Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #476844 > unrolled thread
| Started by | patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-11-11 20:02 -0800 |
| Last post | 2018-12-06 20:57 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 485 — 33 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-11 20:02 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-11-11 20:23 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2018-11-12 16:04 +1100
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-12 06:27 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-12 06:43 +0100
Imbecile Pat Dolan repeats himself "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-11 21:56 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-12 00:43 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan@comcast.net - 2018-11-12 01:04 -0800
Pat Dolan demonstrates his cretinism "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-12 07:52 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-12 11:48 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-12 19:31 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-12 22:55 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox Shon Wible <shwn@shoowe.wh> - 2018-11-13 20:58 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-13 23:40 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox Shon Wible <shwn@shouwe.wh> - 2018-11-13 23:51 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-13 10:22 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-16 09:58 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-16 09:45 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-16 12:48 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox patDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-16 11:32 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-16 21:25 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox patDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-16 12:44 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-17 18:25 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-17 11:14 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-17 19:35 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-17 11:49 -0800
Cretin Pad Dolan perseveres "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-17 12:15 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-17 12:35 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-17 13:47 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-17 14:04 -0800
Utter cretin Patrick Dolan at work "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-17 14:27 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-17 15:06 -0800
Patrick Dolan, total imbecile from Seattle, WA "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-17 19:03 -0800
Re: Patrick Dolan, total imbecile from Seattle, WA pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-17 20:35 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-17 23:43 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-17 18:19 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-17 16:32 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-17 16:39 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-17 17:12 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-17 17:21 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-17 17:25 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-17 17:39 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-17 21:23 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-18 13:57 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-18 08:24 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-18 19:45 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-18 23:32 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-17 02:00 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-17 10:23 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-12 16:08 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan@comcast.net - 2018-11-12 08:29 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-12 18:28 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-11-12 10:44 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-11-12 10:50 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan@comcast.net - 2018-11-12 19:35 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-13 06:22 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-13 06:33 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 12:35 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-13 12:25 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-12 20:29 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Gaston Castaneda <ucpp@java4ow.nv> - 2018-11-12 21:49 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-12 17:46 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Gaston Castaneda <uucp@jav4ow.nq> - 2018-11-13 20:14 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-13 23:48 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 14:55 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Shon Wible <shwn@shoowe.wh> - 2018-11-13 23:49 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 16:00 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-14 17:22 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox Shon Wible <shwn@shouwe.wh> - 2018-11-14 16:31 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-12 20:45 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan@comcast.net - 2018-11-12 23:29 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 01:15 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 13:33 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-13 13:05 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan@comcast.net - 2018-11-13 11:11 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-13 22:43 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan@comcast.net - 2018-11-13 13:57 -0800
Cretin Pat Dolan needs to be sterilized, such that he doesn't reproduce "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-13 14:12 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-13 23:15 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan@comcast.net - 2018-11-13 14:39 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-13 23:58 +0100
Imbecile Pat Dolan needs to be sterilized "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-13 15:04 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-11-13 15:01 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-13 16:02 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-13 17:38 -0800
