 00:59 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-02 01:17 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-02 11:34 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-02 04:36 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-02 05:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-02 01:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 10:13 -0400
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-01 18:20 +0100
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-01 10:36 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-01 19:59 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 21:09 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-16 18:09 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 12:55 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-17 07:39 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 17:44 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-17 11:36 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 21:51 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-18 12:33 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-09 20:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-10 13:32 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-10 08:54 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-10 09:16 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-10 16:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-10 14:07 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-10 22:11 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-10 21:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-11 14:25 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-11 22:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-11 17:28 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-12 13:09 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-12 06:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-07 12:35 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 23:01 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 19:19 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-07 12:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 20:36 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-07 04:02 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 22:26 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 19:19 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-07 12:33 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 20:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-07 19:23 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 23:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 14:39 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 08:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity ldzwinn@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 12:03 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 20:16 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 06:53 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-05 00:21 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 15:53 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-05 21:11 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 15:01 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 08:16 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity ldzwinn@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 12:00 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-07 04:08 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 22:30 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 14:43 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-05 00:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 15:01 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 08:14 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 18:42 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity ldzwinn@gmail.com - 2018-10-06 12:08 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 09:09 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-30 22:37 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Talk.Origins@aol.com - 2018-10-03 03:40 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 13:50 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-10-31 13:22 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-10-31 14:38 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-31 15:55 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-01 03:32 +0100
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-10-31 21:41 -0700
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-12-06 16:09 +0000
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity rbwinn3@gmail.com - 2018-12-06 10:00 -0800
Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-12-07 09:49 +0000
Page 14 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 … 12 13 [14] 15 16 … 50 Next page →
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-13 17:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b9de21ad-c07d-428d-b926-aa1b3ad8392b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #471647 |
On Thursday, September 13, 2018 at 3:10:03 AM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > consequently7990662@gmail.com wrote: > > On Wednesday, September 12, 2018 at 7:20:54 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> <numbernumber1964@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> There has to be a limit. The detection time of a radio wave is not zero.. > >>> I would estimate it is 10^6 seconds. > >> > >> Lol. Not even close. Why make up numbers? > > > > I did not make up the number. I estimated the number. What is that number then??? hum. > > Estimation is based on previous data. It is obvious that you have no data. > > Conclusion: You did not make an estimation, you made the number up. > > -- > PointedEars > > Twitter: @PointedEars2 > Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail. ________________________________________________________________ In the olymipic down hill the down hill time was 1:2011 seconds that represents an uncertainty of approximately .0005 seconds. From there I give you two orders of magnitude to form an approximate circuit reaction time of 10^-6 seconds or so. It is definitely not zero.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-09 18:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d4b08c65-ce41-4ddd-87e1-feb796aa2b1a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #471185 |
On Sunday, September 9, 2018 at 1:46:09 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > And thank you for being concerned for the welfare of my business. My > apprentice has the weekend off, and I purchased some really nice pecan, > birch, and I got a bargain on a rough cut plank of Burmese blackwood which > is going to make the drop-desks of several glass-windowed secretaries. So > that being a successful venture, I have time to reply to you. > So how is it that people where you live get to cut down trees and make boards for woodworkers, while here in the West trees can only be used for 500,000 acre and 1,000,000 acre forest fires?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-19 22:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pnuhr9$geq$4@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #471132 |
Robert Winn wrote: >> You are not going to preach, that the radar bullet goes through a >> curved spacetime, then returns along same, near his point of emission. >> Totally unrealistic. No weapon in the world are constructed with >> relativity in concern. > > Radar is electromagnetic waves, but what is obvious about radar is that > it is accurate concerning distances. This neither. A piezoelectric based for instance is purely acoustic.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-09 05:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <efc54e90-0c73-4dbd-9c5a-d72959ba8503@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #471114 |
