Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #470837 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-09-07 09:57 -0700 |
| Last post | 2018-09-28 20:20 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 617 — 34 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-07 09:57 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-07 12:54 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-09-07 23:40 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-09-07 15:38 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-07 21:40 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Lorent Regoire <euar@ewghwpq.gr> - 2018-09-08 11:33 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-09-08 14:26 -0500
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-08 12:47 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 20:06 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-08 22:11 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-08 20:33 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-08 14:09 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-08 23:47 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-09-08 14:47 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-08 21:59 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-09-08 18:21 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-09 10:20 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-09-09 11:46 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-09 12:32 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-09-09 13:37 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-09-09 14:49 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-10 07:56 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 13:26 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-09 13:57 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 21:11 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-09 14:33 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 12:39 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-12 06:53 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-09 20:33 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-09 14:49 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-10 03:40 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-10 07:48 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-10 16:06 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-10 09:43 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Wilbur Foley <boue@eywffl.uf> - 2018-09-10 16:45 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-10 09:52 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-10 17:50 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-10 17:46 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-10 13:29 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 10:10 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-11 14:05 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 06:59 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-12 09:22 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 11:06 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Wilbur Foley <boue@eywffl.uf> - 2018-09-12 18:09 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-12 14:40 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-18 22:04 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-19 09:33 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-19 17:31 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-09-19 12:16 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-19 13:46 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-19 21:58 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-20 07:11 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaws.np> - 2018-09-20 15:20 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-19 23:36 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaws.np> - 2018-09-20 16:22 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Jayson Durante <tug@wsedwsa.np> - 2018-09-20 17:40 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 07:36 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-12 14:35 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-12 15:10 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-09-13 08:14 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 08:36 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-09-13 09:24 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 10:42 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-13 09:49 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-09-13 12:55 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-13 13:37 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-09-15 11:36 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-09-15 12:59 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-15 20:43 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-15 12:54 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-15 14:36 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-16 08:34 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-16 16:37 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-16 23:06 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-17 09:49 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-15 12:34 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-09-15 12:49 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-15 22:52 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-15 21:03 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-15 22:58 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-16 10:10 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-15 14:31 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-15 21:42 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-15 23:01 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-16 08:22 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-16 16:23 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-13 07:56 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-15 12:49 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-15 23:43 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-16 09:28 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-16 17:08 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-16 10:56 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-09-15 19:03 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 06:03 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-11 19:19 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-11 15:03 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 16:37 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-12 07:24 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-12 07:50 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-12 06:18 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-12 08:44 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-09-12 09:28 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-12 09:29 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-12 09:52 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-12 10:10 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-12 10:18 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Wilbur Foley <boue@eywffl.uf> - 2018-09-12 18:06 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-12 14:16 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-12 15:03 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-15 12:22 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-15 14:21 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-15 21:28 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-16 08:13 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-15 23:54 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-16 09:37 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-09-12 10:48 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-12 10:58 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-12 18:42 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-12 23:31 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-11 23:41 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 12:57 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-09-11 13:24 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 12:49 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Wilbur Foley <boue@eywffl.uf> - 2018-09-11 20:10 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 14:59 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Wilbur Foley <boue@eywffl.uf> - 2018-09-11 22:28 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-09-11 16:25 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-08 22:43 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-10 10:15 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-10 12:59 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 09:56 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-11 13:55 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-09-11 13:57 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 12:29 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-12 06:53 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-09-17 13:48 -0500
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-17 20:05 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-18 08:15 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-09-08 22:43 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-09-11 12:21 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-12 06:52 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Lorent Regoires <ewab@ewgvpq.gn> - 2018-09-09 11:16 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-09 13:56 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Lorent Regoires <ewab@ewgvpq.gn> - 2018-09-09 12:01 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-09 14:19 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Lorent Regoires <ewab@ewgvpq.gn> - 2018-09-09 12:48 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-09 14:24 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-11 23:52 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Wilbur Foley <boue@eywffl.uf> - 2018-09-11 22:26 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-12 07:54 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-13 10:02 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Wilbur Foley <boue@eywffl.uf> - 2018-09-13 17:03 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-09-15 18:38 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-15 12:56 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-15 13:12 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-09-15 13:35 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-15 13:58 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-15 21:08 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-16 07:29 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-16 08:14 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-16 09:51 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-16 10:13 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-09-16 19:42 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-16 18:01 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-16 10:02 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-16 10:27 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-16 10:55 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-16 11:04 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-16 12:59 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-09-16 13:11 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-09-16 13:28 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-16 17:22 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-16 16:46 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-17 09:53 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-17 10:06 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-17 14:40 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-09-17 14:44 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-17 21:45 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-17 14:57 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-18 08:53 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-18 09:46 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-18 09:55 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-09-18 19:41 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-18 