Imbecile Pat Dolan needs to ne stopped from reproducing "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-13 18:19 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-11-14 04:29 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-13 21:22 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan@comcast.net - 2018-11-13 19:45 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 21:42 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan@comcast.net - 2018-11-13 20:19 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 21:43 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan@comcast.net - 2018-11-13 21:49 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-13 22:34 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan@comcast.net - 2018-11-13 23:29 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-14 01:13 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Shon Wible <shwn@shouwe.wh> - 2018-11-14 15:51 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-14 08:03 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Shon Wible <shwn@shouwe.wh> - 2018-11-14 16:28 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-14 15:07 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-14 07:23 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-14 23:56 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-14 07:41 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-14 01:49 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-14 16:35 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-14 09:17 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Shon Wible <shwn@shouwe.wh> - 2018-11-14 18:24 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-14 11:43 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-14 23:56 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-14 16:32 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-14 16:55 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-15 05:22 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-15 16:57 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-15 09:31 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan@comcast.net - 2018-11-15 09:37 -0800
Imbecile Pat Dolan from Seattle , WA "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-15 09:44 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-15 18:31 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-15 01:46 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patd <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-14 19:14 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-11-14 19:29 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-15 03:46 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan@comcast.net - 2018-11-14 21:28 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-15 14:02 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan@comcast.net - 2018-11-15 08:21 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-15 16:57 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-15 09:08 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-15 10:46 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-15 18:56 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-15 11:00 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-15 19:56 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-15 20:04 +0000
Cretins Pat Dolan and Keith Stein working together "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-15 12:59 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-16 01:47 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-16 20:36 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Gaston Castaneda <ucpp@java4ow.nv> - 2018-11-13 20:10 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-14 09:16 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-15 12:51 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-11-18 17:10 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-18 17:52 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-11-19 18:56 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-11-19 19:30 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-19 19:35 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox pdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-19 20:07 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-20 09:44 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox patDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-20 09:32 -0800
Cretin Pat Dolan expresses his imbecility "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-20 09:37 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox PatDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-20 09:42 -0800
Cretin Pat Dolan takes it in the pants "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-20 09:54 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-20 09:57 -0800
Cretin Pat Dolan inserts foot in mouth. Deeper. "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-20 10:04 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox PatDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-20 10:22 -0800
Pathological imbecile Pat Dolan, inserts foot in mouth. Deeper. "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-20 13:24 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-20 21:53 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-20 13:22 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-20 13:30 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-20 13:58 -0800
Incurable cretin Pat Dolan from Seatlle WA "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-20 14:00 -0800
Cretin Pat Dolan perseveres in his imbecility "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-20 13:47 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-21 12:25 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-21 19:00 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-21 11:11 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-21 19:19 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-21 22:03 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-21 23:35 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-22 01:02 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-22 09:17 -0800
Cretin Pat Dolan at work "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-22 09:33 -0800
Re: Cretin Pat Dolan at work JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-22 11:27 -0800
Re: Cretin Pat Dolan at work "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-22 11:50 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-22 10:32 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-22 11:27 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox PatDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-22 11:46 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-22 13:22 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-22 23:00 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-22 14:15 -0800