On Sunday, September 9, 2018 at 4:21:35 AM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote: > On Sunday, September 9, 2018 at 12:08:33 AM UTC-6, Robert Winn wrote: > > > > I used to work on radar in the Navy. What I know about radar proves > > the Lorentz equations wrong as a description of relativity. > > So again you prove yourself to be either an ignoramus or a liar, or both. > NOTHING you have EVER done refutes the LT (in its proper regime). Well, I would say that the proper regime for the Lorentz equations is in electromagnetic fields, where Lorentz was working when he derived them, not in relativity.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-09 15:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pn3fdc$1sru$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #471101 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Saturday, September 8, 2018 at 3:50:12 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Saturday, September 8, 2018 at 10:48:19 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I realize this is very hard for you to understand and probably a major >>>>>> disappointment. Especially to be told that by your reflection in a mirror. >>>>>> >>>>> Well, so I conducted an experiment and the equations were true. Sorry to >>>>> have to be the one to tell you that the Harry Potter books you enjoyed so >>>>> much were fiction. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> They are true within the precision you were able to measure. The Lorentz >>>> transforms are also correct to within the precision you are able to >>>> measure. You are free to try to show me the precision of your measurement >>>> and how your results rule out the Lorentz contraction. >>>> >>>> At higher precision, the Lorentz transforms are still correct but the >>>> hypothetical Galilean transforms are not correct. Measurement clearly shows >>>> this. You don’t want to look at those measurements. >>>> >>> Go ahead and post the measurements. >> >> I have. You would rather that I type thousands of words for you here, >> rather than you moving a mouse and pressing the mouse button on a link. I >> don’t indulge your laziness or your passive aggressive stance. If you want >> to see the measurements, then you will click on the link. If you don’t, >> then you wouldn’t read the result even if you got someone to type thousands >> of words. So then you would learn nothing and accomplish nothing except >> wasting someone’s time. >> >>> The Lorentz equations and the Galilean transformation equations cannot >>> both be true, even though they give similar answers at low velocities. >> >> So similar in fact that a low precision measurement would not be able to >> tell the difference. >> >>> They do not say the same thing. If you were to tell me that the Lorentz >>> equations were true for electromagnetic fields, I might believe you >>> because that was what Lorentz was originally describing with them. >> >> Good measurements have shown that the Lorentz transforms are correct, and >> Galilean transforms are wrong. Galilean transforms are not axiomatically >> true. They are hypothetical statements, subject to test by precision >> measurement. Those measurements have been done, though not by you. You have >> an uninformed opinion about relativity because you don’t know about these >> measurements. And you are too apathetic in general to turn your uninformed >> opinion into an informed one. It’s very simple. >> >>> The Galilean transformation equations are the correct equations to use >>> for describing relativity. >>> > I used to work on radar in the Navy. What I know about radar proves the > Lorentz equations wrong as a description of relativity. > No that’s not true, Robert. The way radar was used involved approximate assumptions. As I said, for objects at low speed, you need very precise measurements to tell any difference between Galilean and Lorentz transforms. And in case this has eluded you, the radar signal itself does not constitute any inertial reference frame. You are mistaken if you think radar proves Lorentz equations wrong. -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-09 13:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0c867e79-0103-4634-a187-49fca9d9972e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #471140 |
On Sunday, September 9, 2018 at 8:49:04 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Saturday, September 8, 2018 at 3:50:12 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Saturday, September 8, 2018 at 10:48:19 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I realize this is very hard for you to understand and probably a major > >>>>>> disappointment. Especially to be told that by your reflection in a mirror. > >>>>>> > >>>>> Well, so I conducted an experiment and the equations were true. Sorry to > >>>>> have to be the one to tell you that the Harry Potter books you enjoyed so > >>>>> much were fiction. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> They are true within the precision you were able to measure. The Lorentz > >>>> transforms are also correct to within the precision you are able to > >>>> measure. You are free to try to show me the precision of your measurement > >>>> and how your results rule out the Lorentz contraction. > >>>> > >>>> At higher precision, the Lorentz transforms are still correct but the > >>>> hypothetical Galilean transforms are not correct. Measurement clearly shows > >>>> this. You don’t want to look at those measurements. > >>>> > >>> Go ahead and post the measurements. > >> > >> I have. You would rather that I type thousands of words for you here, > >> rather than you moving a mouse and pressing the mouse button on a link. I > >> don’t indulge your laziness or your passive aggressive stance. If you want > >> to see the measurements, then you will click on the link. If you don’t, > >> then you wouldn’t read the result even if you got someone to type thousands > >> of words. So then you would learn nothing and accomplish nothing except > >> wasting someone’s time. > >> > >>> The Lorentz equations and the Galilean transformation equations cannot > >>> both be true, even though they give similar answers at low velocities. > >> > >> So similar in fact that a low precision measurement would not be able to > >> tell the difference. > >> > >>> They do not say the same thing. If you were to tell me that the Lorentz > >>> equations were true for electromagnetic fields, I might believe you > >>> because that was what Lorentz was originally describing with them. > >> > >> Good measurements have shown that the Lorentz transforms are correct, and > >> Galilean transforms are wrong. Galilean transforms are not axiomatically > >> true. They are hypothetical statements, subject to test by precision > >> measurement. Those measurements have been done, though not by you. You have > >> an uninformed opinion about relativity because you don’t know about these > >> measurements. And you are too apathetic in general to turn your uninformed > >> opinion into an informed one. It’s very simple. > >> > >>> The Galilean transformation equations are the correct equations to use > >>> for describing relativity. > >>> > > I used to work on radar in the Navy. What I know about radar proves the > > Lorentz equations wrong as a description of relativity. > > > > No that’s not true, Robert. The way radar was used involved approximate > assumptions. As I said, for objects at low speed, you need very precise > measurements to tell any difference between Galilean and Lorentz > transforms. And in case this has eluded you, the radar signal itself does > not constitute any inertial reference frame. > > You are mistaken if you think radar proves Lorentz equations wrong. > Well, I think it does, but you probably have to get back to helping your apprentice and getting wood for your woodworking shop. Maybe you will be able to discuss this at some future time.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-09 05:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d67ae2d6-d845-47db-8600-30b367426c93@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #470990 |