22:09 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-18 11:01 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-09-18 11:24 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-18 13:27 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-18 13:58 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-09-18 14:10 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-09-18 23:19 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-18 22:03 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-19 09:21 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-19 23:29 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-20 07:53 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-09-20 17:47 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaws.np> - 2018-09-20 16:30 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-20 09:34 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-20 12:06 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-20 13:08 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-20 17:19 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-09-20 18:30 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-20 23:33 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-21 11:55 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-21 10:52 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 23:08 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Rhett Joyner <udof@rsrrfirv.on> - 2018-09-22 08:17 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-20 19:56 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 06:26 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 07:23 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-09-21 17:21 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 11:32 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-09-21 23:30 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 22:05 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-09-21 22:39 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 22:56 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-09-21 23:00 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 23:13 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-09-21 23:20 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 23:32 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-09-22 07:13 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 11:06 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-09-22 11:11 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Rhett Joyner <udof@rsrrfirwv.on> - 2018-09-22 20:39 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-21 12:09 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-21 12:56 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-21 13:24 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 14:41 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Rhett Joyner <udof@rsrrfirw.on> - 2018-09-21 21:51 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-22 08:29 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-22 08:49 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-09-22 18:00 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-23 10:05 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-09-23 10:11 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 12:09 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-09-23 14:52 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-09-23 12:06 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-23 12:37 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-23 13:20 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-09-24 02:48 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-23 22:20 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-09-23 14:53 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 23:54 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 10:37 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-24 13:45 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 14:04 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-09-24 15:48 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 16:09 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 16:53 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 00:21 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 05:29 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-25 07:31 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 08:06 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-25 08:21 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-09-25 18:13 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-25 09:59 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 10:56 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-25 23:27 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-25 23:31 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-26 08:01 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-09-26 08:22 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 12:00 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-26 14:03 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-26 21:48 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-25 20:53 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-25 12:53 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-25 23:33 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-09-26 04:47 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-26 08:34 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-09-26 10:33 -0500
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-26 10:00 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-09-26 13:14 -0500
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-09-26 22:11 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-26 13:34 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-09-27 12:01 -0500
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-27 10:04 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-27 13:34 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Hilton Packett <wod@wcothr.ce> - 2018-09-27 22:20 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Hilton Packett <wod@wcothr.ce> - 2018-09-27 22:49 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 11:16 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Hilton Packett <wod@wcothr.ce> - 2018-09-26 18:39 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Hilton Packett <wod@wcothr.ce> - 2018-09-26 18:29 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-26 13:40 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Hilton Packett <wod@wcothr.ce> - 2018-09-27 22:53 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-28 07:22 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-28 17:19 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Hilton Packett <wod@wcothr.ce> - 2018-09-28 20:06 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-28 13:49 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Hilton Packett <wod@wcothr.ce> - 2018-09-28 20:10 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-28 14:21 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Hilton Packett <wod@wcothr.ce> - 2018-09-28 21:34 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-28 23:34 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Hilton Packett <wod@wcothr.ce> - 2018-09-28 21:50 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-29 05:25 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Hilton Packett <wod@wcothr.ce> - 2018-09-29 09:06 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 10:16 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-26 07:39 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 11:52 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-26 13:49 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 14:45 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-26 21:51 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-27 08:11 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 09:22 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-27 10:01 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-27 16:52 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-27 10:03 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-27 10:23 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-09-27 10:34 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 10:38 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-27 18:33 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-27 14:26 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-27 14:56 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-28 04:40 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 05:42 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-28 06:12 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-28 07:55 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-28 17:32 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-28 13:56 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-27 21:55 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-09-26 15:50 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-09-27 12:00 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-27 14:39 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-09-28 08:48 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-28 09:06 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 18:01 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-09-28 20:35 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-28 11:49 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 15:47 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-28 13:47 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-25 21:42 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-26 09:16 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-26 17:33 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-26 13:06 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-25 20:38 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-25 21:32 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 10:22 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 10:00 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-25 14:18 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-25 21:23 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 15:54 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-09-26 22:41 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-26 21:44 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-26 08:59 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-26 17:10 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-26 12:47 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-26 21:14 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-26 14:41 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-22 09:31 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-22 19:44 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 13:11 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-21 11:53 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 12:52 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-25 04:32 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-09-25 00:12 -0500
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-09-24 22:59 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 07:28 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-09-25 11:52 -0500
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-25 23:25 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-25 05:36 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 07:05 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-09-25 18:24 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-25 20:12 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-09-25 19:10 -0500
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-26 09:19 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-26 17:37 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-26 13:13 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-09-25 19:02 -0500
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-09-25 07:30 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Hilton Packett <wod@wcothr.ce> - 2018-09-25 15:07 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-09-25 12:01 -0500
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-25 08:02 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-09-25 12:05 -0500