[OT] Family names and their pronunciation (was: Another Twins Paradox) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-23 02:37 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-22 14:28 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-22 14:25 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox Elden Lathan <an@tnettw.ea> - 2018-11-22 20:44 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-22 21:11 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox Elden Lathan <an@tnetvtw.ea> - 2018-11-23 16:47 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-22 08:59 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-22 01:05 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-22 18:28 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-20 15:57 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-20 14:01 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-20 14:22 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-20 14:35 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-20 14:50 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-20 15:37 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-11-20 16:31 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-20 16:50 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-11-20 19:32 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-20 20:06 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-20 20:13 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-20 20:20 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-21 15:00 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-21 17:14 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-11-21 04:13 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-20 19:24 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-11-19 21:08 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-20 00:06 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-20 01:08 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-20 12:03 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-11-20 04:41 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-20 14:36 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-20 13:42 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-11-20 07:15 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-18 18:34 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-11-18 19:12 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-18 19:41 -0800
Pat Dolan, John Y. Wang, wankers "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-18 19:48 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-19 13:17 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-19 06:36 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2018-11-19 04:34 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-19 13:53 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox carleto4157990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-19 10:13 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-22 14:30 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-22 14:39 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-22 21:07 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-22 21:05 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-22 21:19 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-22 21:33 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-23 08:01 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 08:32 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-23 08:56 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 09:28 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 09:39 -0800
Cretin Pat Dolan doesn't understand basic Newtonian mechanics "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 09:44 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-23 12:41 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 13:22 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-23 13:54 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 14:04 -0800
Shitferbrains Pat Dolan takes another one in the pants "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 14:45 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 15:25 -0800
Pathological imbecile Pat Dolan at work "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 16:07 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 16:25 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 16:37 -0800
Utter cretin Pat Dolan perseveres in his imbecility "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 16:44 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-23 21:22 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-23 16:49 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 17:40 -0800
Pat Dolan, lying POS "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 18:01 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 18:10 -0800
Cretin Pat Dolan insists on taking it up the pants "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 18:16 -0800
Pat Dolan takes another kick in the behind "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 18:34 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-23 19:12 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 19:26 -0800
The Pat Dolan piece of shit takes it in the pants one more time "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 19:37 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 19:55 -0800
Utter cretin Pat Dolan puffs himself up, like a gasbag "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-24 00:02 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-23 21:28 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-23 23:57 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-24 00:31 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-24 14:23 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-24 12:05 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-24 14:45 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-24 21:50 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-25 01:45 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-26 11:00 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-26 12:39 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-26 13:00 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-26 21:29 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-26 14:11 -0800
Pathological Imbecile Pat Dolan keeps taking it in the pants "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-26 14:35 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-26 15:38 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-26 16:27 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-26 16:49 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-27 01:33 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-26 17:42 -0800
Stubborn cretin Pat Dolan perseveres. In his imbecility. "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-26 17:49 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-27 02:04 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-26 20:49 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-26 23:22 -0800
Imbecile Pat Dolan attempts to calculate. Fail. "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-26 17:44 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-26 18:40 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-26 23:10 -0800
Cretin Pat Dolan perseveres in his imbecility "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-27 02:04 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-27 02:40 -0800
Pat Dolan, a lying piece of shit "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-27 07:21 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-27 05:07 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-27 13:54 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-27 09:56 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-27 10:04 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-27 10:42 -0800