On Saturday, 8 September 2018 19:48:19 UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: > At higher precision, the Lorentz transforms are still correct but the > hypothetical Galilean transforms are not correct. A lie, as expected from fanatic trash. GPS shows that your Shit is worthless - right in the place where higher precision comes.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-09 14:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pn3blu$fnp$4@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #471127 |
mlwozniak@wp.pl writes: >On Saturday, 8 September 2018 19:48:19 UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> At higher precision, the Lorentz transforms are still correct but the >> hypothetical Galilean transforms are not correct. >A lie, as expected from fanatic trash. >GPS shows that your Shit is worthless - >right in the place where higher precision >comes. That's right! The math proves it! 1/9,192,631,774.4647 = 1/9,192,631,770 at highest precision, within "acceptable error"? That's what the GPS clocks say!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-09 23:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f0f921ce-dc94-4852-94d8-b31a04bc40d3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #471137 |
On Sunday, 9 September 2018 16:45:19 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote: > mlwozniak@wp.pl writes: > > >On Saturday, 8 September 2018 19:48:19 UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > >> At higher precision, the Lorentz transforms are still correct but the > >> hypothetical Galilean transforms are not correct. > > >A lie, as expected from fanatic trash. > >GPS shows that your Shit is worthless - > >right in the place where higher precision > >comes. > > That's right! The math proves it! 1/9,192,631,774.4647 = 1/9,192,631,770 No, poor idiot. The math proves that 2018-09-10 08:20:32.00000000000000000 = 2018-09-10 08:20:32.00000000000000000 (t'=t). And that 1/9,192,631,774.4647 <> 1/9,192,631,770 (the period of Cs transition wave on the satellite is different than the period of Cs transition wave on the ground, against the moronic prophecies of your idiot guru).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-10 12:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pn5ote$8dd$4@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #471227 |
mlwozniak@wp.pl writes: >On Sunday, 9 September 2018 16:45:19 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote: >> mlwozniak@wp.pl writes: >> >> >On Saturday, 8 September 2018 19:48:19 UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> >> >> At higher precision, the Lorentz transforms are still correct but the >> >> hypothetical Galilean transforms are not correct. >> >> >A lie, as expected from fanatic trash. >> >GPS shows that your Shit is worthless - >> >right in the place where higher precision >> >comes. >> >> That's right! The math proves it! 1/9,192,631,774.4647 = 1/9,192,631,770 >No, poor idiot. The math proves that >2018-09-10 08:20:32.00000000000000000 = >2018-09-10 08:20:32.00000000000000000 (t'=t). That's not what t'=t means. Of course the GPS system can generate extremely accurate times like that, that's one of its purposes, but for t'=t you have to compare a Cs clock on earth (t) to a Cs clock on the satellite and we get 1/9,192,631,774.4647 = 1/9,192,631,770. In other words, t' != t. > And that >1/9,192,631,774.4647 <> 1/9,192,631,770 (the period of >Cs transition wave on the satellite is different than >the period of Cs transition wave on the ground, against >the moronic prophecies of your idiot guru). I don't know who your idiot guru is, but that agrees exactly what Einstein's GR states, the time of a nonlocal moving clock in a different gravitational potential is different than one on earth.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-10 08:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6f5460a6-ca08-488b-8324-bd635d4cfdf7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #471240 |
On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 5:43:28 AM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> mlwozniak@wp.pl writes:
>
> >On Sunday, 9 September 2018 16:45:19 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> mlwozniak@wp.pl writes:
> >>
> >> >On Saturday, 8 September 2018 19:48:19 UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >>
> >> >> At higher precision, the Lorentz transforms are still correct but the
> >> >> hypothetical Galilean transforms are not correct.
> >>
> >> >A lie, as expected from fanatic trash.
> >> >GPS shows that your Shit is worthless -
> >> >right in the place where higher precision
> >> >comes.
> >>
> >> That's right! The math proves it! 1/9,192,631,774.4647 = 1/9,192,631,770
>
> >No, poor idiot. The math proves that
> >2018-09-10 08:20:32.00000000000000000 =
> >2018-09-10 08:20:32.00000000000000000 (t'=t).
>
> That's not what t'=t means. Of course the GPS system can generate extremely
> accurate times like that, that's one of its purposes, but for t'=t
> you have to compare a Cs clock on earth (t) to a Cs clock on the satellite
> and we get 1/9,192,631,774.4647 = 1/9,192,631,770. In other words, t' != t.
>
> > And that
> >1/9,192,631,774.4647 <> 1/9,192,631,770 (the period of
> >Cs transition wave on the satellite is different than
> >the period of Cs transition wave on the ground, against
> >the moronic prophecies of your idiot guru).
>
> I don't know who your idiot guru is, but that agrees exactly what
> Einstein's GR states, the time of a nonlocal moving clock in a different
> gravitational potential is different than one on earth.
It is possible for a clock to be slower than another clock or faster than another clock. What we have seen over the years is an evolution of "proofs"
that Einstein's theory is correct. First, during the 1930's, clocks were flown on transcontinental airplane flights and were said to agree with Einstein's theory. These clocks were all said to run slower than a clock on the ground. Then in the 1970's, Hafele and Keating did the same thing with clocks flown on intercontinental flights, and their result was that if the flight was in the direction of the earth's rotation, the airplane clocks were slower than a clock on the ground, and if they were opposite the earth's rotation, they were faster. Then a guy named Vessot put a clock in the nosecone of a Vanguard missile and claimed it had conclusively proven General Relativity. Then we have GPS satellites that are supposedly containing clocks that are faster than clocks on earth.
I am not personally convinced by any of this because whether or not the experiments were as scientists said them to be, the nature of the equations is such that even wrong equations could agree with experiments. The problem I see with the equations is that they do not agree with reality because they have a length contraction.
So what would be the correct equations? If you have two clocks with different rates, the correct way to show them with equations would be to use two sets of Galilean transformation equations, one for each clock, with different variables so that you do not get the time of one clock mixed up with the time of the other.
