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 37 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 … 35 36 [37] 38 39 … 50 Next page →
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-26 21:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <aca51a68-03d7-4426-817b-01e1f45e7ec4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473146 |
On Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 8:08:44 AM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> writes: > > >> You're not interested in it enough to look at it unless some one spoonfeeds > >> it to you here. You project your own laziness onto others? Really? > > >If you think having a conversation consists of providing links to > >irrelevant discussions of the Special Theory of Relativity, then there > >are a lot of nice scientists in sci.physics.relativity who would probably > >be thrilled to discuss the length contraction with you. Personally, I am > >just not interested in it. > > Then why did you ask for Einstein's explanation of photons? > I did not ask for Einstein's explanation of photons. I just said he had not given a good explanation of photons, even though he was the one who invented them. > > I do not believe in the length contraction. > >The Galilean transformation equations do not have a length contraction. > > Which is why it is no longer used, it does not model nature well. I think that the Galilean transformation equations model nature as well as nature can be modeled.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-26 15:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pog8nh$1dev$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #473138 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 7:24:54 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> >>>> Of course they have. Would you like a nice book reference? >>> >>> If it is something you are too lazy to post, I am not much interested in it. >>>> >>> >> >> You’re not interested in it enough to look at it unless some one spoonfeeds >> it to you here. You project your own laziness onto others? Really? >> > If you think having a conversation consists of providing links to > irrelevant discussions of the Special Theory of Relativity, As you recall, this was about photons and whether they’d ever been described. The answer is that if course they’ve been very well described. There’s an excellent little book aimed for ordinary people like you and me called “QED” written by Richard Feynman written in 1985, thirty years after Einstein died. It is available for purchase for $5, which is just a little more than what you charge for your books. Perhaps the higher price to be expected since it was written by someone who actually knew what he was talking about. You will perhaps be surprised to find that there are no irrelevant discussions of special relativity in that book about photons. Even though photons were discovered by Einstein, you see, he did more things than relativity. > then there are a lot of nice scientists in sci.physics.relativity who > would probably be thrilled to discuss the length contraction with you. > Personally, I am just not interested in it. I do not believe in the > length contraction. The Galilean transformation equations do not have a > length contraction. > -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-26 21:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ff017e7f-bb56-4104-aa24-feade909d7bb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473153 |
On Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 8:31:01 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 7:24:54 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > > >>>> > >>>> Of course they have. Would you like a nice book reference? > >>> > >>> If it is something you are too lazy to post, I am not much interested in it. > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> You’re not interested in it enough to look at it unless some one spoonfeeds > >> it to you here. You project your own laziness onto others? Really? > >> > > If you think having a conversation consists of providing links to > > irrelevant discussions of the Special Theory of Relativity, > > As you recall, this was about photons and whether they’d ever been > described. The answer is that if course they’ve been very well described. > There’s an excellent little book aimed for ordinary people like you and me > called “QED” written by Richard Feynman written in 1985, thirty years after > Einstein died. It is available for purchase for $5, which is just a little > more than what you charge for your books. Perhaps the higher price to be > expected since it was written by someone who actually knew what he was > talking about. You will perhaps be surprised to find that there are no > irrelevant discussions of special relativity in that book about photons. > Even though photons were discovered by Einstein, you see, he did more > things than relativity. Einstein did not discover photons. He invented them. He also did not explain them. So now you say someone has written a book explaining photons in 1985. That is nice. Maybe I will read it sometime.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-27 18:51 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <poj8qt$gj9$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #473231 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 8:31:01 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 7:24:54 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Of course they have. Would you like a nice book reference? >>>>> >>>>> If it is something you are too lazy to post, I am not much interested in it. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> You’re not interested in it enough to look at it unless some one spoonfeeds >>>> it to you here. You project your own laziness onto others? Really? >>>> >>> If you think having a conversation consists of providing links to >>> irrelevant discussions of the Special Theory of Relativity, >> >> As you recall, this was about photons and whether they’d ever been >> described. The answer is that if course they’ve been very well described. >> There’s an excellent little book aimed for ordinary people like you and me >> called “QED” written by Richard Feynman written in 1985, thirty years after >> Einstein died. It is available for purchase for $5, which is just a little >> more than what you charge for your books. Perhaps the higher price to be >> expected since it was written by someone who actually knew what he was >> talking about. You will perhaps be surprised to find that there are no >> irrelevant discussions of special relativity in that book about photons. >> Even though photons were discovered by Einstein, you see, he did more >> things than relativity. > > Einstein did not discover photons. He invented them. No, he did not. He inferred their existence, the same way Pauli inferred that neutrinos exist, and the way that Le Verrier inferred the existence of Neptune. These men invented names for the things but they’ve been around long before humans even were around. > He also did not explain them. Nor was he expected to. The person who makes the initial realization is not the person to go to for a complete compendium on the full idea. Science is a group activity. Once someone makes a key discovery, others join the investigation and a full description is available only later. This was true for photons and neutrinos and Neptune. > So now you say someone has written a book explaining photons in 1985. > That is nice. Maybe I will read it sometime. Maybe, but I doubt it. Even though it’s a short book written in plain language. You’re entirely too lazy, aren’t you? > > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-27 21:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e8956f50-0ab4-4d54-98d5-5050985d94a3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473290 |
On Thursday, September 27, 2018 at 11:51:13 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 8:31:01 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 7:24:54 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Of course they have. Would you like a nice book reference? > >>>>> > >>>>> If it is something you are too lazy to post, I am not much interested in it. > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> You’re not interested in it enough to look at it unless some one spoonfeeds > >>>> it to you here. You project your own laziness onto others? Really? > >>>> > >>> If you think having a conversation consists of providing links to > >>> irrelevant discussions of the Special Theory of Relativity, > >> > >> As you recall, this was about photons and whether they’d ever been > >> described. The answer is that if course they’ve been very well described. > >> There’s an excellent little book aimed for ordinary people like you and me > >> called “QED” written by Richard Feynman written in 1985, thirty years after > >> Einstein died. It is available for purchase for $5, which is just a little > >> more than what you charge for your books. Perhaps the higher price to be > >> expected since it was written by someone who actually knew what he was > >> talking about. You will perhaps be surprised to find that there are no > >> irrelevant discussions of special relativity in that book about photons. > >> Even though photons were discovered by Einstein, you see, he did more > >> things than relativity. > > > > Einstein did not discover photons. He invented them. > > No, he did not. He inferred their existence, the same way Pauli inferred > that neutrinos exist, and the way that Le Verrier inferred the existence of > Neptune. These men invented names for the things but they’ve been around > long before humans even were around. > > > He also did not explain them. > > Nor was he expected to. The person who makes the initial realization is not > the person to go to for a complete compendium on the full idea. Science is > a group activity. Once someone makes a key discovery, others join the > investigation and a full description is available only later. This was true > for photons and neutrinos and Neptune. > > > So now you say someone has written a book explaining photons in 1985. > > That is nice. Maybe I will read it sometime. > > Maybe, but I doubt it. Even though it’s a short book written in plain > language. You’re entirely too lazy, aren’t you? > I am on social security and sit around trying to communicate with scientists. So are you calling me lazy because I collect social security or because I try to communicate with scientists?