Pat Dolan = lying piece of shit "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-27 11:03 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-27 12:41 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-27 14:17 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-27 15:24 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-27 16:16 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-27 16:37 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Lee Primer <itoo@wodinwnc.cg> - 2018-11-28 00:47 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-27 17:00 -0800
Pat Dolan, lying dumbshit "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-27 17:22 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-27 17:41 -0800
Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan continues to squirm "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-27 16:26 -0800
Cretin Pat Dolan insists in his imbecility "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-27 10:21 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-27 19:28 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-27 20:12 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-28 07:39 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-28 18:46 -0800
Pat Dolan imbecile at work "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-28 18:55 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-28 19:04 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-28 19:47 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 15:51 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-29 08:31 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-28 21:07 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-28 21:34 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-28 22:01 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-28 22:07 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-28 22:20 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-28 22:25 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-28 23:43 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 00:18 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-29 01:44 -0800
Wacko Pat Dolan in need of mental help "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 06:11 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 07:28 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 07:36 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 07:50 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 16:19 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 08:41 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 16:19 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 08:28 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 16:49 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-29 10:52 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 09:06 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 17:24 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 09:36 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-29 12:13 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox Lee Primer <itoo@wodinwnc.cg> - 2018-11-29 18:25 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 10:43 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-29 19:30 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-30 00:02 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Lee Primer <itoo@wodinwnc.cg> - 2018-11-30 11:32 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Lee Primer <itoo@wodinwnc.cg> - 2018-11-30 11:35 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-30 13:21 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox Lee Primer <itoo@wodinwnc.cg> - 2018-11-30 20:01 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-30 12:07 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-30 10:43 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 10:38 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 10:53 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-29 11:03 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 11:06 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 11:34 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 11:42 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 12:28 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-29 20:52 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 12:15 -0800
Cretin Pat Dolan inserts foot in mouth "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 12:19 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-30 17:42 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-30 09:01 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-30 18:14 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-30 18:25 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-30 17:15 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-30 09:31 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-30 20:11 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-30 12:28 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-30 23:03 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-30 18:16 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan@comcast.net - 2018-12-04 20:20 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-12-04 20:32 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan@comcast.net - 2018-12-05 13:06 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-12-05 13:38 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-12-05 13:49 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-12-05 16:37 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-12-06 02:04 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan@comcast.net - 2018-12-06 09:11 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-12-06 18:41 +0100
Lunatic asylum resident Pat Dolan regains his 1 hr/week computer privilege and promptly uses it to spew fresh idiocies "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-12-04 22:36 -0800
Pat Dolan imbecile insers both feet in his mouth "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-30 10:19 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 19:59 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 12:25 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 12:36 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 13:29 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 22:27 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 20:55 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 13:24 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 22:27 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 12:29 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 21:40 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-29 16:11 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 14:17 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 14:50 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 14:50 -0800