x'=x-vt
y'=y
z'=z
t'=t
x = x' - v'n'
y = y'
z = z'
n = n'
So then you have S seconds shown by t'=t and S' seconds shown by n=n'. If an S' second is faster or slower than an S second, then you have to convert it to t' before using it in the other equation.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-10 16:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pn66r0$vf3$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #471264 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > I am not personally convinced by any of this because whether or not the > experiments were as scientists said them to be, the nature of the > equations is such that even wrong equations could agree with experiments. > The problem I see with the equations is that they do not agree with > reality because they have a length contraction. > > In the end here, Robert, you are coming into a science group stating that you don’t believe that the core tenet in science (namely, the comparison of the calculations using the equations of a theory with the values obtained in measurement) is valid. You say this because you believe that equations can be manipulated to match any experimental result whatsoever, or that measurements are manipulated to match equations, or both. Instead, you are saying that you assess the correctness of equations on the basis of whether they contain features you don’t like. I asked you how you would make the case that the Galilean transformations are the correct ones, and your response was that they do not contain length contraction. When I followed up with how you would make the case that length contraction is wrong, you stated that you had never observed length contraction yourself. When I followed up and asked why that would be compelling to anyone else, you stated that you didn’t care what anyone else thinks. Finally, you said that you are going to believe whatever seems right to you, and you can’t think of any kind of reason that would convince you to change your beliefs. I think I’ve captured the summary of this several-thousand-comment thread succinctly, don’t you agree? -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-10 10:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3cb2af48-f486-4953-bed5-176cfb472290@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #471270 |
On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 9:41:06 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > I am not personally convinced by any of this because whether or not the > > experiments were as scientists said them to be, the nature of the > > equations is such that even wrong equations could agree with experiments. > > The problem I see with the equations is that they do not agree with > > reality because they have a length contraction. > > > > > > In the end here, Robert, you are coming into a science group stating that > you don’t believe that the core tenet in science (namely, the comparison of > the calculations using the equations of a theory with the values obtained > in measurement) is valid. You say this because you believe that equations > can be manipulated to match any experimental result whatsoever, or that > measurements are manipulated to match equations, or both. > > Instead, you are saying that you assess the correctness of equations on the > basis of whether they contain features you don’t like. > > I asked you how you would make the case that the Galilean transformations > are the correct ones, and your response was that they do not contain length > contraction. When I followed up with how you would make the case that > length contraction is wrong, you stated that you had never observed length > contraction yourself. When I followed up and asked why that would be > compelling to anyone else, you stated that you didn’t care what anyone else > thinks. Finally, you said that you are going to believe whatever seems > right to you, and you can’t think of any kind of reason that would convince > you to change your beliefs. > > I think I’ve captured the summary of this several-thousand-comment thread > succinctly, don’t you agree? > > Well, you did fail to mention that mathematically, the Lorentz equations can be proven wrong, whereas, the Galilean transformation equations cannot.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-10 17:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pn699v$145d$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #471284 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 9:41:06 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> I am not personally convinced by any of this because whether or not the >>> experiments were as scientists said them to be, the nature of the >>> equations is such that even wrong equations could agree with experiments. >>> The problem I see with the equations is that they do not agree with >>> reality because they have a length contraction. >>> >>> >> >> In the end here, Robert, you are coming into a science group stating that >> you don’t believe that the core tenet in science (namely, the comparison of >> the calculations using the equations of a theory with the values obtained >> in measurement) is valid. You say this because you believe that equations >> can be manipulated to match any experimental result whatsoever, or that >> measurements are manipulated to match equations, or both. >> >> Instead, you are saying that you assess the correctness of equations on the >> basis of whether they contain features you don’t like. >> >> I asked you how you would make the case that the Galilean transformations >> are the correct ones, and your response was that they do not contain length >> contraction. When I followed up with how you would make the case that >> length contraction is wrong, you stated that you had never observed length >> contraction yourself. When I followed up and asked why that would be >> compelling to anyone else, you stated that you didn’t care what anyone else >> thinks. Finally, you said that you are going to believe whatever seems >> right to you, and you can’t think of any kind of reason that would convince >> you to change your beliefs. >> >> I think I’ve captured the summary of this several-thousand-comment thread >> succinctly, don’t you agree? >> >> > Well, you did fail to mention that mathematically, the Lorentz equations > can be proven wrong, whereas, the Galilean transformation equations cannot. > I know that you’ve tried to disprove them mathematically by trying to ignore length contraction or by trying to apply flat space circumference formulas to the curved space around the earth. This is basically trying to show that Lorentz formulas are wrong by showing that they conflict with nonLorentz formulas. In the end, of course, the way to prove Lorentz transformations is to show an actual measurement that is in conflict with the numbers predicted by the Lorentz transform. So far you’ve not been able to do that because none of your measurements are precise enough to be distinguishable from the Lorentz results. So I’m not really including the floundering you’ve done along those lines. I guess my summary of before was pretty much on target. -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-10 12:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <67387ea9-96b8-4974-996e-7be08a48d954@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #471295 |