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-28 17:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <polptj$o3d$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #473329 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thursday, September 27, 2018 at 11:51:13 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 8:31:01 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 7:24:54 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Of course they have. Would you like a nice book reference? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If it is something you are too lazy to post, I am not much interested in it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> You’re not interested in it enough to look at it unless some one spoonfeeds >>>>>> it to you here. You project your own laziness onto others? Really? >>>>>> >>>>> If you think having a conversation consists of providing links to >>>>> irrelevant discussions of the Special Theory of Relativity, >>>> >>>> As you recall, this was about photons and whether they’d ever been >>>> described. The answer is that if course they’ve been very well described. >>>> There’s an excellent little book aimed for ordinary people like you and me >>>> called “QED” written by Richard Feynman written in 1985, thirty years after >>>> Einstein died. It is available for purchase for $5, which is just a little >>>> more than what you charge for your books. Perhaps the higher price to be >>>> expected since it was written by someone who actually knew what he was >>>> talking about. You will perhaps be surprised to find that there are no >>>> irrelevant discussions of special relativity in that book about photons. >>>> Even though photons were discovered by Einstein, you see, he did more >>>> things than relativity. >>> >>> Einstein did not discover photons. He invented them. >> >> No, he did not. He inferred their existence, the same way Pauli inferred >> that neutrinos exist, and the way that Le Verrier inferred the existence of >> Neptune. These men invented names for the things but they’ve been around >> long before humans even were around. >> >>> He also did not explain them. >> >> Nor was he expected to. The person who makes the initial realization is not >> the person to go to for a complete compendium on the full idea. Science is >> a group activity. Once someone makes a key discovery, others join the >> investigation and a full description is available only later. This was true >> for photons and neutrinos and Neptune. >> >>> So now you say someone has written a book explaining photons in 1985. >>> That is nice. Maybe I will read it sometime. >> >> Maybe, but I doubt it. Even though it’s a short book written in plain >> language. You’re entirely too lazy, aren’t you? >> > I am on social security and sit around trying to communicate with > scientists. So are you calling me lazy because I collect social security > or because I try to communicate with scientists? > I’m calling you lazy because you aren’t interested in reading anything in your own. You’d rather people present it to you here. Sitting around and declining to do something other than this newsgroup is laziness. See? I post on this newsgroup, AND I have an occupation that gives me a living wage, AND I read a lot on my own. I understand you believe that is an unreasonable amount of effort to spend in a day. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-28 12:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <dc5d02c4-46aa-4100-acc8-c449a08e10d1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473383 |
On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 10:55:03 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thursday, September 27, 2018 at 11:51:13 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 8:31:01 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> On Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 7:24:54 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Of course they have. Would you like a nice book reference? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> If it is something you are too lazy to post, I am not much interested in it. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> You’re not interested in it enough to look at it unless some one spoonfeeds > >>>>>> it to you here. You project your own laziness onto others? Really? > >>>>>> > >>>>> If you think having a conversation consists of providing links to > >>>>> irrelevant discussions of the Special Theory of Relativity, > >>>> > >>>> As you recall, this was about photons and whether they’d ever been > >>>> described. The answer is that if course they’ve been very well described. > >>>> There’s an excellent little book aimed for ordinary people like you and me > >>>> called “QED” written by Richard Feynman written in 1985, thirty years after > >>>> Einstein died. It is available for purchase for $5, which is just a little > >>>> more than what you charge for your books. Perhaps the higher price to be > >>>> expected since it was written by someone who actually knew what he was > >>>> talking about. You will perhaps be surprised to find that there are no > >>>> irrelevant discussions of special relativity in that book about photons. > >>>> Even though photons were discovered by Einstein, you see, he did more > >>>> things than relativity. > >>> > >>> Einstein did not discover photons. He invented them. > >> > >> No, he did not. He inferred their existence, the same way Pauli inferred > >> that neutrinos exist, and the way that Le Verrier inferred the existence of > >> Neptune. These men invented names for the things but they’ve been around > >> long before humans even were around. > >> > >>> He also did not explain them. > >> > >> Nor was he expected to. The person who makes the initial realization is not > >> the person to go to for a complete compendium on the full idea. Science is > >> a group activity. Once someone makes a key discovery, others join the > >> investigation and a full description is available only later. This was true > >> for photons and neutrinos and Neptune. > >> > >>> So now you say someone has written a book explaining photons in 1985. > >>> That is nice. Maybe I will read it sometime. > >> > >> Maybe, but I doubt it. Even though it’s a short book written in plain > >> language. You’re entirely too lazy, aren’t you? > >> > > I am on social security and sit around trying to communicate with > > scientists. So are you calling me lazy because I collect social security > > or because I try to communicate with scientists? > > > > I’m calling you lazy because you aren’t interested in reading anything in > your own. You’d rather people present it to you here. Sitting around and > declining to do something other than this newsgroup is laziness. > > See? I post on this newsgroup, AND I have an occupation that gives me a > living wage, AND I read a lot on my own. I understand you believe that is > an unreasonable amount of effort to spend in a day. > Well, your idea is that if something is written in a book, then it is true, and if I do not read the book, and you do, then that proves that you know more than I do.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-28 21:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pom84p$1ffb$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #473398 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 10:55:03 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Thursday, September 27, 2018 at 11:51:13 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 8:31:01 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 26, 2018 at 7:24:54 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Of course they have. Would you like a nice book reference? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If it is something you are too lazy to post, I am not much interested in it. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You’re not interested in it enough to look at it unless some one spoonfeeds >>>>>>>> it to you here. You project your own laziness onto others? Really? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> If you think having a conversation consists of providing links to >>>>>>> irrelevant discussions of the Special Theory of Relativity, >>>>>> >>>>>> As you recall, this was about photons and whether they’d ever been >>>>>> described. The answer is that if course they’ve been very well described. >>>>>> There’s an excellent little book aimed for ordinary people like you and me >>>>>> called “QED” written by Richard Feynman written in 1985, thirty years after >>>>>> Einstein died. It is available for purchase for $5, which is just a little >>>>>> more than what you charge for your books. Perhaps the higher price to be >>>>>> expected since it was written by someone who actually knew what he was >>>>>> talking about. You will perhaps be surprised to find that there are no >>>>>> irrelevant discussions of special relativity in that book about photons. >>>>>> Even though photons were discovered by Einstein, you see, he did more >>>>>> things than relativity. >>>>> >>>>> Einstein did not discover photons. He invented them. >>>> >>>> No, he did not. He inferred their existence, the same way Pauli inferred >>>> that neutrinos exist, and the way that Le Verrier inferred the existence of >>>> Neptune. These men invented names for the things but they’ve been around >>>> long before humans even were around. >>>> >>>>> He also did not explain them. >>>> >>>> Nor was he expected to. The person who makes the initial realization is not >>>> the person to go to for a complete compendium on the full idea. Science is >>>> a group