Pat Dolan, natural imbecile "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 11:27 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 12:23 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 12:33 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 21:40 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 14:49 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-29 15:07 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 13:38 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 15:20 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 16:24 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 18:15 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 16:46 -0800
Pat Dolan sinks even lower "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 17:19 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 19:35 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 12:58 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 13:32 -0800
Natural cretin Pat Dolan insists "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 13:34 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 14:38 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 14:46 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-29 10:54 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 10:42 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-29 10:55 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 00:12 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 15:51 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-24 03:36 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-24 12:09 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-24 13:07 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-24 15:32 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-24 08:02 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-24 17:30 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-24 09:36 -0800
Pat Dolan, lying POS "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-24 09:43 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-24 18:06 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-24 10:20 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-24 18:31 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-24 10:39 -0800
Shiitforbrains Pat Dolan, Seattle, WA "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-24 10:56 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-24 19:42 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-24 12:48 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-25 00:20 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-24 17:11 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-24 18:46 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-24 19:32 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-24 19:36 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-24 19:46 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-25 12:43 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-25 00:46 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-25 14:35 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-26 10:50 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-26 19:23 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-24 19:15 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-11-24 11:22 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-24 19:20 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-24 19:24 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-24 10:33 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-24 19:54 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-11-25 04:36 +0100
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-24 12:47 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 10:14 -0800
Pathological imbecile Pat Dolan takes it in the pants. Repeatedly. "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 10:29 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-22 22:07 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-23 00:28 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 01:01 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-26 17:56 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-23 07:04 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-24 19:06 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-24 17:14 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-24 23:35 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-11-26 00:11 -0600
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-26 09:15 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-26 11:24 -0800
Re:" PHYSICS AWARDS " Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-27 14:55 +0000
Re: " PHYSICS AWARDS " Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-11-28 15:00 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox yeurohenry@gmail.com - 2018-11-27 20:00 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-11-27 20:37 -0800
Dumbshit Pat Dolan takes it in the pants "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-23 07:31 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox carleto4157990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 11:29 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox carleto4157990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 11:30 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox carleto4157990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 11:30 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox carleto4157990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 11:32 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox carleto4157990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 12:11 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox carleto4157990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 14:42 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 14:58 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 15:02 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-30 03:22 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 19:42 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 20:20 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-29 20:37 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 20:47 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 21:37 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-11-29 21:50 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2018-11-30 01:03 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-30 13:23 +0000
Incurable cretin Pat Dolan itches to take it in the pants "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-30 07:24 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-11-30 03:44 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox patdolan@comcast.net - 2018-11-30 07:36 -0800
Insane patient Pat Dolan at work "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-30 07:58 -0800
Re: Insane patient Pat Dolan at work Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-30 16:18 +0000
Re: Insane patient Pat Dolan at work "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-11-30 08:40 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-30 13:22 +0000
Re: Another Twins Paradox carleto4157990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 15:09 -0800