On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 10:23:13 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 9:41:06 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> I am not personally convinced by any of this because whether or not the > >>> experiments were as scientists said them to be, the nature of the > >>> equations is such that even wrong equations could agree with experiments. > >>> The problem I see with the equations is that they do not agree with > >>> reality because they have a length contraction. > >>> > >>> > >> > >> In the end here, Robert, you are coming into a science group stating that > >> you don’t believe that the core tenet in science (namely, the comparison of > >> the calculations using the equations of a theory with the values obtained > >> in measurement) is valid. You say this because you believe that equations > >> can be manipulated to match any experimental result whatsoever, or that > >> measurements are manipulated to match equations, or both. > >> > >> Instead, you are saying that you assess the correctness of equations on the > >> basis of whether they contain features you don’t like. > >> > >> I asked you how you would make the case that the Galilean transformations > >> are the correct ones, and your response was that they do not contain length > >> contraction. When I followed up with how you would make the case that > >> length contraction is wrong, you stated that you had never observed length > >> contraction yourself. When I followed up and asked why that would be > >> compelling to anyone else, you stated that you didn’t care what anyone else > >> thinks. Finally, you said that you are going to believe whatever seems > >> right to you, and you can’t think of any kind of reason that would convince > >> you to change your beliefs. > >> > >> I think I’ve captured the summary of this several-thousand-comment thread > >> succinctly, don’t you agree? > >> > >> > > Well, you did fail to mention that mathematically, the Lorentz equations > > can be proven wrong, whereas, the Galilean transformation equations cannot. > > > > I know that you’ve tried to disprove them mathematically by trying to > ignore length contraction or by trying to apply flat space circumference > formulas to the curved space around the earth. This is basically trying to > show that Lorentz formulas are wrong by showing that they conflict with > nonLorentz formulas. If you want to make complicated equations, what is that to me. I was just saying that the Galilean transformation equations were correct because they match reality. > > In the end, of course, the way to prove Lorentz transformations is to show > an actual measurement that is in conflict with the numbers predicted by the > Lorentz transform. So far you’ve not been able to do that because none of > your measurements are precise enough to be distinguishable from the Lorentz > results. They don't have to be. The Galilean transformation equations accommodate any results, as I have pointed out to you many times. They accommodate slower clocks. They accommodate faster clocks. They accommodate the exact times of the Lorentz equations. What they do not accommodate is a length contraction. They also do not accommodate a slower clock in S' as seen from S and a slower clock in S as seen from S'. A slower clock is slower as seen from either frame of reference, which is also what we see in reality. But if you want to believe something you read in a Harry Potter book, go ahead and do that, but don't try to tell me that I have to believe it. > So I’m not really including the floundering you’ve done along those lines. > I guess my summary of before was pretty much on target. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-10 21:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pn6mf6$1rtt$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #471317 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 10:23:13 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 9:41:06 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> I am not personally convinced by any of this because whether or not the >>>>> experiments were as scientists said them to be, the nature of the >>>>> equations is such that even wrong equations could agree with experiments. >>>>> The problem I see with the equations is that they do not agree with >>>>> reality because they have a length contraction. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> In the end here, Robert, you are coming into a science group stating that >>>> you don’t believe that the core tenet in science (namely, the comparison of >>>> the calculations using the equations of a theory with the values obtained >>>> in measurement) is valid. You say this because you believe that equations >>>> can be manipulated to match any experimental result whatsoever, or that >>>> measurements are manipulated to match equations, or both. >>>> >>>> Instead, you are saying that you assess the correctness of equations on the >>>> basis of whether they contain features you don’t like. >>>> >>>> I asked you how you would make the case that the Galilean transformations >>>> are the correct ones, and your response was that they do not contain length >>>> contraction. When I followed up with how you would make the case that >>>> length contraction is wrong, you stated that you had never observed length >>>> contraction yourself. When I followed up and asked why that would be >>>> compelling to anyone else, you stated that you didn’t care what anyone else >>>> thinks. Finally, you said that you are going to believe whatever seems >>>> right to you, and you can’t think of any kind of reason that would convince >>>> you to change your beliefs. >>>> >>>> I think I’ve captured the summary of this several-thousand-comment thread >>>> succinctly, don’t you agree? >>>> >>>> >>> Well, you did fail to mention that mathematically, the Lorentz equations >>> can be proven wrong, whereas, the Galilean transformation equations cannot. >>> >> >> I know that you’ve tried to disprove them mathematically by trying to >> ignore length contraction or by trying to apply flat space circumference >> formulas to the curved space around the earth. This is basically trying to >> show that Lorentz formulas are wrong by showing that they conflict with >> nonLorentz formulas. > > > If you want to make complicated equations, what is that to me. I was > just saying that the Galilean transformation equations were correct > because they match reality. They match reality in terms of agreeing with measurements to the precision that you measure them. Of course, the Lorentz transforms also match reality in terms of agreeing with measurements to the precision you measure them. > > >> >> In the end, of course, the way to prove Lorentz transformations wrong is to show >> an actual measurement that is in conflict with the numbers predicted by the >> Lorentz transform. So far you’ve not been able to do that because none of >> your measurements are precise enough to be distinguishable from the Lorentz >> results. > > They don't have to be. What you can do with futzing with the Galilean transforms is irrelevant. The point is that to prove the Lorentz transforms wrong requires showing an actual measurement that is in conflict with the numbers predicted by the Lorentz transform. So far you’ve not been able to do that. I repeat, showing that your crude measurements are consistent with Galilean transforms does NOT demonstrate those same crude measurements are inconsistent with Lorentz transforms. Crude measurements can and mostly likely will be consistent with both. I guess this is hard for you to understand. I’m not surprised. You found the straightforward English definition for a standard second to be impenetrable. > The Galilean transformation equations accommodate any results, as I have > pointed out to you many times. They accommodate slower clocks. They > accommodate faster clocks. They accommodate the exact times of the > Lorentz equations. What they do not accommodate is a length contraction. > They also do not accommodate a slower clock in S' as seen from S and a > slower clock in S as seen from S'. A slower clock is slower as seen from > either frame of reference, which is also what we see in reality. But if > you want to believe something you read in a Harry Potter book, go ahead > and do that, but don't try to tell me that I have to believe it. >> So I’m not really including the floundering you’ve done along those lines. >> I guess my summary of before was pretty much on target. >> > -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-10 15:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6aecd107-d76e-4dfb-a197-c073588af8d6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #471325 |