activity. Once someone makes a key discovery, others join the >>>> investigation and a full description is available only later. This was true >>>> for photons and neutrinos and Neptune. >>>> >>>>> So now you say someone has written a book explaining photons in 1985. >>>>> That is nice. Maybe I will read it sometime. >>>> >>>> Maybe, but I doubt it. Even though it’s a short book written in plain >>>> language. You’re entirely too lazy, aren’t you? >>>> >>> I am on social security and sit around trying to communicate with >>> scientists. So are you calling me lazy because I collect social security >>> or because I try to communicate with scientists? >>> >> >> I’m calling you lazy because you aren’t interested in reading anything in >> your own. You’d rather people present it to you here. Sitting around and >> declining to do something other than this newsgroup is laziness. >> >> See? I post on this newsgroup, AND I have an occupation that gives me a >> living wage, AND I read a lot on my own. I understand you believe that is >> an unreasonable amount of effort to spend in a day. >> > Well, your idea is that if something is written in a book, then it is > true, and if I do not read the book, and you do, then that proves that > you know more than I do. > Well, Robert, I think it’s fair to say that someone who has strong ideas on a subject but is mostly unread in that same subject, then it is extremely likely that he is incorrect in his idea, and that he is expressing an uninformed opinion. In this case, since we are talking about historical facts, being uninformed is truly a liability. And yes, in this case, since I have read descriptions of photons and you haven’t, then yes, I know more than you do about whether descriptions of photons exist. This position has occurred, by the way, because I don’t wallow in laziness the way you do. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-28 18:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c9e99d95-0b2b-411a-9eda-32ea922281a5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473429 |
On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 2:57:49 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > Well, your idea is that if something is written in a book, then it is > > true, and if I do not read the book, and you do, then that proves that > > you know more than I do. > > > > Well, Robert, I think it’s fair to say that someone who has strong ideas on > a subject but is mostly unread in that same subject, then it is extremely > likely that he is incorrect in his idea, and that he is expressing an > uninformed opinion. > > In this case, since we are talking about historical facts, being uninformed > is truly a liability. And yes, in this case, since I have read descriptions > of photons and you haven’t, then yes, I know more than you do about whether > descriptions of photons exist. This position has occurred, by the way, > because I don’t wallow in laziness the way you do. > I am certainly sorry about wallowing in laziness, but I am just not really interested in the scientific mis-information you are directing me to pursue. I think my time is better spent in doing other things. If you were inclined to say what there is about these scientific writings that is supposed to be so beneficial, perhaps we could discuss that, but you seem to be saying that these scientific secrets must never be discussed and can only be available to those who show sufficient obedience to modern science to go to these sources of modern scientific theories when directed to do so.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-29 12:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ponsnm$1qp8$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #473440 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 2:57:49 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>> Well, your idea is that if something is written in a book, then it is >>> true, and if I do not read the book, and you do, then that proves that >>> you know more than I do. >>> >> >> Well, Robert, I think it’s fair to say that someone who has strong ideas on >> a subject but is mostly unread in that same subject, then it is extremely >> likely that he is incorrect in his idea, and that he is expressing an >> uninformed opinion. >> >> In this case, since we are talking about historical facts, being uninformed >> is truly a liability. And yes, in this case, since I have read descriptions >> of photons and you haven’t, then yes, I know more than you do about whether >> descriptions of photons exist. This position has occurred, by the way, >> because I don’t wallow in laziness the way you do. >> > I am certainly sorry about wallowing in laziness, but I am just not > really interested in the scientific mis-information you are directing me to pursue. Well, it’s interesting that you decide that it is misinformation before even looking at it. As I recall, there have been periods where books were burned by people who knew the books were evil without even reading them. As you recall, there were visitors to Galileo’s house who were not interested in the misinformation provided by his telescope and so they simply declined to look through it. > I think my time is better spent in doing other things. Yes, I know. Like collecting Social Security, putting gas in a truck you aren’t legally able to drive, and telling people on sci.physics.relativity how uninterested in physics you are. > If you were inclined to say what there is about these scientific writings > that is supposed to be so beneficial, perhaps we could discuss that, but > you seem to be saying that these scientific secrets must never be > discussed and can only be available to those who show sufficient > obedience to modern science to go to these sources of modern scientific > theories when directed to do so. > I’ve never really thought of a public library as a warehouse of secrets. I mean, I show up at the door when they’ve posted it is open, and sure enough I walk right in and no one asks me for any credentials. Then I walk right over to the secret shelves and I put my hand right on the book of secrets and I open it up and read all the secrets there, and not one person tries to stop me. But I suppose that my deciding to go to the public library and reading secrets must just be cowtowing to somebody else’s wishes every time I do it, that’s what you’re telling me. And you just aren’t going to cowtow to anybody by going to a public library and reading anything when you can tell for yourself what is valid information and what is misinformation. Have I got that right, Robert? -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-29 14:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <bfaa55c5-27af-4e33-b359-e61d27c94994@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473451 |
On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 5:55:21 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 2:57:49 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > > >>> Well, your idea is that if something is written in a book, then it is > >>> true, and if I do not read the book, and you do, then that proves that > >>> you know more than I do. > >>> > >> > >> Well, Robert, I think it’s fair to say that someone who has strong ideas on > >> a subject but is mostly unread in that same subject, then it is extremely > >> likely that he is incorrect in his idea, and that he is expressing an > >> uninformed opinion. > >> > >> In this case, since we are talking about historical facts, being uninformed > >> is truly a liability. And yes, in this case, since I have read descriptions > >> of photons and you haven’t, then yes, I know more than you do about whether > >> descriptions of photons exist. This position has occurred, by the way, > >> because I don’t wallow in laziness the way you do. > >> > > I am certainly sorry about wallowing in laziness, but I am just not > > really interested in the scientific mis-information you are directing me to pursue. > > Well, it’s interesting that you decide that it is misinformation before > even looking at it. As I recall, there have been periods where books were > burned by people who knew the books were evil without even reading them. As > you recall, there were visitors to Galileo’s house who were not interested > in the misinformation provided by his telescope and so they simply declined > to look through it. > > > I think my time is better spent in doing other things. > > Yes, I know. Like collecting Social Security, putting gas in a truck you > aren’t legally able to drive, and telling people on sci.physics.relativity > how uninterested in physics you are. > > > If you were inclined to say what there is about these scientific writings > > that is supposed to be so beneficial, perhaps we could discuss that, but > > you seem to be saying that these scientific secrets must never be > > discussed and can only be available to those who show sufficient > > obedience to modern science to go to these sources of modern scientific > > theories when directed to do so. > > > > I’ve never really thought of a public library as a warehouse of secrets. I > mean, I show up at the door when they’ve posted it is open, and sure enough > I walk right in and no one asks me for any credentials. Then I walk right > over to the secret shelves and I put my hand right on the book of secrets > and I open it up and read all the secrets there, and not one person tries > to stop me. But I suppose that my deciding to go to the public library and > reading secrets must just be cowtowing to somebody else’s wishes every time > I do it, that’s what you’re telling me. And you just aren’t going to cowtow > to anybody by going to a public library and reading anything when you can > tell for yourself what is valid information and what is misinformation. > Have I got that right, Robert? > Well, there is one detail you left out. The new public library is about a mile from where I live. I would have to have a fairly good reason to go there before I would walk that far. Personally, I think you are the lazy person. You multiply words in long harangues about my personal failings, but have yet to post anything significant about relativity. I just don't see any reason to walk over to the public library based on anything you have said.