Re: Another Twins Paradox Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-12-06 20:57 +0100
Page 6 of 25 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 25 Next page →
| From | patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-14 07:23 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <0bb1fe48-6c63-4357-a8f9-84fbddf21e69@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #477062 |
> > 31 quadrillion feet, for both observers. > > -- > Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables Wow! Bodkin. You really can calculate stuff. Who would have guessed. No can you demonstrate your prowess one more time and answer the question assigned to Michael Moroney, namely, > There you go ahead, trying to combine gravity and SR, despite being > corrected. You can't use SR where gravity is involved. You just can't, > SR assumes no gravity or gravity effects so weak they don't affect the > outcome. Um...how weak would gravity effects have to be in order to not effect the outcome, Michael Moroney?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-14 23:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <psicmt$1gfl$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #477066 |
patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> wrote: > >> >> 31 quadrillion feet, for both observers. >> >> -- >> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > Wow! Bodkin. You really can calculate stuff. Who would have guessed. > No can you demonstrate your prowess one more time and answer the question > assigned to Michael Moroney, namely, > >> There you go ahead, trying to combine gravity and SR, despite being >> corrected. You can't use SR where gravity is involved. You just can't, >> SR assumes no gravity or gravity effects so weak they don't affect the >> outcome. > > Um...how weak would gravity effects have to be in order to not effect the > outcome, Michael Moroney? > Depends on the sensitivity of the measurement. Taking an example from SR, if your length measurement precision is 1 in 10,000, then you won’t be able to tell the difference between SR and Newtonian physics for any speed less than 1800 miles per second. -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-14 07:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <psgjjf$rb7$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #477039 |
patdolan@comcast.net writes: >> SR does not include gravitation, and your attempt to apply it to earth's >> orbit is just plain wrong. GR does include gravitation, and applies to >> earth's orbit as I explained in this thread. But GR does not have any >> "gravitational force" or "centrifugal force", so your "calculation" is >> still nonsense. >By Jove, Tom Roberts! You have given me a wonderful inspiration. Ta hell >with force and gravity. I will destroy SR by means of orbital period and >Kepler's Law! Kepler didn't know or care what gravitational force was or >might even mean. Thanks Tom, old chum(p). FAIL. There you go ahead, trying to combine gravity and SR, despite being corrected. You can't use SR where gravity is involved. You just can't, SR assumes no gravity or gravity effects so weak they don't affect the outcome. It's like applying the religious laws of Saudi Arabia to Iowa. The religious laws of Saudi Arabia apply only in Saudi Arabia. Now quit failing, and that's an order.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-14 01:49 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <0e7075b9-65e5-43f4-baa2-02b65b57a9b8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #477047 |
> There you go ahead, trying to combine gravity and SR, despite being > corrected. You can't use SR where gravity is involved. You just can't, > SR assumes no gravity or gravity effects so weak they don't affect the > outcome. Um...how weak would gravity effects have to be in order to not effect the outcome, Michael Moroney?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-14 16:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pshiro$83j$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #477050 |
patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> writes: >> There you go ahead, trying to combine gravity and SR, despite being >> corrected. You can't use SR where gravity is involved. You just can't, >> SR assumes no gravity or gravity effects so weak they don't affect the >> outcome. >Um...how weak would gravity effects have to be in order to not effect >the outcome, Michael Moroney? Smaller than the measurement errors. That's the standard that scientists and engineers use. Don't forget that part of measurement and measurement- related computation is estimating the range of all errors. You'll see that in ALL modern science papers, they track the accumulated error range and use this number to show the possibility that the observed results are by random chance. That number must be very small for valid results. But you cannot use SR math to model an earth orbiting a gravitating sun. That effect is in no way too small to ignore by using SR.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-14 09:17 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <83e6f675-bc49-4fb5-9408-47c11a01b913@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #477080 |
On Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 8:35:05 AM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote: > patdolan <patdolan> writes: > > > >> There you go ahead, trying to combine gravity and SR, despite being > >> corrected. You can't use SR where gravity is involved. You just can't, > >> SR assumes no gravity or gravity effects so weak they don't affect the > >> outcome. > > >Um...how weak would gravity effects have to be in order to not effect > >the outcome, Michael Moroney? > > Smaller than the measurement errors. That's the standard that scientists > and engineers use. Don't forget that part of measurement and measurement- > related computation is estimating the range of all errors. You'll see that > in ALL modern science papers, they track the accumulated error range and > use this number to show the possibility that the observed results are by > random chance. That number must be very small for valid results. But > you cannot use SR math to model an earth orbiting a gravitating sun. That > effect is in no way too small to ignore by using SR. Thank you Micheal M. Now consider a neighborhood where the radius of spacetime curvature is, oh let's say 31 quadrillion feet. In your opinion is such a neighborhood flat enough to perform reliably accurate testing of SR?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Shon Wible <shwn@shouwe.wh> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-14 18:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pshp92$gem$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #477081 |