On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 2:07:53 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 10:23:13 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 9:41:06 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> I am not personally convinced by any of this because whether or not the > >>>>> experiments were as scientists said them to be, the nature of the > >>>>> equations is such that even wrong equations could agree with experiments. > >>>>> The problem I see with the equations is that they do not agree with > >>>>> reality because they have a length contraction. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> In the end here, Robert, you are coming into a science group stating that > >>>> you don’t believe that the core tenet in science (namely, the comparison of > >>>> the calculations using the equations of a theory with the values obtained > >>>> in measurement) is valid. You say this because you believe that equations > >>>> can be manipulated to match any experimental result whatsoever, or that > >>>> measurements are manipulated to match equations, or both. > >>>> > >>>> Instead, you are saying that you assess the correctness of equations on the > >>>> basis of whether they contain features you don’t like. > >>>> > >>>> I asked you how you would make the case that the Galilean transformations > >>>> are the correct ones, and your response was that they do not contain length > >>>> contraction. When I followed up with how you would make the case that > >>>> length contraction is wrong, you stated that you had never observed length > >>>> contraction yourself. When I followed up and asked why that would be > >>>> compelling to anyone else, you stated that you didn’t care what anyone else > >>>> thinks. Finally, you said that you are going to believe whatever seems > >>>> right to you, and you can’t think of any kind of reason that would convince > >>>> you to change your beliefs. > >>>> > >>>> I think I’ve captured the summary of this several-thousand-comment thread > >>>> succinctly, don’t you agree? > >>>> > >>>> > >>> Well, you did fail to mention that mathematically, the Lorentz equations > >>> can be proven wrong, whereas, the Galilean transformation equations cannot. > >>> > >> > >> I know that you’ve tried to disprove them mathematically by trying to > >> ignore length contraction or by trying to apply flat space circumference > >> formulas to the curved space around the earth. This is basically trying to > >> show that Lorentz formulas are wrong by showing that they conflict with > >> nonLorentz formulas. > > > > > > If you want to make complicated equations, what is that to me. I was > > just saying that the Galilean transformation equations were correct > > because they match reality. > > They match reality in terms of agreeing with measurements to the precision > that you measure them. Of course, the Lorentz transforms also match reality > in terms of agreeing with measurements to the precision you measure them. > > > > > > >> > >> In the end, of course, the way to prove Lorentz transformations wrong is to show > >> an actual measurement that is in conflict with the numbers predicted by the > >> Lorentz transform. So far you’ve not been able to do that because none of > >> your measurements are precise enough to be distinguishable from the Lorentz > >> results. > > > > They don't have to be. > > What you can do with futzing with the Galilean transforms is irrelevant. > The point is that to prove the Lorentz transforms wrong requires showing an > actual measurement that is in conflict with the numbers predicted by the > Lorentz transform. So far you’ve not been able to do that. > > I repeat, showing that your crude measurements are consistent with Galilean > transforms does NOT demonstrate those same crude measurements are > inconsistent with Lorentz transforms. Crude measurements can and mostly > likely will be consistent with both. > > I guess this is hard for you to understand. I’m not surprised. You found > the straightforward English definition for a standard second to be > impenetrable. > > > The Galilean transformation equations accommodate any results, as I have > > pointed out to you many times. They accommodate slower clocks. They > > accommodate faster clocks. They accommodate the exact times of the > > Lorentz equations. What they do not accommodate is a length contraction. > > They also do not accommodate a slower clock in S' as seen from S and a > > slower clock in S as seen from S'. A slower clock is slower as seen from > > either frame of reference, which is also what we see in reality. But if > > you want to believe something you read in a Harry Potter book, go ahead > > and do that, but don't try to tell me that I have to believe it. > >> So I’m not really including the floundering you’ve done along those lines. > >> I guess my summary of before was pretty much on target. > >> Well, no, as I told Gary Harnagel, all I need is the Hafele-Keating experiment. So let's run the experiment. First we get two IDEAL clocks so that scientists cannot complain about them, and we take them to Quito, Ecuador, and we put one of them on an airplane. This airplane is going to fly all the way around the world, so we either put enough fuel on it or we persuade the Air Force to let us use a plane that can be refueled in flight. I am sure they would do it for an experiment this important. So now the airplane takes off with the clock on board and flies all the way around the world. Hafele and Keating tell us that if the plane flies one way, it the clock will be slower than the clock on the ground. If it flies the other way, it will be faster. The significant thing here is the circumference of the earth. It is 24,701 miles at the equator. This is true whether the airplane flies east or west or whether it does not fly at all. The circumference is 24,701 miles. So now if we know the altitude of the plane, we can calculate exactly how many miles it travels. So the plane goes all the way around the world and arrives back at Quito, Ecuador. The clock that was on the plane is compared to the clock that was left on the ground. According to Hafele and Keating it will either show more time or less time than the clock on the ground, depending on which way it went around the earth. So now we have a problem. The circumference of the earth did not change even though there was an airplane going around the earth. I know this might seem incomprehensible to people who read a lot of Harry Potter books. So where is your length contraction? All you have are two clocks that had different rates during the flight of the airplane. So now we give the clock that was on the airplane back to the pilot and tell him, Calculate the average speed of the airplane. The pilot calculates the average speed of the airplane. Then we take the clock that was left on the ground and calculate the average speed of the airplane from the time of that clock. This is not difficult to do. In either case, you divide 24,701 miles by the time on the clock. If the clock on the airplane had fewer seconds than the clock on the ground, the pilot will get a faster speed for the airplane than you will get calculating the speed from the time of the clock on the ground. If the clock on the airplane has more seconds than the clock on the ground, you will get a slower speed for the airplane than you will get using the time of the clock on the ground. Which speed is right? The clock on the ground agrees with the GPS system, so scientific people would say it is right. So now we have conducted an experiment with exact values that should satisfy any scientist. The results agree with the Galilean transformation equations, not with Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-10 15:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <83852adb-a5b4-4a67-8a3f-b05691ef4e8c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #471325 |