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-26 07:14 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-26 09:54 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-26 10:04 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-26 10:18 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-26 12:58 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-26 15:09 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-27 08:20 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-27 09:57 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-27 13:16 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-27 14:41 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-28 06:59 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-28 07:42 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-28 08:26 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-28 09:05 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-28 09:36 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-28 09:58 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-28 13:30 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-09-28 13:52 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-28 23:20 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-09-28 14:27 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-28 15:03 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-29 08:29 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-29 09:33 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-29 10:16 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-29 10:52 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-29 11:00 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-29 11:04 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-29 13:16 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-29 13:43 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-29 14:02 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-09-29 14:09 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-29 17:27 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-30 04:39 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-09-29 21:58 -0500
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-30 03:49 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-30 05:55 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-30 06:40 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-30 08:23 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-30 10:21 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-09-30 19:30 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-30 11:00 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-30 12:54 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-30 13:05 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-30 13:42 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-30 21:43 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-01 08:32 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-01 16:12 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-01 10:01 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 17:23 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-01 18:31 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-01 13:57 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-10-01 16:32 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-02 02:28 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-01 09:31 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-01 10:10 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-01 10:46 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-01 13:26 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-10-01 13:32 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 13:53 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-01 14:09 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:33 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-01 14:04 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:21 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Hilton Packett <wod@wcotahr.ce> - 2018-10-01 22:23 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-10-01 16:33 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-02 03:21 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-30 15:27 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-01 08:45 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-01 04:10 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-09-30 11:18 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-30 13:12 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-30 13:37 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-30 14:26 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-30 15:30 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-10-01 09:10 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-10-01 17:39 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-30 20:58 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-30 20:52 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-29 20:53 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-29 14:20 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-29 21:32 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-02 17:14 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-03 07:10 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-03 07:28 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-03 07:42 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-03 08:21 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-03 08:52 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 09:14 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-03 09:29 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 17:13 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-03 12:15 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 12:50 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-03 19:56 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:00 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-03 21:33 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:54 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-04 17:34 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 14:26 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-04 21:41 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 20:02 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-03 10:22 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-03 12:50 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-06 07:41 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-10-06 21:50 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 15:38 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2018-10-03 16:57 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 13:13 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-01 14:00 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-10-01 14:30 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Hilton Packett <wod@wcotahr.ce> - 2018-10-01 22:25 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-01 22:53 -0500
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-02 13:24 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:31 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:54 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-02 14:31 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 15:24 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:55 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:10 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:26 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Burton Callanan <uuu@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-03 15:26 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-02 14:23 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-03 12:51 -0400
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-03 11:54 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 19:08 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 12:34 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-03 20:09 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:01 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-04 17:38 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-03 17:58 -0400
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-28 17:50 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-28 14:17 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-28 17:13 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-28 13:37 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-27 17:13 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-27 13:45 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-28 03:42 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-27 21:57 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-26 11:23 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-25 00:17 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-25 07:11 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-09-25 20:14 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 18:02 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-09-18 18:31 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-19 03:14 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 10:39 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-09-17 10:21 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-17 10:31 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-09-17 10:49 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 18:35 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-09-17 15:39 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 23:28 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-09-18 07:13 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 14:30 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-17 18:02 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-09-16 22:09 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-09-16 22:15 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-16 13:52 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-16 17:26 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-17 10:03 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-17 10:11 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-09-17 10:21 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-17 10:24 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-09-17 10:39 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-17 14:57 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-17 15:03 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-17 22:16 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-09-17 15:38 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-18 22:10 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-09-18 16:20 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 17:27 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-09-17 08:22 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-16 23:58 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-17 14:01 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-17 14:45 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 22:13 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-17 17:10 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-18 08:43 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-18 09:39 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-18 09:51 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-18 10:59 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-18 13:23 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-18 13:36 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-09-18 22:42 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-18 21:55 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-19 09:14 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-19 23:17 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-20 07:28 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-20 19:36 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-21 11:26 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 12:46 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-09-18 22:38 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-18 14:23 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-18 22:12 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-19 09:45 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-19 23:33 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-20 07:59 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-20 08:34 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-20 12:11 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 14:55 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-21 09:48 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-20 20:03 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaws.np> - 2018-09-20 20:44 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-20 13:44 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-20 23:23 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaws.np> - 2018-09-21 09:29 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-21 06:57 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-21 07:28 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-21 10:54 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-09-19 15:05 +0200