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-29 22:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <poot0r$1j3h$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #473494 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 5:55:21 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 2:57:49 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> >>>>> Well, your idea is that if something is written in a book, then it is >>>>> true, and if I do not read the book, and you do, then that proves that >>>>> you know more than I do. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Well, Robert, I think it’s fair to say that someone who has strong ideas on >>>> a subject but is mostly unread in that same subject, then it is extremely >>>> likely that he is incorrect in his idea, and that he is expressing an >>>> uninformed opinion. >>>> >>>> In this case, since we are talking about historical facts, being uninformed >>>> is truly a liability. And yes, in this case, since I have read descriptions >>>> of photons and you haven’t, then yes, I know more than you do about whether >>>> descriptions of photons exist. This position has occurred, by the way, >>>> because I don’t wallow in laziness the way you do. >>>> >>> I am certainly sorry about wallowing in laziness, but I am just not >>> really interested in the scientific mis-information you are directing me to pursue. >> >> Well, it’s interesting that you decide that it is misinformation before >> even looking at it. As I recall, there have been periods where books were >> burned by people who knew the books were evil without even reading them. As >> you recall, there were visitors to Galileo’s house who were not interested >> in the misinformation provided by his telescope and so they simply declined >> to look through it. >> >>> I think my time is better spent in doing other things. >> >> Yes, I know. Like collecting Social Security, putting gas in a truck you >> aren’t legally able to drive, and telling people on sci.physics.relativity >> how uninterested in physics you are. >> >>> If you were inclined to say what there is about these scientific writings >>> that is supposed to be so beneficial, perhaps we could discuss that, but >>> you seem to be saying that these scientific secrets must never be >>> discussed and can only be available to those who show sufficient >>> obedience to modern science to go to these sources of modern scientific >>> theories when directed to do so. >>> >> >> I’ve never really thought of a public library as a warehouse of secrets. I >> mean, I show up at the door when they’ve posted it is open, and sure enough >> I walk right in and no one asks me for any credentials. Then I walk right >> over to the secret shelves and I put my hand right on the book of secrets >> and I open it up and read all the secrets there, and not one person tries >> to stop me. But I suppose that my deciding to go to the public library and >> reading secrets must just be cowtowing to somebody else’s wishes every time >> I do it, that’s what you’re telling me. And you just aren’t going to cowtow >> to anybody by going to a public library and reading anything when you can >> tell for yourself what is valid information and what is misinformation. >> Have I got that right, Robert? >> > Well, there is one detail you left out. The new public library is about > a mile from where I live. I would have to have a fairly good reason to > go there before I would walk that far. A twenty minute walk is just too much effort for you, Robert? How much time have you spent on Usenet today? > Personally, I think you are the lazy person. I walk two and a half miles miles to the library. Usually I ride my bike. And you? Oh, that’s right. A mile is too much time away from sci.physics.relativity, sitting on your rear. > You multiply words in long harangues about my personal failings, but have > yet to post anything significant about relativity. I just don't see any > reason to walk over to the public library based on anything you have said. > Yes that’s what I mean. You’re too lazy to read on your own unless someone works really hard to convince you to do it. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-29 22:47 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4183f595-71e4-4213-9ac7-8bc9745b63f1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473503 |
On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 3:06:23 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 5:55:21 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 2:57:49 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>> > >>>>> Well, your idea is that if something is written in a book, then it is > >>>>> true, and if I do not read the book, and you do, then that proves that > >>>>> you know more than I do. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Well, Robert, I think it’s fair to say that someone who has strong ideas on > >>>> a subject but is mostly unread in that same subject, then it is extremely > >>>> likely that he is incorrect in his idea, and that he is expressing an > >>>> uninformed opinion. > >>>> > >>>> In this case, since we are talking about historical facts, being uninformed > >>>> is truly a liability. And yes, in this case, since I have read descriptions > >>>> of photons and you haven’t, then yes, I know more than you do about whether > >>>> descriptions of photons exist. This position has occurred, by the way, > >>>> because I don’t wallow in laziness the way you do. > >>>> > >>> I am certainly sorry about wallowing in laziness, but I am just not > >>> really interested in the scientific mis-information you are directing me to pursue. > >> > >> Well, it’s interesting that you decide that it is misinformation before > >> even looking at it. As I recall, there have been periods where books were > >> burned by people who knew the books were evil without even reading them. As > >> you recall, there were visitors to Galileo’s house who were not interested > >> in the misinformation provided by his telescope and so they simply declined > >> to look through it. > >> > >>> I think my time is better spent in doing other things. > >> > >> Yes, I know. Like collecting Social Security, putting gas in a truck you > >> aren’t legally able to drive, and telling people on sci.physics.relativity > >> how uninterested in physics you are. > >> > >>> If you were inclined to say what there is about these scientific writings > >>> that is supposed to be so beneficial, perhaps we could discuss that, but > >>> you seem to be saying that these scientific secrets must never be > >>> discussed and can only be available to those who show sufficient > >>> obedience to modern science to go to these sources of modern scientific > >>> theories when directed to do so. > >>> > >> > >> I’ve never really thought of a public library as a warehouse of secrets. I > >> mean, I show up at the door when they’ve posted it is open, and sure enough > >> I walk right in and no one asks me for any credentials. Then I walk right > >> over to the secret shelves and I put my hand right on the book of secrets > >> and I open it up and read all the secrets there, and not one person tries > >> to stop me. But I suppose that my deciding to go to the public library and > >> reading secrets must just be cowtowing to somebody else’s wishes every time > >> I do it, that’s what you’re telling me. And you just aren’t going to cowtow > >> to anybody by going to a public library and reading anything when you can > >> tell for yourself what is valid information and what is misinformation. > >> Have I got that right, Robert? > >> > > Well, there is one detail you left out. The new public library is about > > a mile from where I live. I would have to have a fairly good reason to > > go there before I would walk that far. > > A twenty minute walk is just too much effort for you, Robert? How much time > have you spent on Usenet today? > > > Personally, I think you are the lazy person. > > I walk two and a half miles miles to the library. Usually I ride my bike. > And you? Oh, that’s right. A mile is too much time away from > sci.physics.relativity, sitting on your rear. > > > You multiply words in long harangues about my personal failings, but have > > yet to post anything significant about relativity. I just don't see any > > reason to walk over to the public library based on anything you have said. > > > > Yes that’s what I mean. You’re too lazy to read on your own unless someone > works really hard to convince you to do it. I read what you write. What else would I need to convince me that the Galilean transformation equations are the correct equations?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-30 12:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <poqgdr$1s49$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #473525 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 3:06:23 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 5:55:21 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 2:57:49 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> Well, your idea is that if something is written in a book, then it is >>>>>>> true, and if I do not read the book, and you do, then that proves that >>>>>>> you know more than I do. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, Robert, I think it’s fair to say that someone who has strong ideas on >>>>>> a subject but is mostly unread in that same subject, then it is extremely >>>>>> likely that he is incorrect in his idea, and that he is expressing an >>>>>> uninformed opinion. >>>>>> >>>>>> In this case, since we are talking about historical facts, being uninformed >>>>>> is truly a liability. And yes, in this case, since I have read descriptions >>>>>> of photons and you haven’t, then yes, I know more than you do about whether >>>>>> descriptions of photons exist. This position has occurred, by the way, >>>>>> because I don’t wallow in laziness the way you do. >>>>>> >>>>> I am certainly sorry about wallowing in laziness, but I am just not >>>>> really interested in the scientific mis-information you are directing me to pursue. >>>> >>>> Well, it’s interesting that you decide that it is misinformation before >>>> even looking at it. As I recall, there have been periods where books were >>>> burned by people who knew the books were evil without even reading them. As >>>> you recall, there were visitors to Galileo’s house who were not interested >>>> in the misinformation provided by his telescope and so they simply declined >>>> to look through it. >>>> >>>>> I think my time is better spent in doing other things. >>>> >>>> Yes, I know. Like collecting Social Security, putting gas in a truck you >>>> aren’t legally able to drive, and telling people on sci.physics.relativity >>>> how uninterested in physics you are. >>>> >>>>> If you were inclined to say what there is about these scientific writings >>>>> that is supposed to be so beneficial, perhaps we could discuss that, but >>>>> you seem to be saying that these scientific secrets must never be >>>>> discussed and can only be available to those who show sufficient >>>>> obedience to modern science to go to these sources of modern scientific >>>>> theories when directed to do so. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I’ve never really thought of a public library as a warehouse of secrets. I >>>> mean, I show up at the door when they’ve posted it is open, and sure enough >>>> I walk right in and no one asks me for any credentials. Then I walk right >>>> over to the secret shelves and I put my hand right on the book of secrets >>>> and I open it up and read all the secrets there, and not one person tries >>>> to stop me. But I suppose that my deciding to go to the public library and >>>> reading secrets must just be cowtowing to somebody else’s wishes every time >>>> I do it, that’s what you’re telling me. And you just aren’t going to cowtow >>>> to anybody by going to a public library and reading anything when you can >>>> tell for yourself what is valid information and what is misinformation. >>>> Have I got that right, Robert? >>>> >>> Well, there is one detail you left out. The new public library is about >>> a mile from where I live. I would have to have a fairly good reason to >>> go there before I would walk that far. >> >> A twenty minute walk is just too much effort for you, Robert? How much time >> have you spent on Usenet today? >> >>> Personally, I think you are the lazy person. >> >> I walk two and a half miles miles to the library. Usually I ride my bike. >> And you? Oh, that’s right. A mile is too much time away from >> sci.physics.relativity, sitting on your rear. >> >>> You multiply words in long harangues about my personal failings, but have >>> yet to post anything significant about relativity. I just don't see any >>> reason to walk over to the public library based on anything you have said. >>> >> >> Yes that’s what I mean. You’re too lazy to read on your own unless someone >> works really hard to convince you to do it. > > I read what you write. Not enough to become informed. > What else would I need to convince me that the Galilean transformation > equations are the correct equations? Don’t look for info just for the sake of validating a conclusion you want. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-09-30 21:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d5fb21b9-f60a-4cc3-a1e0-f231953294b9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473540 |
On Sunday, September 30, 2018 at 5:43:42 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 3:06:23 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 5:55:21 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 2:57:49 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>>> Well, your idea is that if something is written in a book, then it is > >>>>>>> true, and if I do not read the book, and you do, then that proves that > >>>>>>> you know more than I do. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Well, Robert, I think it’s fair to say that someone who has strong ideas on > >>>>>> a subject but is mostly unread in that same subject, then it is extremely > >>>>>> likely that he is incorrect in his idea, and that he is expressing an > >>>>>> uninformed opinion. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> In this case, since we are talking about historical facts, being uninformed > >>>>>> is truly a liability. And yes, in this case, since I have read descriptions > >>>>>> of photons and you haven’t, then yes, I know more than you do about whether > >>>>>> descriptions of photons exist. This position has occurred, by the way, > >>>>>> because I don’t wallow in laziness the way you do. > >>>>>> > >>>>> I am certainly sorry about wallowing in laziness, but I am just not > >>>>> really interested in the scientific mis-information you are directing me to pursue. > >>>> > >>>> Well, it’s interesting that you decide that it is misinformation before > >>>> even looking at it. As I recall, there have been periods where books were > >>>> burned by people who knew the books were evil without even reading them. As > >>>> you recall, there were visitors to Galileo’s house who were not interested > >>>> in the misinformation provided by his telescope and so they simply declined > >>>> to look through it. > >>>> > >>>>> I think my time is better spent in doing other things. > >>>> > >>>> Yes, I know. Like collecting Social Security, putting gas in a truck you > >>>> aren’t legally able to drive, and telling people on sci.physics.relativity > >>>> how uninterested in physics you are. > >>>> > >>>>> If you were inclined to say what there is about these scientific writings > >>>>> that is supposed to be so beneficial, perhaps we could discuss that, but > >>>>> you seem to be saying that these scientific secrets must never be > >>>>> discussed and can only be available to those who show sufficient > >>>>> obedience to modern science to go to these sources of modern scientific > >>>>> theories when directed to do so. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> I’ve never really thought of a public library as a warehouse of secrets. I > >>>> mean, I show up at the door when they’ve posted it is open, and sure enough > >>>> I walk right in and no one asks me for any credentials. Then I walk right > >>>> over to the secret shelves and I put my hand right on the book of secrets > >>>> and I open it up and read all the secrets there, and not one person tries > >>>> to stop me. But I suppose that my deciding to go to the public library and > >>>> reading secrets must just be cowtowing to somebody else’s wishes every time > >>>> I do it, that’s what you’re telling me. And you just aren’t going to cowtow > >>>> to anybody by going to a public library and reading anything when you can > >>>> tell for yourself what is valid information and what is misinformation. > >>>> Have I got that right, Robert? > >>>> > >>> Well, there is one detail you left out. The new public library is about > >>> a mile from where I live. I would have to have a fairly good reason to > >>> go there before I would walk that far. > >> > >> A twenty minute walk is just too much effort for you, Robert? How much time > >> have you spent on Usenet today? > >> > >>> Personally, I think you are the lazy person. > >> > >> I walk two and a half miles miles to the library. Usually I ride my bike. > >> And you? Oh, that’s right. A mile is too much time away from > >> sci.physics.relativity, sitting on your rear. > >> > >>> You multiply words in long harangues about my personal failings, but have > >>> yet to post anything significant about relativity. I just don't see any > >>> reason to walk over to the public library based on anything you have said. > >>> > >> > >> Yes that’s what I mean. You’re too lazy to read on your own unless someone > >> works really hard to convince you to do it. > > > > I read what you write. > > Not enough to become informed. > > > What else would I need to convince me that the Galilean transformation > > equations are the correct equations? > > Don’t look for info just for the sake of validating a conclusion you want. > I already looked at the information.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 14:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <potcgs$frl$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #473650 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sunday, September 30, 2018 at 5:43:42 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 3:06:23 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 5:55:21 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 2:57:49 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Well, your idea is that if something is written in a book, then it is >>>>>>>>> true, and if I do not read the book, and you do, then that proves that >>>>>>>>> you know more than I do. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Well, Robert, I think it’s fair to say that someone who has strong ideas on >>>>>>>> a subject but is mostly unread in that same subject, then it is extremely >>>>>>>> likely that he is incorrect in his idea, and that he is expressing an >>>>>>>> uninformed opinion. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In this case, since we are talking about historical facts, being uninformed >>>>>>>> is truly a liability. And yes, in this case, since I have read descriptions >>>>>>>> of photons and you haven’t, then yes, I know more than you do about whether >>>>>>>> descriptions of photons exist. This position has occurred, by the way, >>>>>>>> because I don’t wallow in laziness the way you do. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am certainly sorry about wallowing in laziness, but I am just not >>>>>>> really interested in the scientific mis-information you are directing me to pursue. >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, it’s interesting that you decide that it is misinformation before >>>>>> even looking at it. As I recall, there have been periods where books were >>>>>> burned by people who knew the books were evil without even reading them. As >>>>>> you recall, there were visitors to Galileo’s house who were not interested >>>>>> in the misinformation provided by his telescope and so they simply declined >>>>>> to look through it. >>>>>> >>>>>>> I think my time is better spent in doing other things. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, I know. Like collecting Social Security, putting gas in a truck you >>>>>> aren’t legally able to drive, and telling people on sci.physics.relativity >>>>>> how uninterested in physics you are. >>>>>> >>>>>>> If you were inclined to say what there is about these scientific writings >>>>>>> that is supposed to be so beneficial, perhaps we could discuss that, but >>>>>>> you seem to be saying that these scientific secrets must never be >>>>>>> discussed and can only be available to those who show sufficient >>>>>>> obedience to modern science to go to these sources of modern scientific >>>>>>> theories when directed to do so. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I’ve never really thought of a public library as a warehouse of secrets. I >>>>>> mean, I show up at the door when they’ve posted it is open, and sure enough >>>>>> I walk right in and no one asks me for any credentials. Then I walk right >>>>>> over to the secret shelves and I put my hand right on the book of secrets >>>>>> and I open it up and read all the secrets there, and not one person tries >>>>>> to stop me. But I suppose that my deciding to go to the public library and >>>>>> reading secrets must just be cowtowing to somebody else’s wishes every time >>>>>> I do it, that’s what you’re telling me. And you just aren’t going to cowtow >>>>>> to anybody by going to a public library and reading anything when you can >>>>>> tell for yourself what is valid information and what is misinformation. >>>>>> Have I got that right, Robert? >>>>>> >>>>> Well, there is one detail you left out. The new public library is about >>>>> a mile from where I live. I would have to have a fairly good reason to >>>>> go there before I would walk that far. >>>> >>>> A twenty minute walk is just too much effort for you, Robert? How much time >>>> have you spent on Usenet today? >>>> >>>>> Personally, I think you are the lazy person. >>>> >>>> I walk two and a half miles miles to the library. Usually I ride my bike. >>>> And you? Oh, that’s right. A mile is too much time away from >>>> sci.physics.relativity, sitting on your rear. >>>> >>>>> You multiply words in long harangues about my personal failings, but have >>>>> yet to post anything significant about relativity. I just don't see any >>>>> reason to walk over to the public library based on anything you have said. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes that’s what I mean. You’re too lazy to read on your own unless someone >>>> works really hard to convince you to do it. >>> >>> I read what you write. >> >> Not enough to become informed. >> >>> What else would I need to convince me that the Galilean transformation >>> equations are the correct equations? >> >> Don’t look for info just for the sake of validating a conclusion you want. >> > I already looked at the information. > You looked at the information about length contraction? Marvelous. And to think you said there was no evidence of length contraction first, and then you said you would not look at any information about length contraction. What reference did you look at? -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 13:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3d3b059e-e693-404a-af2a-453d33ee6975@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473670 |
On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 7:55:27 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sunday, September 30, 2018 at 5:43:42 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 3:06:23 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 5:55:21 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 2:57:49 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Well, your idea is that if something is written in a book, then it is > >>>>>>>>> true, and if I do not read the book, and you do, then that proves that > >>>>>>>>> you know more than I do. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Well, Robert, I think it’s fair to say that someone who has strong ideas on > >>>>>>>> a subject but is mostly unread in that same subject, then it is extremely > >>>>>>>> likely that he is incorrect in his idea, and that he is expressing an > >>>>>>>> uninformed opinion. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> In this case, since we are talking about historical facts, being uninformed > >>>>>>>> is truly a liability. And yes, in this case, since I have read descriptions > >>>>>>>> of photons and you haven’t, then yes, I know more than you do about whether > >>>>>>>> descriptions of photons exist. This position has occurred, by the way, > >>>>>>>> because I don’t wallow in laziness the way you do. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I am certainly sorry about wallowing in laziness, but I am just not > >>>>>>> really interested in the scientific mis-information you are directing me to pursue. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Well, it’s interesting that you decide that it is misinformation before > >>>>>> even looking at it. As I recall, there have been periods where books were > >>>>>> burned by people who knew the books were evil without even reading them. As > >>>>>> you recall, there were visitors to Galileo’s house who were not interested > >>>>>> in the misinformation provided by his telescope and so they simply declined > >>>>>> to look through it. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> I think my time is better spent in doing other things. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Yes, I know. Like collecting Social Security, putting gas in a truck you > >>>>>> aren’t legally able to drive, and telling people on sci.physics.relativity > >>>>>> how uninterested in physics you are. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> If you were inclined to say what there is about these scientific writings > >>>>>>> that is supposed to be so beneficial, perhaps we could discuss that, but > >>>>>>> you seem to be saying that these scientific secrets must never be > >>>>>>> discussed and can only be available to those who show sufficient > >>>>>>> obedience to modern science to go to these sources of modern scientific > >>>>>>> theories when directed to do so. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I’ve never really thought of a public library as a warehouse of secrets. I > >>>>>> mean, I show up at the door when they’ve posted it is open, and sure enough > >>>>>> I walk right in and no one asks me for any credentials. Then I walk right > >>>>>> over to the secret shelves and I put my hand right on the book of secrets > >>>>>> and I open it up and read all the secrets there, and not one person tries > >>>>>> to stop me. But I suppose that my deciding to go to the public library and > >>>>>> reading secrets must just be cowtowing to somebody else’s wishes every time > >>>>>> I do it, that’s what you’re telling me. And you just aren’t going to cowtow > >>>>>> to anybody by going to a public library and reading anything when you can > >>>>>> tell for yourself what is valid information and what is misinformation. > >>>>>> Have I got that right, Robert? > >>>>>> > >>>>> Well, there is one detail you left out. The new public library is about > >>>>> a mile from where I live. I would have to have a fairly good reason to > >>>>> go there before I would walk that far. > >>>> > >>>> A twenty minute walk is just too much effort for you, Robert? How much time > >>>> have you spent on Usenet today? > >>>> > >>>>> Personally, I think you are the lazy person. > >>>> > >>>> I walk two and a half miles miles to the library. Usually I ride my bike. > >>>> And you? Oh, that’s right. A mile is too much time away from > >>>> sci.physics.relativity, sitting on your rear. > >>>> > >>>>> You multiply words in long harangues about my personal failings, but have > >>>>> yet to post anything significant about relativity. I just don't see any > >>>>> reason to walk over to the public library based on anything you have said. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Yes that’s what I mean. You’re too lazy to read on your own unless someone > >>>> works really hard to convince you to do it. > >>> > >>> I read what you write. > >> > >> Not enough to become informed. > >> > >>> What else would I need to convince me that the Galilean transformation > >>> equations are the correct equations? > >> > >> Don’t look for info just for the sake of validating a conclusion you want. > >> > > I already looked at the information. > > > > You looked at the information about length contraction? Marvelous. And to > think you said there was no evidence of length contraction first, and then > you said you would not look at any information about length contraction. > What reference did you look at? The first book I read about Special Relativity was in a box of discarded books at a library. Then I read Einstein's book, Relativity, the Special and General Theories, Then I read a bunch of other books on the subject. None of them convinced me that there was a length contraction.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 21:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pou4aj$1rut$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #473705 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 7:55:27 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sunday, September 30, 2018 at 5:43:42 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 3:06:23 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 5:55:21 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 2:57:49 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Well, your idea is that if something is written in a book, then it is >>>>>>>>>>> true, and if I do not read the book, and you do, then that proves that >>>>>>>>>>> you know more than I do. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Well, Robert, I think it’s fair to say that someone who has strong ideas on >>>>>>>>>> a subject but is mostly unread in that same subject, then it is extremely >>>>>>>>>> likely that he is incorrect in his idea, and that he is expressing an >>>>>>>>>> uninformed opinion. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In this case, since we are talking about historical facts, being uninformed >>>>>>>>>> is truly a liability. And yes, in this case, since I have read descriptions >>>>>>>>>> of photons and you haven’t, then yes, I know more than you do about whether >>>>>>>>>> descriptions of photons exist. This position has occurred, by the way, >>>>>>>>>> because I don’t wallow in laziness the way you do. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I am certainly sorry about wallowing in laziness, but I am just not >>>>>>>>> really interested in the scientific mis-information you are >>>>>>>>> directing me to pursue. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Well, it’s interesting that you decide that it is misinformation before >>>>>>>> even looking at it. As I recall, there have been periods where books were >>>>>>>> burned by people who knew the books were evil without even reading them. As >>>>>>>> you recall, there were visitors to Galileo’s house who were not interested >>>>>>>> in the misinformation provided by his telescope and so they simply declined >>>>>>>> to look through it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think my time is better spent in doing other things. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes, I know. Like collecting Social Security, putting gas in a truck you >>>>>>>> aren’t legally able to drive, and telling people on sci.physics.relativity >>>>>>>> how uninterested in physics you are. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If you were inclined to say what there is about these scientific writings >>>>>>>>> that is supposed to be so beneficial, perhaps we could discuss that, but >>>>>>>>> you seem to be saying that these scientific secrets must never be >>>>>>>>> discussed and can only be available to those who show sufficient >>>>>>>>> obedience to modern science to go to these sources of modern scientific >>>>>>>>> theories when directed to do so. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I’ve never really thought of a public library as a warehouse of secrets. I >>>>>>>> mean, I show up at the door when they’ve posted it is open, and sure enough >>>>>>>> I walk right in and no one asks me for any credentials. Then I walk right >>>>>>>> over to the secret shelves and I put my hand right on the book of secrets >>>>>>>> and I open it up and read all the secrets there, and not one person tries >>>>>>>> to stop me. But I suppose that my deciding to go to the public library and >>>>>>>> reading secrets must just be cowtowing to somebody else’s wishes every time >>>>>>>> I do it, that’s what you’re telling me. And you just aren’t going to cowtow >>>>>>>> to anybody by going to a public library and reading anything when you can >>>>>>>> tell for yourself what is valid information and what is misinformation. >>>>>>>> Have I got that right, Robert? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Well, there is one detail you left out. The new public library is about >>>>>>> a mile from where I live. I would have to have a fairly good reason to >>>>>>> go there before I would walk that far. >>>>>> >>>>>> A twenty minute walk is just too much effort for you, Robert? How much time >>>>>> have you spent on Usenet today? >>>>>> >>>>>>> Personally, I think you are the lazy person. >>>>>> >>>>>> I walk two and a half miles miles to the library. Usually I ride my bike. >>>>>> And you? Oh, that’s right. A mile is too much time away from >>>>>> sci.physics.relativity, sitting on your rear. >>>>>> >>>>>>> You multiply words in long harangues about my personal failings, but have >>>>>>> yet to post anything significant about relativity. I just don't see any >>>>>>> reason to walk over to the public library based on anything you have said. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes that’s what I mean. You’re too lazy to read on your own unless someone >>>>>> works really hard to convince you to do it. >>>>> >>>>> I read what you write. >>>> >>>> Not enough to become informed. >>>> >>>>> What else would I need to convince me that the Galilean transformation >>>>> equations are the correct equations? >>>> >>>> Don’t look for info just for the sake of validating a conclusion you want. >>>> >>> I already looked at the information. >>> >> >> You looked at the information about length contraction? Marvelous. And to >> think you said there was no evidence of length contraction first, and then >> you said you would not look at any information about length contraction. >> What reference did you look at? > > The first book I read about Special Relativity was in a box of discarded > books at a library. Written by whom? Surely you remember the author if you remember the contents. > Then I read Einstein's book, Relativity, the Special and General Theories, That book contains no documented real measurements. > Then I read a bunch of other books on the subject. Namely? Which books were about experimental measurement tests of relativity? > None of them convinced me that there was a length contraction. > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 16:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <11282bea-fe63-44c7-8996-8a7221ac849f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473720 |
On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 2:41:43 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 7:55:27 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Sunday, September 30, 2018 at 5:43:42 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 3:06:23 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 5:55:21 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 2:57:49 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Well, your idea is that if something is written in a book, then it is > >>>>>>>>>>> true, and if I do not read the book, and you do, then that proves that > >>>>>>>>>>> you know more than I do. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Well, Robert, I think it’s fair to say that someone who has strong ideas on > >>>>>>>>>> a subject but is mostly unread in that same subject, then it is extremely > >>>>>>>>>> likely that he is incorrect in his idea, and that he is expressing an > >>>>>>>>>> uninformed opinion. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> In this case, since we are talking about historical facts, being uninformed > >>>>>>>>>> is truly a liability. And yes, in this case, since I have read descriptions > >>>>>>>>>> of photons and you haven’t, then yes, I know more than you do about whether > >>>>>>>>>> descriptions of photons exist. This position has occurred, by the way, > >>>>>>>>>> because I don’t wallow in laziness the way you do. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I am certainly sorry about wallowing in laziness, but I am just not > >>>>>>>>> really interested in the scientific mis-information you are > >>>>>>>>> directing me to pursue. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Well, it’s interesting that you decide that it is misinformation before > >>>>>>>> even looking at it. As I recall, there have been periods where books were > >>>>>>>> burned by people who knew the books were evil without even reading them. As > >>>>>>>> you recall, there were visitors to Galileo’s house who were not interested > >>>>>>>> in the misinformation provided by his telescope and so they simply declined > >>>>>>>> to look through it. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I think my time is better spent in doing other things. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Yes, I know. Like collecting Social Security, putting gas in a truck you > >>>>>>>> aren’t legally able to drive, and telling people on sci.physics.relativity > >>>>>>>> how uninterested in physics you are. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> If you were inclined to say what there is about these scientific writings > >>>>>>>>> that is supposed to be so beneficial, perhaps we could discuss that, but > >>>>>>>>> you seem to be saying that these scientific secrets must never be > >>>>>>>>> discussed and can only be available to those who show sufficient > >>>>>>>>> obedience to modern science to go to these sources of modern scientific > >>>>>>>>> theories when directed to do so. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I’ve never really thought of a public library as a warehouse of secrets. I > >>>>>>>> mean, I show up at the door when they’ve posted it is open, and sure enough > >>>>>>>> I walk right in and no one asks me for any credentials. Then I walk right > >>>>>>>> over to the secret shelves and I put my hand right on the book of secrets > >>>>>>>> and I open it up and read all the secrets there, and not one person tries > >>>>>>>> to stop me. But I suppose that my deciding to go to the public library and > >>>>>>>> reading secrets must just be cowtowing to somebody else’s wishes every time > >>>>>>>> I do it, that’s what you’re telling me. And you just aren’t going to cowtow > >>>>>>>> to anybody by going to a public library and reading anything when you can > >>>>>>>> tell for yourself what is valid information and what is misinformation. > >>>>>>>> Have I got that right, Robert? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Well, there is one detail you left out. The new public library is about > >>>>>>> a mile from where I live. I would have to have a fairly good reason to > >>>>>>> go there before I would walk that far. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> A twenty minute walk is just too much effort for you, Robert? How much time > >>>>>> have you spent on Usenet today? > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Personally, I think you are the lazy person. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I walk two and a half miles miles to the library. Usually I ride my bike. > >>>>>> And you? Oh, that’s right. A mile is too much time away from > >>>>>> sci.physics.relativity, sitting on your rear. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> You multiply words in long harangues about my personal failings, but have > >>>>>>> yet to post anything significant about relativity. I just don't see any > >>>>>>> reason to walk over to the public library based on anything you have said. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Yes that’s what I mean. You’re too lazy to read on your own unless someone > >>>>>> works really hard to convince you to do it. > >>>>> > >>>>> I read what you write. > >>>> > >>>> Not enough to become informed. > >>>> > >>>>> What else would I need to convince me that the Galilean transformation > >>>>> equations are the correct equations? > >>>> > >>>> Don’t look for info just for the sake of validating a conclusion you want. > >>>> > >>> I already looked at the information. > >>> > >> > >> You looked at the information about length contraction? Marvelous. And to > >> think you said there was no evidence of length contraction first, and then > >> you said you would not look at any information about length contraction. > >> What reference did you look at? > > > > The first book I read about Special Relativity was in a box of discarded > > books at a library. > > Written by whom? Surely you remember the author if you remember the > contents. > > > Then I read Einstein's book, Relativity, the Special and General Theories, > > That book contains no documented real measurements. > > > Then I read a bunch of other books on the subject. > > Namely? Which books were about experimental measurement tests of > relativity? > > > None of them convinced me that there was a length contraction. If you want to try to convince me that a length contraction exists, go ahead. The names of books I read about relativity are not important. If you want to say something, go ahead and say it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-02 03:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <poupnd$omc$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #473733 |
Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: > On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 2:41:43 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 7:55:27 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Sunday, September 30, 2018 at 5:43:42 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 3:06:23 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 5:55:21 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 2:57:49 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, your idea is that if something is written in a book, then it is >>>>>>>>>>>>> true, and if I do not read the book, and you do, then that proves that >>>>>>>>>>>>> you know more than I do. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Well, Robert, I think it’s fair to say that someone who has strong ideas on >>>>>>>>>>>> a subject but is mostly unread in that same subject, then it is extremely >>>>>>>>>>>> likely that he is incorrect in his idea, and that he is expressing an >>>>>>>>>>>> uninformed opinion. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> In this case, since we are talking about historical facts, being uninformed >>>>>>>>>>>> is truly a liability. And yes, in this case, since I have read descriptions >>>>>>>>>>>> of photons and you haven’t, then yes, I know more than you do about whether >>>>>>>>>>>> descriptions of photons exist. This position has occurred, by the way, >>>>>>>>>>>> because I don’t wallow in laziness the way you do. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I am certainly sorry about wallowing in laziness, but I am just not >>>>>>>>>>> really interested in the scientific mis-information you are >>>>>>>>>>> directing me to pursue. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Well, it’s interesting that you decide that it is misinformation before >>>>>>>>>> even looking at it. As I recall, there have been periods where books were >>>>>>>>>> burned by people who knew the books were evil without even reading them. As >>>>>>>>>> you recall, there were visitors to Galileo’s house who were not interested >>>>>>>>>> in the misinformation provided by his telescope and so they simply declined >>>>>>>>>> to look through it. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I think my time is better spent in doing other things. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Yes, I know. Like collecting Social Security, putting gas in a truck you >>>>>>>>>> aren’t legally able to drive, and telling people on sci.physics.relativity >>>>>>>>>> how uninterested in physics you are. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> If you were inclined to say what there is about these scientific writings >>>>>>>>>>> that is supposed to be so beneficial, perhaps we could discuss that, but >>>>>>>>>>> you seem to be saying that these scientific secrets must never be >>>>>>>>>>> discussed and can only be available to those who show sufficient >>>>>>>>>>> obedience to modern science to go to these sources of modern scientific >>>>>>>>>>> theories when directed to do so. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I’ve never really thought of a public library as a warehouse of secrets. I >>>>>>>>>> mean, I show up at the door when they’ve posted it is open, and sure enough >>>>>>>>>> I walk right in and no one asks me for any credentials. Then I walk right >>>>>>>>>> over to the secret shelves and I put my hand right on the book of secrets >>>>>>>>>> and I open it up and read all the secrets there, and not one person tries >>>>>>>>>> to stop me. But I suppose that my deciding to go to the public library and >>>>>>>>>> reading secrets must just be cowtowing to somebody else’s wishes every time >>>>>>>>>> I do it, that’s what you’re telling me. And you just aren’t going to cowtow >>>>>>>>>> to anybody by going to a public library and reading anything when you can >>>>>>>>>> tell for yourself what is valid information and what is misinformation. >>>>>>>>>> Have I got that right, Robert? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Well, there is one detail you left out. The new public library is about >>>>>>>>> a mile from where I live. I would have to have a fairly good reason to >>>>>>>>> go there before I would walk that far. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> A twenty minute walk is just too much effort for you, Robert? How much time >>>>>>>> have you spent on Usenet today? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Personally, I think you are the lazy person. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I walk two and a half miles miles to the library. Usually I ride my bike. >>>>>>>> And you? Oh, that’s right. A mile is too much time away from >>>>>>>> sci.physics.relativity, sitting on your rear. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You multiply words in long harangues about my personal failings, but have >>>>>>>>> yet to post anything significant about relativity. I just don't see any >>>>>>>>> reason to walk over to the public library based on anything you have said. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes that’s what I mean. You’re too lazy to read on your own unless someone >>>>>>>> works really hard to convince you to do it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I read what you write. >>>>>> >>>>>> Not enough to become informed. >>>>>> >>>>>>> What else would I need to convince me that the Galilean transformation >>>>>>> equations are the correct equations? >>>>>> >>>>>> Don’t look for info just for the sake of validating a conclusion you want. >>>>>> >>>>> I already looked at the information. >>>>> >>>> >>>> You looked at the information about length contraction? Marvelous. And to >>>> think you said there was no evidence of length contraction first, and then >>>> you said you would not look at any information about length contraction. >>>> What reference did you look at? >>> >>> The first book I read about Special Relativity was in a box of discarded >>> books at a library. >> >> Written by whom? Surely you remember the author if you remember the >> contents. >> >>> Then I read Einstein's book, Relativity, the Special and General Theories, >> >> That book contains no documented real measurements. >> >>> Then I read a bunch of other books on the subject. >> >> Namely? Which books were about experimental measurement tests of >> relativity? >> >>> None of them convinced me that there was a length contraction. > > If you want to try to convince me that a length contraction exists, go > ahead. The names of books I read about relativity are not important. If > you want to say something, go ahead and say it. > I have no interest in making efforts to convince you of anything. That would be something you elect to do on your own, as a grownup is customarily expected to do to become informed enough to have an intelligent discussion on a subject. I see that in fact you cannot recall any books you’ve read on the experimental measurement of length contraction, which is what we were talking about. This, despite you saying, “I already looked at the information.” I also noted that you’ve told me that you’d need a really solid reason to walk 20 minutes to go to the library, but then just above, you told me that you picked up a book from a discard box at the library, so I know it doesn’t take that much to get you off your rear to walk 20 minutes. Maybe you can ask someone to drive you in your truck for a three minute drive. Maybe one of the global elitists will have enough money to put a couple of gallons of gas in it. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 37 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 … 35 36 [37] 38 39 … 50 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web