On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 2:07:53 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 10:23:13 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 9:41:06 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> I am not personally convinced by any of this because whether or not the > >>>>> experiments were as scientists said them to be, the nature of the > >>>>> equations is such that even wrong equations could agree with experiments. > >>>>> The problem I see with the equations is that they do not agree with > >>>>> reality because they have a length contraction. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> In the end here, Robert, you are coming into a science group stating that > >>>> you don’t believe that the core tenet in science (namely, the comparison of > >>>> the calculations using the equations of a theory with the values obtained > >>>> in measurement) is valid. You say this because you believe that equations > >>>> can be manipulated to match any experimental result whatsoever, or that > >>>> measurements are manipulated to match equations, or both. > >>>> > >>>> Instead, you are saying that you assess the correctness of equations on the > >>>> basis of whether they contain features you don’t like. > >>>> > >>>> I asked you how you would make the case that the Galilean transformations > >>>> are the correct ones, and your response was that they do not contain length > >>>> contraction. When I followed up with how you would make the case that > >>>> length contraction is wrong, you stated that you had never observed length > >>>> contraction yourself. When I followed up and asked why that would be > >>>> compelling to anyone else, you stated that you didn’t care what anyone else > >>>> thinks. Finally, you said that you are going to believe whatever seems > >>>> right to you, and you can’t think of any kind of reason that would convince > >>>> you to change your beliefs. > >>>> > >>>> I think I’ve captured the summary of this several-thousand-comment thread > >>>> succinctly, don’t you agree? > >>>> > >>>> > >>> Well, you did fail to mention that mathematically, the Lorentz equations > >>> can be proven wrong, whereas, the Galilean transformation equations cannot. > >>> > >> > >> I know that you’ve tried to disprove them mathematically by trying to > >> ignore length contraction or by trying to apply flat space circumference > >> formulas to the curved space around the earth. This is basically trying to > >> show that Lorentz formulas are wrong by showing that they conflict with > >> nonLorentz formulas. > > > > > > If you want to make complicated equations, what is that to me. I was > > just saying that the Galilean transformation equations were correct > > because they match reality. > > They match reality in terms of agreeing with measurements to the precision > that you measure them. Of course, the Lorentz transforms also match reality > in terms of agreeing with measurements to the precision you measure them. > > > > > > >> > >> In the end, of course, the way to prove Lorentz transformations wrong is to show > >> an actual measurement that is in conflict with the numbers predicted by the > >> Lorentz transform. So far you’ve not been able to do that because none of > >> your measurements are precise enough to be distinguishable from the Lorentz > >> results. > > > > They don't have to be. > > What you can do with futzing with the Galilean transforms is irrelevant. > The point is that to prove the Lorentz transforms wrong requires showing an > actual measurement that is in conflict with the numbers predicted by the > Lorentz transform. So far you’ve not been able to do that. > > I repeat, showing that your crude measurements are consistent with Galilean > transforms does NOT demonstrate those same crude measurements are > inconsistent with Lorentz transforms. Crude measurements can and mostly > likely will be consistent with both. > > I guess this is hard for you to understand. I’m not surprised. You found > the straightforward English definition for a standard second to be > impenetrable. Well, Isaac Newton was English and he used a fraction of the time it takes for the earth to rotate as the definition for a second. > > > The Galilean transformation equations accommodate any results, as I have > > pointed out to you many times. They accommodate slower clocks. They > > accommodate faster clocks. They accommodate the exact times of the > > Lorentz equations. What they do not accommodate is a length contraction. > > They also do not accommodate a slower clock in S' as seen from S and a > > slower clock in S as seen from S'. A slower clock is slower as seen from > > either frame of reference, which is also what we see in reality. But if > > you want to believe something you read in a Harry Potter book, go ahead > > and do that, but don't try to tell me that I have to believe it. > >> So I’m not really including the floundering you’ve done along those lines. > >> I guess my summary of before was pretty much on target. > >>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-10 23:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pn6tj6$6po$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #471341 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 2:07:53 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 10:23:13 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 9:41:06 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am not personally convinced by any of this because whether or not the >>>>>>> experiments were as scientists said them to be, the nature of the >>>>>>> equations is such that even wrong equations could agree with experiments. >>>>>>> The problem I see with the equations is that they do not agree with >>>>>>> reality because they have a length contraction. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> In the end here, Robert, you are coming into a science group stating that >>>>>> you don’t believe that the core tenet in science (namely, the comparison of >>>>>> the calculations using the equations of a theory with the values obtained >>>>>> in measurement) is valid. You say this because you believe that equations >>>>>> can be manipulated to match any experimental result whatsoever, or that >>>>>> measurements are manipulated to match equations, or both. >>>>>> >>>>>> Instead, you are saying that you assess the correctness of equations on the >>>>>> basis of whether they contain features you don’t like. >>>>>> >>>>>> I asked you how you would make the case that the Galilean transformations >>>>>> are the correct ones, and your response was that they do not contain length >>>>>> contraction. When I followed up with how you would make the case that >>>>>> length contraction is wrong, you stated that you had never observed length >>>>>> contraction yourself. When I followed up and asked why that would be >>>>>> compelling to anyone else, you stated that you didn’t care what anyone else >>>>>> thinks. Finally, you said that you are going to believe whatever seems >>>>>> right to you, and you can’t think of any kind of reason that would convince >>>>>> you to change your beliefs. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think I’ve captured the summary of this several-thousand-comment thread >>>>>> succinctly, don’t you agree? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Well, you did fail to mention that mathematically, the Lorentz equations >>>>> can be proven wrong, whereas, the Galilean transformation equations cannot. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I know that you’ve tried to disprove them mathematically by trying to >>>> ignore length contraction or by trying to apply flat space circumference >>>> formulas to the curved space around the earth. This is basically trying to >>>> show that Lorentz formulas are wrong by showing that they conflict with >>>> nonLorentz formulas. >>> >>> >>> If you want to make complicated equations, what is that to me. I was >>> just saying that the Galilean transformation equations were correct >>> because they match reality. >> >> They match reality in terms of agreeing with measurements to the precision >> that you measure them. Of course, the Lorentz transforms also match reality >> in terms of agreeing with measurements to the precision you measure them. >> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> In the end, of course, the way to prove Lorentz transformations wrong is to show >>>> an actual measurement that is in conflict with the numbers predicted by the >>>> Lorentz transform. So far you’ve not been able to do that because none of >>>> your measurements are precise enough to be distinguishable from the Lorentz >>>> results. >>> >>> They don't have to be. >> >> What you can do with futzing with the Galilean transforms is irrelevant. >> The point is that to prove the Lorentz transforms wrong requires showing an >> actual measurement that is in conflict with the numbers predicted by the >> Lorentz transform. So far you’ve not been able to do that. >> >> I repeat, showing that your crude