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-19 07:04 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-09-19 07:46 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-19 09:42 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-19 09:57 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-17 16:35 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-17 14:31 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-17 21:40 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-18 08:18 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-18 22:15 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-19 09:47 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-19 22:09 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 15:37 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-18 09:12 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-18 17:26 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-18 13:16 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-18 21:47 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-09-19 03:15 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 17:57 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 02:40 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-15 23:34 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Stakos Netakis <autp@wsalaw.oa> - 2018-09-16 10:09 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-16 09:04 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 06:19 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-17 14:10 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-09-17 15:23 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-18 09:01 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-09-18 11:58 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-09-18 12:33 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-09-20 01:09 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-27 10:00 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Hilton Packett <wod@wcothr.ce> - 2018-09-27 23:03 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-09-28 07:29 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-09-28 17:22 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Hilton Packett <wod@wcothr.ce> - 2018-09-29 09:12 +0000
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-09-28 10:33 -0700
Re: Time Dilation as I understand it Hilton Packett <wod@wcothr.ce> - 2018-09-28 20:20 +0000
Page 24 of 31 — ← Prev page 1 … 22 23 [24] 25 26 … 31 Next page →
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 09:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e75cf98b-79c0-4526-9a74-03c4af8bdb6c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473955 |
On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 10:53:02 AM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > El miércoles, 3 de octubre de 2018, 12:21:53 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:42:36 AM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > > El miércoles, 3 de octubre de 2018, 11:29:02 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > > > > > > > > > Here's a web site that explains the situation: https://ideonexus.com/2009/02/17/how-much-does-time-dilate-for-the-iss-astronauts/ > > > > > > > > It says "The ISS orbits 255 miles above the Earth at 8000 m/s, so time runs > > > > approximately 0.0000000014 percent slower" than on the surface of the earth. > > > > > > > > > > Notice the article correctly says "so TIME runs...slower". Nothing there about > > > a clock ticking slower!!!! > > > > Clocks measure time. When time runs slower, clocks run slower. > > > > Sure enough and you have it expressed correctly. You see Edward, you tend to > assign more relevance to the clock than what that clock is measuring, that is > time. Einstein main contribution was to express that time, as well as space, > were all variables dependent on the frame of reference from where they are > measured. > > If you can set aside that bias and adopt what you wrote above (When time runs > slower, clocks run slower), you will be much closer to understand what > relativity deals with. > > So in the GPS system, the atomic clocks that are inside the satellites, are > measuring the elapsed time AT THE ORBIT of the satellites, and that time > effectively is changed both by the orbital speeds of the satellites and by > the gravity at their orbits so TIME runs 38 microseconds per sidereal day > faster than the atomic clocks at the ground. > > It is time what it is affected and not the ticking of the clocks. The > accurate ticking of the atomic clocks is what allows to measure TIME with > the needed precission. We seem to be in agreement except for one sentence: "It is time what it is affected and not the ticking of the clocks." You cannot affect time without affecting clocks. I think the disagreement results from you believing that "space is a variable." I know that Einstein believed there was a connection between time and space (i.e. between time and length/distance), but I do not believe that. I think that belief was due to a lack of understanding of the workings of atoms when Einstein wrote his paper in 1905. As I see it, time relates to particle spin. When an object moves faster, the particles that comprise its atoms spin slower. When an object is closer to the surface of the earth, the particles that comprise the object spin slower. That is why atomic clocks can measure time so precisely. They measure particle spin. So, when an rocket ship moves at 99.5% of the speed of light, all the atomic particles on the ship spin roughly 10 times slower than particles on earth. That not only means that clocks run 10 times slower than clocks on earth, but people AGE 10 times slower than people on earth, and things decay 10 time slower than they do on earth. So, time is particle spin. And when particle spin slows down, clocks slow down. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 17:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp2tbb$25n$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #473969 |
Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> writes: >On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 10:53:02 AM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: >We seem to be in agreement except for one sentence: "It is time what it is >affected and not the ticking of the clocks." You cannot affect time withou >affecting clocks. Clocks measure time. It is time that is affected, the clocks just measure the time. >As I see it, time relates to particle spin. When an object moves faster, the >particles that comprise its atoms spin slower. When an object is closer to >the surface of the earth, the particles that comprise the object spin slower. Spin is motion, it is affected by time. The more time that passes, the more motion, the more rotations something spinning rotates. >That is why atomic clocks can measure time so precisely. They measure >particle spin. They do not, as has been explained. Atomic clocks work due to a difference in energy of two energy levels of the atom. >So, when an rocket ship moves at 99.5% of the speed of light, all the atomic >particles on the ship spin roughly 10 times slower than particles on earth. >That not only means that clocks run 10 times slower than clocks on earth, >but people AGE 10 times slower than people on earth, and things decay >10 time slower than they do on earth. That is your opinion, and it is a bad one, since we already know that it is not true. >So, time is particle spin. And when particle spin slows down, clocks slow >down. Again, your opinion, and it disagrees with actual science.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 12:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b589b4a5-4111-4374-8864-2d334b729562@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473978 |
On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 12:13:17 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote: > Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> writes: > > >On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 10:53:02 AM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > >We seem to be in agreement except for one sentence: "It is time what it is > >affected and not the ticking of the clocks." You cannot affect time withou > >affecting clocks. > > Clocks measure time. It is time that is affected, the clocks just measure > the time. > > >As I see it, time relates to particle spin. When an object moves faster, the > >particles that comprise its atoms spin slower. When an object is closer to > >the surface of the earth, the particles that comprise the object spin slower. > > Spin is motion, it is affected by time. The more time that passes, the > more motion, the more rotations something spinning rotates. > > >That is why atomic clocks can measure time so precisely. They measure > >particle spin. > > They do not, as has been explained. Atomic clocks work due to a difference > in energy of two energy levels of the atom. The difference in "energy levels" is the difference in particle spin (a.k.a. "oscillation rate". The faster a photon oscillates the higher its energy. > > >So, when an rocket ship moves at 99.5% of the speed of light, all the atomic > >particles on the ship spin roughly 10 times slower than particles on earth. > >That not only means that clocks run 10 times slower than clocks on earth, > >but people AGE 10 times slower than people on earth, and things decay > >10 time slower than they do on earth. > > That is your opinion, and it is a bad one, since we already know that it > is not true. How do you know it is not true? Because it is what you BELIEVE? How many sources should I cite that say you are WRONG? I assume you ignore all sources, since you cite none and all sources disagree with your beliefs. "Your head technically ages more quickly than your feet." Source: https://www.businessinsider.com/do-astronauts-age-slower-than-people-on-earth-2015-8 "In Space, Scott Kelly Aged Slower Than His Brother on Earth." Source: https://www.sciencealert.com/in-space-scott-kelly-aged-more-slowly-than-his-brother-on-earth-and-here-s-why "Similarly, when you are living in a particular value of gravitational field intensity, by your frame of reference you are living your live like nothing is too fast or slow than it should be. Your watch moves at the normal one tick per second. Your body is living in that rate of time, your metabolism happens at that rate of time, you are aging by that rate of time. In fact all animals & plants, computers and clocks in the same gravitational intensity (and moving spatially by your frame of reference) are also perceiving the same rate of time." Source: https://www.quora.com/Does-gravitational-time-dilation-also-affect-biological-processes-like-how-quickly-our-bodies-age "This familiar — and paradoxical — plotline comes from a particular tenet of relativity theory known as time dilation. It predicts that a fast-moving clock will tick at a slower rate than a stationary one — or, a man on an interstellar voyage will age more slowly than his twin back on Earth." Source: https://scienceline.org/2010/10/do-frequent-fliers-age-more-slowly/ Etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc. > > >So, time is particle spin. And when particle spin slows down, clocks slow > >down. > > Again, your opinion, and it disagrees with actual science. Claiming something without citations or evidence just shows you are only arguing your BELIEFS. You have nothing to support your BELIEFS - except perhaps the support of others who BELIEVE as you do. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 12:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6585c24c-668b-4652-99d3-94add37d94ea@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473988 |