measurements are consistent with Galilean >> transforms does NOT demonstrate those same crude measurements are >> inconsistent with Lorentz transforms. Crude measurements can and mostly >> likely will be consistent with both. >> >> I guess this is hard for you to understand. I’m not surprised. You found >> the straightforward English definition for a standard second to be >> impenetrable. > > > Well, Isaac Newton was English and he used a fraction of the time it > takes for the earth to rotate as the definition for a second. Yes he did. Back in the 1600s the precision of scientific measurements was quite a bit less than it is today. The choice of a standard is driven by the precision required for scientific, engineering, and commerce needs. Nevertheless you’ve not been able to rule out Lorentz transformations with your crude measurements, though you have tried by intermixing nonLorentz assumptions in with your arguments. That only proves that Lorentz transforms don’t mix well with Galilean assumptions. >> >>> The Galilean transformation equations accommodate any results, as I have >>> pointed out to you many times. They accommodate slower clocks. They >>> accommodate faster clocks. They accommodate the exact times of the >>> Lorentz equations. What they do not accommodate is a length contraction. >>> They also do not accommodate a slower clock in S' as seen from S and a >>> slower clock in S as seen from S'. A slower clock is slower as seen from >>> either frame of reference, which is also what we see in reality. But if >>> you want to believe something you read in a Harry Potter book, go ahead >>> and do that, but don't try to tell me that I have to believe it. >>>> So I’m not really including the floundering you’ve done along those lines. >>>> I guess my summary of before was pretty much on target. >>>> > > -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-10 16:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <afde1a49-3ec1-4bba-9632-da545cebc6ec@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #471344 |
On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 4:09:30 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 2:07:53 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 10:23:13 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 9:41:06 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I am not personally convinced by any of this because whether or not the > >>>>>>> experiments were as scientists said them to be, the nature of the > >>>>>>> equations is such that even wrong equations could agree with experiments. > >>>>>>> The problem I see with the equations is that they do not agree with > >>>>>>> reality because they have a length contraction. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> In the end here, Robert, you are coming into a science group stating that > >>>>>> you don’t believe that the core tenet in science (namely, the comparison of > >>>>>> the calculations using the equations of a theory with the values obtained > >>>>>> in measurement) is valid. You say this because you believe that equations > >>>>>> can be manipulated to match any experimental result whatsoever, or that > >>>>>> measurements are manipulated to match equations, or both. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Instead, you are saying that you assess the correctness of equations on the > >>>>>> basis of whether they contain features you don’t like. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I asked you how you would make the case that the Galilean transformations > >>>>>> are the correct ones, and your response was that they do not contain length > >>>>>> contraction. When I followed up with how you would make the case that > >>>>>> length contraction is wrong, you stated that you had never observed length > >>>>>> contraction yourself. When I followed up and asked why that would be > >>>>>> compelling to anyone else, you stated that you didn’t care what anyone else > >>>>>> thinks. Finally, you said that you are going to believe whatever seems > >>>>>> right to you, and you can’t think of any kind of reason that would convince > >>>>>> you to change your beliefs. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I think I’ve captured the summary of this several-thousand-comment thread > >>>>>> succinctly, don’t you agree? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> Well, you did fail to mention that mathematically, the Lorentz equations > >>>>> can be proven wrong, whereas, the Galilean transformation equations cannot. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> I know that you’ve tried to disprove them mathematically by trying to > >>>> ignore length contraction or by trying to apply flat space circumference > >>>> formulas to the curved space around the earth. This is basically trying to > >>>> show that Lorentz formulas are wrong by showing that they conflict with > >>>> nonLorentz formulas. > >>> > >>> > >>> If you want to make complicated equations, what is that to me. I was > >>> just saying that the Galilean transformation equations were correct > >>> because they match reality. > >> > >> They match reality in terms of agreeing with measurements to the precision > >> that you measure them. Of course, the Lorentz transforms also match reality > >> in terms of agreeing with measurements to the precision you measure them. > >> > >>> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> In the end, of course, the way to prove Lorentz transformations wrong is to show > >>>> an actual measurement that is in conflict with the numbers predicted by the > >>>> Lorentz transform. So far you’ve not been able to do that because none of > >>>> your measurements are precise enough to be distinguishable from the Lorentz > >>>> results. > >>> > >>> They don't have to be. > >> > >> What you can do with futzing with the Galilean transforms is irrelevant. > >> The point is that to prove the Lorentz transforms wrong requires showing an > >> actual measurement that is in conflict with the numbers predicted by the > >> Lorentz transform. So far you’ve not been able to do that. > >> > >> I repeat, showing that your crude measurements are consistent with Galilean > >> transforms does NOT demonstrate those same crude measurements are > >> inconsistent with Lorentz transforms. Crude measurements can and mostly > >> likely will be consistent with both. > >> > >> I guess this is hard for you to understand. I’m not surprised. You found > >> the straightforward English definition for a standard second to be > >> impenetrable. > > > > > > Well, Isaac Newton was English and he used a fraction of the time it > > takes for the earth to rotate as the definition for a second. > > Yes he did. Back in the 1600s the precision of scientific measurements was > quite a bit less than it is today. The choice of a standard is driven by > the precision required for scientific, engineering, and commerce needs. > > Nevertheless you’ve not been able to rule out Lorentz transformations with > your crude measurements, though you have tried by intermixing nonLorentz > assumptions in with your arguments. That only proves that Lorentz > transforms don’t mix well with Galilean assumptions. > I ruled them out when I proved there was no length contraction. > >>> The Galilean transformation equations accommodate any results, as I have > >>> pointed out to you many times. They accommodate slower clocks. They > >>> accommodate faster clocks. They accommodate the exact times of the > >>> Lorentz equations. What they do not accommodate is a length contraction. > >>> They also do not accommodate a slower clock in S' as seen from S and a > >>> slower clock in S as seen from S'. A slower clock is slower as seen from > >>> either frame of reference, which is also what we see in reality. But if > >>> you want to believe something you read in a Harry Potter book, go ahead > >>> and do that, but don't try to tell me that I have to believe it. > >>>> So I’m not really including the floundering you’ve done along those lines. > >>>> I guess my summary of before was pretty much on target. > >>>>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 14 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 … 12 13 [14] 15 16 … 50 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web