On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 12:15:33 PM UTC-7, Ed Lake wrote: > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 12:13:17 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote: > > Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> writes: > > > > >On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 10:53:02 AM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > > > >We seem to be in agreement except for one sentence: "It is time what it is > > >affected and not the ticking of the clocks." You cannot affect time withou > > >affecting clocks. > > > > Clocks measure time. It is time that is affected, the clocks just measure > > the time. > > > > >As I see it, time relates to particle spin. When an object moves faster, the > > >particles that comprise its atoms spin slower. When an object is closer to > > >the surface of the earth, the particles that comprise the object spin slower. > > > > Spin is motion, it is affected by time. The more time that passes, the > > more motion, the more rotations something spinning rotates. > > > > >That is why atomic clocks can measure time so precisely. They measure > > >particle spin. > > > > They do not, as has been explained. Atomic clocks work due to a difference > > in energy of two energy levels of the atom. > > The difference in "energy levels" is the difference in particle spin Incorrect. > (a.k.a. "oscillation rate". Incorrect. Ed, what's the POINT of making stuff up like this? If what you want is to create your own fantasy world, Tolkien-like, be my guest. But you are on the wrong NG for this sort of thing. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 19:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp36u9$8ka$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #473993 |
JanPB wrote: >> > >That is why atomic clocks can measure time so precisely. They >> > >measure particle spin. >> > >> > They do not, as has been explained. Atomic clocks work due to a >> > difference in energy of two energy levels of the atom. >> >> The difference in "energy levels" is the difference in particle spin > > Incorrect. > >> (a.k.a. "oscillation rate". > > Incorrect. > > Ed, what's the POINT of making stuff up like this? If what you want is > to create your own fantasy world, Tolkien-like, be my guest. But you are > on the wrong NG for this sort of thing. That's a model, and his guess is as much good as yours.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 14:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <27b83f8c-e6b7-441c-8d88-18fb34008a19@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473997 |
On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 12:57:01 PM UTC-7, Paul Gish wrote: > JanPB wrote: > > >> > >That is why atomic clocks can measure time so precisely. They > >> > >measure particle spin. > >> > > >> > They do not, as has been explained. Atomic clocks work due to a > >> > difference in energy of two energy levels of the atom. > >> > >> The difference in "energy levels" is the difference in particle spin > > > > Incorrect. > > > >> (a.k.a. "oscillation rate". > > > > Incorrect. > > > > Ed, what's the POINT of making stuff up like this? If what you want is > > to create your own fantasy world, Tolkien-like, be my guest. But you are > > on the wrong NG for this sort of thing. > > That's a model, and his guess is as much good as yours. But it is not! That's the point. Saying "the earth is flat" is simply not in the same league as saying "the earth is not flat". These are not just two opinions. Similarly, when Ed states what he assumes are Einstein's postulates, and when Tom states what are Einstein's postulates, this is not a pair of opinions. Tom's post is simply a description of a fact. Ed's post is a fantasy. Two totally different things.. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 21:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp3cip$hhf$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #474011 |
JanPB wrote: >> > Ed, what's the POINT of making stuff up like this? If what you want >> > is to create your own fantasy world, Tolkien-like, be my guest. But >> > you are on the wrong NG for this sort of thing. >> >> That's a model, and his guess is as much good as yours. > > But it is not! That's the point. Saying "the earth is flat" is simply > not in the same league as saying "the earth is not flat". These are not > just two opinions. Similarly, when Ed states what he assumes are > Einstein's postulates, and when Tom states what are Einstein's > postulates, this is not a pair of opinions. Tom's post is simply a > description of a fact. Ed's post is a fantasy. Two totally different > things.. The fact is that relativity is so simple, it doesn't even need postulates, since those are facts. Once you have the facts displayed, the theory pops in smoothly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 14:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a4801e1c-d6d8-4e56-b6ef-529df18de248@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474020 |
On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 2:33:16 PM UTC-7, Paul Gish wrote: > JanPB wrote: > > >> > Ed, what's the POINT of making stuff up like this? If what you want > >> > is to create your own fantasy world, Tolkien-like, be my guest. But > >> > you are on the wrong NG for this sort of thing. > >> > >> That's a model, and his guess is as much good as yours. > > > > But it is not! That's the point. Saying "the earth is flat" is simply > > not in the same league as saying "the earth is not flat". These are not > > just two opinions. Similarly, when Ed states what he assumes are > > Einstein's postulates, and when Tom states what are Einstein's > > postulates, this is not a pair of opinions. Tom's post is simply a > > description of a fact. Ed's post is a fantasy. Two totally different > > things.. > > The fact is that relativity is so simple, it doesn't even need postulates, > since those are facts. Once you have the facts displayed, the theory pops > in smoothly. Gobbledygook. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 17:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp5iun$51d$4@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #474025 |
JanPB wrote: >> > But it is not! That's the point. Saying "the earth is flat" is simply >> > not in the same league as saying "the earth is not flat". These are >> > not just two opinions. Similarly, when Ed states what he assumes are >> > Einstein's postulates, and when Tom states what are Einstein's >> > postulates, this is not a pair of opinions. Tom's post is simply a >> > description of a fact. Ed's post is a fantasy. Two totally different >> > things.. >> >> The fact is that relativity is so simple, it doesn't even need >> postulates, >> since those are facts. Once you have the facts displayed, the theory >> pops in smoothly. > > Gobbledygook. To you, yes. For the informed, the output of this theory feeds back as input, known as "postulates". Purely differentiable theory. Actually domain of theory. Obvious, even without mentioning the "abstract differential geometry". Actually I already said too much.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 14:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a715c9c5-a88e-4509-b1ff-bb0da00ed90c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474094 |
On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 10:34:18 AM UTC-7, Paul Gish wrote: > JanPB wrote: > > >> > But it is not! That's the point. Saying "the earth is flat" is simply > >> > not in the same league as saying "the earth is not flat". These are > >> > not just two opinions. Similarly, when Ed states what he assumes are > >> > Einstein's postulates, and when Tom states what are Einstein's > >> > postulates, this is not a pair of opinions. Tom's post is simply a > >> > description of a fact. Ed's post is a fantasy. Two totally different > >> > things.. > >> > >> The fact is that relativity is so simple, it doesn't even need > >> postulates, > >> since those are facts. Once you have the facts displayed, the theory > >> pops in smoothly. > > > > Gobbledygook. > > To you, yes. For the informed, the output of this theory feeds back as > input, known as "postulates". Purely differentiable theory. Actually > domain of theory. Obvious, even without mentioning the "abstract > differential geometry". Actually I already said too much. Gobbledygook. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 21:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp61dq$vqp$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #474113 |
JanPB wrote: > On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 10:34:18 AM UTC-7, Paul Gish wrote: >> JanPB wrote: >> >> >> > But it is not! That's the point. Saying "the earth is flat" is >> >> > simply not in the same league as saying "the earth is not flat". >> >> > These are not just two opinions. Similarly, when Ed states what he >> >> > assumes are Einstein's postulates, and when Tom states what are >> >> > Einstein's postulates, this is not a pair of opinions. Tom's post >> >> > is simply a description of a fact. Ed's post is a fantasy. Two >> >> > totally different things.. >> >> >> >> The fact is that relativity is so simple, it doesn't even need >> >> postulates, >> >> since those are facts. Once you have the facts displayed, the theory >> >> pops in smoothly. >> > >> > Gobbledygook. >> >> To you, yes. For the informed, the output of this theory feeds back as >> input, known as "postulates". Purely differentiable theory. Actually >> domain of theory. Obvious, even without mentioning the "abstract >> differential geometry". Actually I already said too much. > > Gobbledygook. Clearley you can't capisce other than that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 20:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp378k$dl8$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #473988 |
Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> writes: >On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 12:13:17 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote: >> Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> writes: >> >That is why atomic clocks can measure time so precisely. They measure >> >particle spin. >> They do not, as has been explained. Atomic clocks work due to a difference >> in energy of two energy levels of the atom. >The difference in "energy levels" is the difference in particle spin (a.k.a. >"oscillation rate". The faster a photon oscillates the higher its energy. No, it is not. It is the frequency of the radiation that correspond to that energy difference E. E=hf, so f is the resultant frequency. f=E/h. >> >So, when an rocket ship moves at 99.5% of the speed of light, all the atomic >> >particles on the ship spin roughly 10 times slower than particles on earth. >> >That not only means that clocks run 10 times slower than clocks on earth, >> >but people AGE 10 times slower than people on earth, and things decay >> >10 time slower than they do on earth. >> That is your opinion, and it is a bad one, since we already know that it >> is not true. >How do you know it is not true? Because it is what you BELIEVE? I already told you, scientists do SR experiments all the time. The traveling twin experiment (muons in a storage ring) would not work is SR wasn't symmetrical. Particle accelerators that work with counter-rotating beams also verify SR mutual time dilation. On the other hand, YOU never provide evidence of your opinions that time is particle spin. (that's because there is none; it's just your opinion) >How many sources should I cite that say you are WRONG? I assume you ignore >all sources, since you cite none and all sources disagree with your beliefs. >"Your head technically ages more quickly than your feet." >Source: https://www.businessinsider.com/do-astronauts-age-slower-than-people-on-earth-2015-8 That is a gravitational effect, GR. If you consider that "evidence", then you simply don't even understand SR and when it does and does not apply. >"In Space, Scott Kelly Aged Slower Than His Brother on Earth." >Source: https://www.sciencealert.com/in-space-scott-kelly-aged-more-slowly-than-his-brother-on-earth-and-here-s-why The ISS is essentially an ongoing traveling twin experiment. Ignoring the smaller gravitational speedup, it is EXPECTED, SR predicts the space twin to experience less time. >"Similarly, when you are living in a particular value of gravitational field >intensity, by your frame of reference you are living your live like nothing is >too fast or slow than it should be. Your watch moves at the normal one tick per >second. Your body is living in that rate of time, your metabolism happens at >that rate of time, you are aging by that rate of time. In fact all animals & >plants, computers and clocks in the same gravitational intensity (and moving >spatially by your frame of reference) are also perceiving the same rate of >time." >Source: https://www.quora.com/Does-gravitational-time-dilation-also-affect-biological-processes-like-how-quickly-our-bodies-age Again, you are referencing a gravitational effect so more evidence that you do NOT understand when SR is relevant. But that paragraph essentially states that there really isn't a particular rate for clocks. What we have been telling you all along. That paragraph tells you you cannot tell if time is "fast" or "slow" without some sort of external source. Clocks tick at the correct rate, including cesium atomic clocks, a 3 minute egg takes 3 minutes, it takes 9 months for a woman to give birth etc. Only when you compare two non-local clocks in different SR/GR situations will you see something odd. If gravity only, it sort of makes sense, A will see B's clock as slower while B sees A's clock as faster. Speed is different, A sees B's clock as slower but B sees A's clock as slower. >"This familiar -- and paradoxical -- plotline comes from a particular tenet of >relativity theory known as time dilation. It predicts that a fast-moving clock >will tick at a slower rate than a stationary one -- or, a man on an interstellar >voyage will age more slowly than his twin back on Earth." >Source: https://scienceline.org/2010/10/do-frequent-fliers-age-more-slowly/ Poorly written, I can't tell whether that is time for an astronaut flying by one-way (if so, they omit using earth as the reference, the astronaut will say the opposite), or if it is a traveling twin situation (astronaut turns around and returns to earth). In the latter case, SR does predict the astronaut to experience less time. >Etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc. >> >So, time is particle spin. And when particle spin slows down, clocks slow >> >down. Unsupported Opinion. "Particle spin" isn't spinning/rotation as you know it. It is a quantum effect that has no macroscopic equivalent. Plus it is quantized, for example an electron can only have spin values of hbar/2 and -hbar/2, no other valuess. So it CANNOT "slow down", only change between the two values. >> >> Again, your opinion, and it disagrees with actual science. >Claiming something without citations or evidence just shows you are only >arguing your BELIEFS. You have nothing to support your BELIEFS - except >perhaps the support of others who BELIEVE as you do. I gave you the reasons, you can look it all up in any good physics book. The best reference is Einstein's 1905 SR paper plus his followups/gedankens, but I already know you never read or can't understand the 1905 paper. You also never give reference to your opinion that a speeding astronaut will see everything else speed up. Or your dumb "spin causes time" opinion. Part of your confusion is that you simply DON'T UNDERSTAND when SR doe and does not apply.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 10:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <413bfe3c-9826-4dbc-84c2-c201c3ae0a4d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473969 |
El miércoles, 3 de octubre de 2018, 13:29:29 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 10:53:02 AM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > El miércoles, 3 de octubre de 2018, 12:21:53 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:42:36 AM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > > > El miércoles, 3 de octubre de 2018, 11:29:02 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's a web site that explains the situation: https://ideonexus.com/2009/02/17/how-much-does-time-dilate-for-the-iss-astronauts/ > > > > > > > > > > It says "The ISS orbits 255 miles above the Earth at 8000 m/s, so time runs > > > > > approximately 0.0000000014 percent slower" than on the surface of the earth. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Notice the article correctly says "so TIME runs...slower". Nothing there about > > > > a clock ticking slower!!!! > > > > > > Clocks measure time. When time runs slower, clocks run slower. > > > > > > > Sure enough and you have it expressed correctly. You see Edward, you tend to > > assign more relevance to the clock than what that clock is measuring, that is > > time. Einstein main contribution was to express that time, as well as space, > > were all variables dependent on the frame of reference from where they are > > measured. > > > > If you can set aside that bias and adopt what you wrote above (When time runs > > slower, clocks run slower), you will be much closer to understand what > > relativity deals with. > > > > So in the GPS system, the atomic clocks that are inside the satellites, are > > measuring the elapsed time AT THE ORBIT of the satellites, and that time > > effectively is changed both by the orbital speeds of the satellites and by > > the gravity at their orbits so TIME runs 38 microseconds per sidereal day > > faster than the atomic clocks at the ground. > > > > It is time what it is affected and not the ticking of the clocks. The > > accurate ticking of the atomic clocks is what allows to measure TIME with > > the needed precission. > > We seem to be in agreement except for one sentence: "It is time what it is > affected and not the ticking of the clocks." You cannot affect time without > affecting clocks. > I agree completely with "You cannot affect time without affecting clocks." but you get to this correct sentence from your wrong interpretation about the ticking of a clock. Again, the change of time changes the elapsed time measured by a clock, but if the ticking rate of a clock changed too, that would affect the measuring of time. You wrote before correctly: "When time runs slower, clocks run slower." This is analogous to say "When a car follows a shorter path, the odometer shows a shorter distance". The odometer measures distance so when the distance (the relevant variable) changes, the odometer measurement changes. > I think the disagreement results from you believing that "space is a variable." > In physics, you need to use coordinates. Newton used space coordinates (x,y,z) and a constant invariable time coordinate t. So when you read x=vt it means the coordinate x is a variable which depends on the speed of the object and the time, and which shows the position in time of the object. > I know that Einstein believed there was a connection between time and space > (i.e. between time and length/distance), but I do not believe that. I think > that belief was due to a lack of understanding of the workings of atoms when > Einstein wrote his paper in 1905. > This, of course has nothing to do with atoms. Space and time coordinates are used to geometrically characterize and describe physical events. > As I see it, time relates to particle spin. When an object moves faster, the > particles that comprise its atoms spin slower. When an object is closer to > the surface of the earth, the particles that comprise the object spin slower. > You should review your understanding of what really spin is in the atomic Standard Model. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_(physics) for details.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 12:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a7d9afd0-b409-4a7a-90b4-b630ee9f2bd9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473979 |
On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 12:22:56 PM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > El miércoles, 3 de octubre de 2018, 13:29:29 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 10:53:02 AM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > > El miércoles, 3 de octubre de 2018, 12:21:53 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:42:36 AM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > > > > El miércoles, 3 de octubre de 2018, 11:29:02 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's a web site that explains the situation: https://ideonexus.com/2009/02/17/how-much-does-time-dilate-for-the-iss-astronauts/ > > > > > > > > > > > > It says "The ISS orbits 255 miles above the Earth at 8000 m/s, so time runs > > > > > > approximately 0.0000000014 percent slower" than on the surface of the earth. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Notice the article correctly says "so TIME runs...slower". Nothing there about > > > > > a clock ticking slower!!!! > > > > > > > > Clocks measure time. When time runs slower, clocks run slower. > > > > > > > > > > Sure enough and you have it expressed correctly. You see Edward, you tend to > > > assign more relevance to the clock than what that clock is measuring, that is > > > time. Einstein main contribution was to express that time, as well as space, > > > were all variables dependent on the frame of reference from where they are > > > measured. > > > > > > If you can set aside that bias and adopt what you wrote above (When time runs > > > slower, clocks run slower), you will be much closer to understand what > > > relativity deals with. > > > > > > So in the GPS system, the atomic clocks that are inside the satellites, are > > > measuring the elapsed time AT THE ORBIT of the satellites, and that time > > > effectively is changed both by the orbital speeds of the satellites and by > > > the gravity at their orbits so TIME runs 38 microseconds per sidereal day > > > faster than the atomic clocks at the ground. > > > > > > It is time what it is affected and not the ticking of the clocks. The > > > accurate ticking of the atomic clocks is what allows to measure TIME with > > > the needed precission. > > > > We seem to be in agreement except for one sentence: "It is time what it is > > affected and not the ticking of the clocks." You cannot affect time without > > affecting clocks. > > > I agree completely with "You cannot affect time without affecting clocks." but > you get to this correct sentence from your wrong interpretation about the > ticking of a clock. Again, the change of time changes the elapsed time measured > by a clock, but if the ticking rate of a clock changed too, that would affect > the measuring of time. How? When time slows down in a "frame," EVERYTHING affected by time slows down in that frame. Clocks slow down. The aging process slows down. Your thought processes slow down. Your digestive processes slow down. Etc. You cannot see that the clock has slowed down, because everything SEEMS normal. It IS "normal" for a frame moving at that velocity or in that location. Clocks run SLOWER at the bottom of a mountain than at the top. Many experiments confirm this. No one can sit there and watch both clocks to see that one ticks slower than the other. Time dilation is too small to be observed that way. But that is the ONLY explanation for how the elapsed time is different. > > You wrote before correctly: "When time runs slower, clocks run slower." > This is analogous to say "When a car follows a shorter path, the odometer shows > a shorter distance". The odometer measures distance so when the distance (the > relevant variable) changes, the odometer measurement changes. That is a BAD analogy. Time is NOT related to distance. It is more like saying that when atomic particles in a location spin slower, everything that consists of atoms and atomic particles in that location functions slower. > > > I think the disagreement results from you believing that "space is a variable." > > > > In physics, you need to use coordinates. Newton used space coordinates (x,y,z) > and a constant invariable time coordinate t. So when you read x=vt it means > the coordinate x is a variable which depends on the speed of the object and > the time, and which shows the position in time of the object. Einstein showed that time is variable. So you cannot use t as a constant. I'm having all kinds of posting problems, evidently due to this thread being so long. This is going to be my last post in this thread. I may start a new thread tomorrow. I'm done for today. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-06 07:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <facce49a-8cb9-4862-89fb-50fe3cbbd2d7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473994 |
On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 3:50:36 PM UTC-4, Ed Lake wrote: > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 12:22:56 PM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > El miércoles, 3 de octubre de 2018, 13:29:29 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 10:53:02 AM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > > > El miércoles, 3 de octubre de 2018, 12:21:53 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > > > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:42:36 AM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > > > > > El miércoles, 3 de octubre de 2018, 11:29:02 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's a web site that explains the situation: https://ideonexus.com/2009/02/17/how-much-does-time-dilate-for-the-iss-astronauts/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It says "The ISS orbits 255 miles above the Earth at 8000 m/s, so time runs > > > > > > > approximately 0.0000000014 percent slower" than on the surface of the earth. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Notice the article correctly says "so TIME runs...slower". Nothing there about > > > > > > a clock ticking slower!!!! > > > > > > > > > > Clocks measure time. When time runs slower, clocks run slower. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sure enough and you have it expressed correctly. You see Edward, you tend to > > > > assign more relevance to the clock than what that clock is measuring, that is > > > > time. Einstein main contribution was to express that time, as well as space, > > > > were all variables dependent on the frame of reference from where they are > > > > measured. > > > > > > > > If you can set aside that bias and adopt what you wrote above (When time runs > > > > slower, clocks run slower), you will be much closer to understand what > > > > relativity deals with. > > > > > > > > So in the GPS system, the atomic clocks that are inside the satellites, are > > > > measuring the elapsed time AT THE ORBIT of the satellites, and that time > > > > effectively is changed both by the orbital speeds of the satellites and by > > > > the gravity at their orbits so TIME runs 38 microseconds per sidereal day > > > > faster than the atomic clocks at the ground. > > > > > > > > It is time what it is affected and not the ticking of the clocks. The > > > > accurate ticking of the atomic clocks is what allows to measure TIME with > > > > the needed precission. > > > > > > We seem to be in agreement except for one sentence: "It is time what it is > > > affected and not the ticking of the clocks." You cannot affect time without > > > affecting clocks. > > > > > I agree completely with "You cannot affect time without affecting clocks." but > > you get to this correct sentence from your wrong interpretation about the > > ticking of a clock. Again, the change of time changes the elapsed time measured > > by a clock, but if the ticking rate of a clock changed too, that would affect > > the measuring of time. > > How? When time slows down in a "frame," EVERYTHING affected by time slows > down in that frame. Clocks slow down. The aging process slows down. Your > thought processes slow down. Your digestive processes slow down. Etc. You have a misconception of time. The only time exists is Absolute Time. Absolute Time never slow down. The rate of passage of absolute time is the same in all frames of reference....in other words, the rate of passage of absolute time is insensitive to motion or gravitational potential. However, there is no clock time unit (including a clock second) that represents the same amount of Absolute Time in different frames and that’s why clocks in relative motion or in different gravitational potentials accumulate clock seconds at different rates. The designers of the GPS recognized the existence of Absolute Time so they made the GPS function in terms of Absolute Time. Before the launch of the GPS, they redefine the GPS second to have 4.4647 more periods of Cs 133 radiation than the ground clock second. This makes the passage of a redefined GPS second at its location corresponds to the passage of a stand ground clock second and thus making the GPS permanently in synch with the ground clock in terms of Absolute Time. The reason why clocks in relative motion or in different gravitational potentials accumulate clock seconds at different rates is because their clock seconds contain a different amount of Absolute Time. The reason why different clock seconds in relative motion or in different gravitational potentials contain a different amount of Absolute Time is because a transition of the Cs 133 atom is dependent on the absolute motion of the clock in the aether called the E-Matrix. The higher is the state of absolute motion of the clock the more Absolute Time is needed to complete a transition and thus the slower is the clock accumulating clock seconds. http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015irt.pdf > > You cannot see that the clock has slowed down, becausever slow downe everything SEEMS > normal. It IS "normal" for a frame moving at that velocity or in that > location. > > Clocks run SLOWER at the bottom of a mountain than at the top. Many > experiments confirm this. No one can sit there and watch both clocks to > see that one ticks slower than the other. Time dilation is too small to > be observed that way. But that is the ONLY explanation for how the elapsed > time is different. > > > > > You wrote before correctly: "When time runs slower, clocks run slower." > > This is analogous to say "When a car follows a shorter path, the odometer shows > > a shorter distance". The odometer measures distance so when the distance (the > > relevant variable) changes, the odometer measurement changes. > > That is a BAD analogy. Time is NOT related to distance. It is more like > saying that when atomic particles in a location spin slower, everything that > consists of atoms and atomic particles in that location functions slower. > > > > > > I think the disagreement results from you believing that "space is a variable." > > > > > > > In physics, you need to use coordinates. Newton used space coordinates (x,y,z) > > and a constant invariable time coordinate t. So when you read x=vt it means > > the coordinate x is a variable which depends on the speed of the object and > > the time, and which shows the position in time of the object. > > Einstein showed that time is variable. So you cannot use t as a constant. > > I'm having all kinds of posting problems, evidently due to this thread being > so long. > > This is going to be my last post in this thread. I may start a new thread > tomorrow. I'm done for today. > > Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-06 21:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ppb3mp$193p$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #474254 |
Op 06-okt-2018 om 16:41 schreef kenseto: > On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 3:50:36 PM UTC-4, Ed Lake wrote: >> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 12:22:56 PM UTC-5, Paparios >> wrote: >>> El miércoles, 3 de octubre de 2018, 13:29:29 (UTC-3), Ed Lake >>> escribió: >>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 10:53:02 AM UTC-5, Paparios >>>> wrote: >>>>> El miércoles, 3 de octubre de 2018, 12:21:53 (UTC-3), Ed Lake >>>>> escribió: >>>>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2018 at 9:42:36 AM UTC-5, Paparios >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> El miércoles, 3 de octubre de 2018, 11:29:02 (UTC-3), Ed >>>>>>> Lake escribió: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Here's a web site that explains the situation: >>>>>>>> https://ideonexus.com/2009/02/17/how-much-does-time-dilate-for-the-iss-astronauts/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It says "The ISS orbits 255 miles above the Earth at 8000 m/s, so time runs >>>>>>>> approximately 0.0000000014 percent slower" than on the >>>>>>>> surface of the earth. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Notice the article correctly says "so TIME >>>>>>> runs...slower". Nothing there about a clock ticking >>>>>>> slower!!!! >>>>>> >>>>>> Clocks measure time. When time runs slower, clocks run >>>>>> slower. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sure enough and you have it expressed correctly. You see >>>>> Edward, you tend to assign more relevance to the clock than >>>>> what that clock is measuring, that is time. Einstein main >>>>> contribution was to express that time, as well as space, were >>>>> all variables dependent on the frame of reference from where >>>>> they are measured. >>>>> >>>>> If you can set aside that bias and adopt what you wrote above >>>>> (When time runs slower, clocks run slower), you will be much >>>>> closer to understand what relativity deals with. >>>>> >>>>> So in the GPS system, the atomic clocks that are inside the >>>>> satellites, are measuring the elapsed time AT THE ORBIT of >>>>> the satellites, and that time effectively is changed both by >>>>> the orbital speeds of the satellites and by the gravity at >>>>> their orbits so TIME runs 38 microseconds per sidereal day >>>>> faster than the atomic clocks at the ground. >>>>> >>>>> It is time what it is affected and not the ticking of the >>>>> clocks. The accurate ticking of the atomic clocks is what >>>>> allows to measure TIME with the needed precission. >>>> >>>> We seem to be in agreement except for one sentence: "It is time >>>> what it is affected and not the ticking of the clocks." You >>>> cannot affect time without affecting clocks. >>>> >>> I agree completely with "You cannot affect time without affecting >>> clocks." but you get to this correct sentence from your wrong >>> interpretation about the ticking of a clock. Again, the change of >>> time changes the elapsed time measured by a clock, but if the >>> ticking rate of a clock changed too, that would affect the >>> measuring of time. >> >> How? When time slows down in a "frame," EVERYTHING affected by >> time slows down in that frame. Clocks slow down. The aging >> process slows down. Your thought processes slow down. Your >> digestive processes slow down. Etc. > > You have a misconception of time. But Edvis has left this building. Dirk Vdm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 15:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp2npm$1ckj$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #473935 |
Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 7:14:06 PM UTC-5, RichD wrote: >> On September 29, Ed Lake wrote: >>> His new theory did "not require an 'absolutely stationary space' >>> provided with special properties." It's a theory based upon the >>> movement of objects. >>> It's a theory that says time moves at different rates for objects >>> moving at different speeds. So, you do not NEED any "absolutely >>> stationary space" to measure movement from. You can measure >>> movement by the different rates at which time passes for different objects. >> >> Ed, pop quiz: >> >> I) You're aboard the International Space Station, a >> satellite, all jets off. There are no windows. In the >> weaker gravity, time has contracted, has it not? So, how >> would you determine the faster rate of time, and your >> velocity, totally within the ship? What tests? > > There is no test to determine your rate of time within a location. Which is nonsense. The principle of relativity tells you that the laws of physics that would govern a regularly periodic process are independent of inertial reference frame. So you can simply calibrate a clock against a local period process. > You can > only determine your rate of time by comparing it to the rate of time in > another location (frame of reference). > >> >> II) A rogue Klingon ship passes near earth. Spitefully, >> he hits you with a phasor beam, stopping the Space >> Station in its tracks. You free fall, straight toward >> earth's center. You certainly feel the initial shock, >> but following that, how would you determine your >> velocity, and your altitude, and the time dilation? > > There is no test to determine your rate of time within a location. You can > only determine your rate of time by comparing it to the rate of time in > another location (frame of reference). > >> >> III) A well opens in the ground, directly below >> (another dastardly Klingon trick). It drills all >> the way through the earth, a complete vacuum. As >> you traverse the surface, the force of gravity weakens, >> therefore time contracts, and you decelerate. Again, >> how do you determine your velocity, and rate of time? > > There is no test to determine your rate of time within a location. You can > only determine your rate of time by comparing it to the rate of time in > another location (frame of reference). > >> >> IV) At the center, gravity force drops to zero, >> so you halt, hence time flies at its maximum. How >> do you determine this, and your state of rest? > > There is no test to determine your rate of time within a location. You can > only determine your rate of time by comparing it to the rate of time in > another location (frame of reference). > > The principle of relativity says that inside a frame of reference you cannot > tell that your clock is running fast or slow. I.e., "the same laws of > electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which > the equations of mechanics hold good." > > BUT, if you compare your rate of time on the ISS to the the rate of time on > the ground, you CAN tell that your clock is running at a different rate > (a rate that depends upon your altitude and velocity). > > Ed > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-03 16:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <078f6508-a9c4-490b-8e09-cfb4523cf03f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473935 |
On October 3, Ed Lake wrote: >> I) You're aboard the International Space Station, a >> satellite, all jets off. There are no windows. In the >> weaker gravity, time has contracted, has it not? So, how >> would you determine the faster rate of time, and your >> velocity, totally within the ship? > > There is no test to determine your rate of time within a location. > >> II) You free fall, straight toward earth's center. >> ... how would you determine your velocity, and your >> altitude, and the time dilation? > > There is no test to determine your rate of time within a location. > >> III) .... > > There is no test to determine your rate of time within a location. Dammit, he didn't bite on any of these. Score: Ed Lake: 1 Richard D.: 0 >> IV) At the center, gravity force drops to zero, >> so you halt... He didn't bite on this either. Ed Lake: 2 Richard D.: 0 -- Rich
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 13:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7dcfb8bf-ff24-42d2-9a1a-8e93a9c7e7e7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473474 |
On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 1:16:48 PM UTC-7, Ed Lake wrote: > On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 1:04:37 PM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > El sábado, 29 de septiembre de 2018, 14:52:10 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 12:16:13 PM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > > > El sábado, 29 de septiembre de 2018, 12:29:17 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > > > On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 5:03:43 PM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > > So, you again turn what Einstein clearly wrote into another absurd debate > > > over what Einstein MEANT. I'm not interested in any OPINION vs OPINION > > > debate about what Einstein MEANT. > > > > > > > What the hell are you talking about? It is not what Einstein meant!!! > > It is what it is written in his papers!!! > > Here is what Einstein WROTE in his 1905 paper: > > "Examples of this sort, together with the unsuccessful attempts to discover > any motion of the earth relatively to the “light medium,” suggest that the > phenomena of electrodynamics as well as of mechanics possess no properties > corresponding to the idea of absolute rest. They suggest rather that, as has > already been shown to the first order of small quantities, the same laws of > electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the > equations of mechanics hold good.1 We will raise this conjecture (the purport > of which will hereafter be called the “Principle of Relativity”) to the status > of a POSTULATE, and also introduce ANOTHER POSTULATE, which is only apparently > irreconcilable with the former, namely, that light is always propagated in empty > space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the > emitting body. THESE TWO POSTULATES suffice for the attainment of a simple and > consistent theory of the electrodynamics of moving bodies based on Maxwell’s > theory for stationary bodies." > > The word "postulate" does NOT appear anywhere else in his paper. > > Einstein's First Postulate, therefore, is: > > "the same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of > reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good." > > And Einstein' Second Postulate is: > > "light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is > independent of the state of motion of the emitting body." > > Wild INTERPRETATIONS that those are NOT Einstein's postulates, > and that his two postulates are actually totally different and are written > somewhere else in the paper is JUST A CRAZY OPINION. No, you are wrong. You see, your problem is the lack of training and the resulting narrow vision which mistakes molehills for mountains (you cannot tell them apart because of your lack of experience). What you are doing is akin to deciding whether neutrino has mass or not by examining the relevant papers solely from the point of view of their English grammar. This is not where the meat is. What you quoted comes from a summary portion of the paper. In 1905 paragraphs like that were not labelled in papers in any special way. Today this entire section would have been titled: "ABSTRACT" or "SUMMARY OF THE PAPER", or some such. In other words, these are not the ACTUAL definitions the author uses, they are loose summaries designed to quickly focus an EXPERT reader's attention in the right direction. The actual definitions are contained in the paper proper which begins with the "Kinematical Part". Last but not least, you are not qualified make pronouncements like: > Wild INTERPRETATIONS that those are NOT Einstein's postulates, > and that his two postulates are actually totally different and are written > somewhere else in the paper is JUST A CRAZY OPINION. No, this is 100% correct. The postulates' version stated in the summary are NOT what they actually are. You are totally confused on this (and many other things). Once again, unless you change your attitude you'll get nowhere with any of this. I suggest you simply lay off physics, it doesn't look like a good hobby for you. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-01 14:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <407e5f12-003f-4024-8385-d8ca92c363d9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #473699 |
On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 3:13:30 PM UTC-5, JanPB wrote: > On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 1:16:48 PM UTC-7, Ed Lake wrote: > > On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 1:04:37 PM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > > El sábado, 29 de septiembre de 2018, 14:52:10 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > > On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 12:16:13 PM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > > > > El sábado, 29 de septiembre de 2018, 12:29:17 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > > > > On Friday, September 28, 2018 at 5:03:43 PM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > > > So, you again turn what Einstein clearly wrote into another absurd debate > > > > over what Einstein MEANT. I'm not interested in any OPINION vs OPINION > > > > debate about what Einstein MEANT. > > > > > > > > > > What the hell are you talking about? It is not what Einstein meant!!! > > > It is what it is written in his papers!!! > > > > Here is what Einstein WROTE in his 1905 paper: > > > > "Examples of this sort, together with the unsuccessful attempts to discover > > any motion of the earth relatively to the “light medium,” suggest that the > > phenomena of electrodynamics as well as of mechanics possess no properties > > corresponding to the idea of absolute rest. They suggest rather that, as has > > already been shown to the first order of small quantities, the same laws of > > electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the > > equations of mechanics hold good.1 We will raise this conjecture (the purport > > of which will hereafter be called the “Principle of Relativity”) to the status > > of a POSTULATE, and also introduce ANOTHER POSTULATE, which is only apparently > > irreconcilable with the former, namely, that light is always propagated in empty > > space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the > > emitting body. THESE TWO POSTULATES suffice for the attainment of a simple and > > consistent theory of the electrodynamics of moving bodies based on Maxwell’s > > theory for stationary bodies." > > > > The word "postulate" does NOT appear anywhere else in his paper. > > > > Einstein's First Postulate, therefore, is: > > > > "the same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of > > reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good." > > > > And Einstein' Second Postulate is: > > > > "light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is > > independent of the state of motion of the emitting body." > > > > Wild INTERPRETATIONS that those are NOT Einstein's postulates, > > and that his two postulates are actually totally different and are written > > somewhere else in the paper is JUST A CRAZY OPINION. > > No, you are wrong. You see, your problem is the lack of training and the > resulting narrow vision which mistakes molehills for mountains (you cannot > tell them apart because of your lack of experience). What you are doing is > akin to deciding whether neutrino has mass or not by examining the relevant > papers solely from the point of view of their English grammar. This is not > where the meat is. > > What you quoted comes from a summary portion of the paper. In 1905 paragraphs > like that were not labelled in papers in any special way. Today this > entire section would have been titled: "ABSTRACT" or "SUMMARY OF THE PAPER", > or some such. In other words, these are not the ACTUAL definitions the > author uses, they are loose summaries designed to quickly focus an > EXPERT reader's attention in the right direction. The actual definitions > are contained in the paper proper which begins with the "Kinematical Part". > > Last but not least, you are not qualified make pronouncements like: > > Wild INTERPRETATIONS that those are NOT Einstein's postulates, > > and that his two postulates are actually totally different and are written > > somewhere else in the paper is JUST A CRAZY OPINION. > > No, this is 100% correct. The postulates' version stated in the summary > are NOT what they actually are. You are totally confused on this (and > many other things). Once again, unless you change your attitude you'll > get nowhere with any of this. I suggest you simply lay off physics, it > doesn't look like a good hobby for you. > > -- > Jan Why would you think that your OPINIONS will change anything? All you do above is state your OPINIONS. Haven't I made it clear that I am NOT INTERESTED in getting into any OPINION VS OPINION arguments. They are a TOTAL waste of time. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 24 of 31 — ← Prev page 1 … 22 23 [24] 25 26 … 31 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web