patdolan wrote: >> Smaller than the measurement errors. That's the standard that >> scientists and engineers use. Don't forget that part of measurement and >> measurement- related computation is estimating the range of all errors. >> You'll see that in ALL modern science papers, they track the >> accumulated error range and use this number to show the possibility >> that the observed results are by random chance. That number must be >> very small for valid results. But you cannot use SR math to model an >> earth orbiting a gravitating sun. That effect is in no way too small to >> ignore by using SR. > > Thank you Micheal M. Now consider a neighborhood where the radius of > spacetime curvature is, oh let's say 31 quadrillion feet. In your > opinion is such a neighborhood flat enough to perform reliably accurate > testing of SR? A curvature of a spacetime has no such property associated with, named radius. What is the name of your teacher?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-14 11:43 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <0ea8e364-5351-4818-8235-0a4d3e9b9a52@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #477082 |
On Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 10:24:39 AM UTC-8, Shon Wible wrote: > patdolan wrote: > > >> Smaller than the measurement errors. That's the standard that > >> scientists and engineers use. Don't forget that part of measurement and > >> measurement- related computation is estimating the range of all errors. > >> You'll see that in ALL modern science papers, they track the > >> accumulated error range and use this number to show the possibility > >> that the observed results are by random chance. That number must be > >> very small for valid results. But you cannot use SR math to model an > >> earth orbiting a gravitating sun. That effect is in no way too small to > >> ignore by using SR. > > > > Thank you Micheal M. Now consider a neighborhood where the radius of > > spacetime curvature is, oh let's say 31 quadrillion feet. In your > > opinion is such a neighborhood flat enough to perform reliably accurate > > testing of SR? > > A curvature of a spacetime has no such property associated with, named > radius. What is the name of your teacher? Oak-kaaay Shon, my boy. Time for the Jim Acosta treatment. Put down the mic and get out. Your Dolan access credentials are hereby revoked. (although snarkiness is the best way to learn English, if you really are a non-native speaker and not a Sylvia-esque faker.) Where the hell is the answer to my question, Tom Moroney? Do I have to wait all day?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-14 23:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <psicmv$1gfl$4@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #477081 |
patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> wrote: > On Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 8:35:05 AM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote: >> patdolan <patdolan> writes: >> >> >>>> There you go ahead, trying to combine gravity and SR, despite being >>>> corrected. You can't use SR where gravity is involved. You just can't, >>>> SR assumes no gravity or gravity effects so weak they don't affect the >>>> outcome. >> >>> Um...how weak would gravity effects have to be in order to not effect >>> the outcome, Michael Moroney? >> >> Smaller than the measurement errors. That's the standard that scientists >> and engineers use. Don't forget that part of measurement and measurement- >> related computation is estimating the range of all errors. You'll see that >> in ALL modern science papers, they track the accumulated error range and >> use this number to show the possibility that the observed results are by >> random chance. That number must be very small for valid results. But >> you cannot use SR math to model an earth orbiting a gravitating sun. That >> effect is in no way too small to ignore by using SR. > > Thank you Micheal M. Now consider a neighborhood where the radius of > spacetime curvature is, oh let's say 31 quadrillion feet. In your > opinion is such a neighborhood flat enough to perform reliably accurate testing of SR? > What’s the measurement precision? -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-14 16:32 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b442d6ff-1986-477c-b096-5ab48e384f42@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #477092 |
On Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 3:56:19 PM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > patdolan <patdolan> wrote: > > On Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 8:35:05 AM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote: > >> patdolan <patdolan> writes: > >> > >> > >>>> There you go ahead, trying to combine gravity and SR, despite being > >>>> corrected. You can't use SR where gravity is involved. You just can't, > >>>> SR assumes no gravity or gravity effects so weak they don't affect the > >>>> outcome. > >> > >>> Um...how weak would gravity effects have to be in order to not effect > >>> the outcome, Michael Moroney? > >> > >> Smaller than the measurement errors. That's the standard that scientists > >> and engineers use. Don't forget that part of measurement and measurement- > >> related computation is estimating the range of all errors. You'll see that > >> in ALL modern science papers, they track the accumulated error range and > >> use this number to show the possibility that the observed results are by > >> random chance. That number must be very small for valid results. But > >> you cannot use SR math to model an earth orbiting a gravitating sun. That > >> effect is in no way too small to ignore by using SR. > > > > Thank you Micheal M. Now consider a neighborhood where the radius of > > spacetime curvature is, oh let's say 31 quadrillion feet. In your > > opinion is such a neighborhood flat enough to perform reliably accurate testing of SR? > > > > What’s the measurement precision? > > -- > Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables The |(delta x) - (delta t*c)| will be around 10 billion feet in the one case and 100 feet in the other.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-14 16:55 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a07336df-6f1d-44e8-8d5c-c14c74ebf11d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #477095 |
> > >>> Um...how weak would gravity effects have to be in order to not effect > > >>> the outcome, Michael Moroney? > > >> > > >> Smaller than the measurement errors. That's the standard that scientists > > >> and engineers use. Don't forget that part of measurement and measurement- > > >> related computation is estimating the range of all errors. You'll see that > > >> in ALL modern science papers, they track the accumulated error range and > > >> use this number to show the possibility that the observed results are by > > >> random chance. That number must be very small for valid results. But > > >> you cannot use SR math to model an earth orbiting a gravitating sun. That > > >> effect is in no way too small to ignore by using SR. > > > > > > Thank you Micheal M. Now consider a neighborhood where the radius of > > > spacetime curvature is, oh let's say 31 quadrillion feet. In your > > > opinion is such a neighborhood flat enough to perform reliably accurate testing of SR? > > > > > > > What’s the measurement precision? > > > > -- > > Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > The |(delta x) - (delta t*c)| will be around 10 billion feet in the one case and 100 feet in the other. And what is your answer Michael Moroney--backbone of macaroni--month full of baloney--pockets full of spumoni? I would like to compare your answer to Bodkins.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-15 05:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <psivrd$foh$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #477096 |
patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> writes: >> > > Thank you Micheal M. Now consider a neighborhood where the radius of >> > > spacetime curvature is, oh let's say 31 quadrillion feet. In your >> > > opinion is such a neighborhood flat enough to perform reliably accurate testing of SR? >> > What's the measurement precision? >> The |(delta x) - (delta t*c)| will be around 10 billion feet in the one >> case and 100 feet in the other. >And what is your answer Michael Moroney--backbone of macaroni--month >full of baloney--pockets full of spumoni? I would like to compare your >answer to Bodkins. Oh how mature. I haven't heard that since second grade.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-15 16:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <psk8ii$e0k$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #477096 |
patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> wrote: > >>>>>> Um...how weak would gravity effects have to be in order to not effect >>>>>> the outcome, Michael Moroney? >>>>> >>>>> Smaller than the measurement errors. That's the standard that scientists >>>>> and engineers use. Don't forget that part of measurement and measurement- >>>>> related computation is estimating the range of all errors. You'll see that >>>>> in ALL modern science papers, they track the accumulated error range and >>>>> use this number to show the possibility that the observed results are by >>>>> random chance. That number must be very small for valid results. But >>>>> you cannot use SR math to model an earth orbiting a gravitating sun. That >>>>> effect is in no way too small to ignore by using SR. >>>> >>>> Thank you Micheal M. Now consider a neighborhood where the radius of >>>> spacetime curvature is, oh let's say 31 quadrillion feet. In your >>>> opinion is such a neighborhood flat enough to perform reliably accurate testing of SR? >>>> >>> >>> What’s the measurement precision? >>> >>> -- >>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables >> >> The |(delta x) - (delta t*c)| will be around 10 billion feet in the one >> case and 100 feet in the other. > > And what is your answer Michael Moroney--backbone of macaroni--month full > of baloney--pockets full of spumoni? I would like to compare your answer to Bodkins. > How old are you? You’re behaving like a six-year-old. -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-15 09:31 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <be2f007b-16f1-407b-b127-f005864558ba@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #477143 |
On Thursday, November 15, 2018 at 8:57:58 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> wrote: > > > >>>>>> Um...how weak would gravity effects have to be in order to not effect > >>>>>> the outcome, Michael Moroney? > >>>>> > >>>>> Smaller than the measurement errors. That's the standard that scientists > >>>>> and engineers use. Don't forget that part of measurement and measurement- > >>>>> related computation is estimating the range of all errors. You'll see that > >>>>> in ALL modern science papers, they track the accumulated error range and > >>>>> use this number to show the possibility that the observed results are by > >>>>> random chance. That number must be very small for valid results. But > >>>>> you cannot use SR math to model an earth orbiting a gravitating sun. That > >>>>> effect is in no way too small to ignore by using SR. > >>>> > >>>> Thank you Micheal M. Now consider a neighborhood where the radius of > >>>> spacetime curvature is, oh let's say 31 quadrillion feet. In your > >>>> opinion is such a neighborhood flat enough to perform reliably accurate testing of SR? > >>>> > >>> > >>> What’s the measurement precision? > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > >> > >> The |(delta x) - (delta t*c)| will be around 10 billion feet in the one > >> case and 100 feet in the other. > > > > And what is your answer Michael Moroney--backbone of macaroni--month full > > of baloney--pockets full of spumoni? I would like to compare your answer to Bodkins. > > > > How old are you? You’re behaving like a six-year-old. > > -- > Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables The imbecile is 46 years old. And he already has dementia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | patdolan@comcast.net |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-15 09:37 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <1c5dde6f-cecb-4973-8188-ba8860c7383c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #477150 |
On Thursday, November 15, 2018 at 9:31:45 AM UTC-8, Dono, wrote: > On Thursday, November 15, 2018 at 8:57:58 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > patdolan <patdolan> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>> Um...how weak would gravity effects have to be in order to not effect > > >>>>>> the outcome, Michael Moroney? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Smaller than the measurement errors. That's the standard that scientists > > >>>>> and engineers use. Don't forget that part of measurement and measurement- > > >>>>> related computation is estimating the range of all errors. You'll see that > > >>>>> in ALL modern science papers, they track the accumulated error range and > > >>>>> use this number to show the possibility that the observed results are by > > >>>>> random chance. That number must be very small for valid results. But > > >>>>> you cannot use SR math to model an earth orbiting a gravitating sun. That > > >>>>> effect is in no way too small to ignore by using SR. > > >>>> > > >>>> Thank you Micheal M. Now consider a neighborhood where the radius of > > >>>> spacetime curvature is, oh let's say 31 quadrillion feet. In your > > >>>> opinion is such a neighborhood flat enough to perform reliably accurate testing of SR? > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> What’s the measurement precision? > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > >> > > >> The |(delta x) - (delta t*c)| will be around 10 billion feet in the one > > >> case and 100 feet in the other. > > > > > > And what is your answer Michael Moroney--backbone of macaroni--month full > > > of baloney--pockets full of spumoni? I would like to compare your answer to Bodkins. > > > > > > > How old are you? You’re behaving like a six-year-old. > > > > -- > > Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > The imbecile is 46 years old. And he already has dementia. Which imbecile? Bodkin or me?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-15 09:44 -0800 |
| Subject | Imbecile Pat Dolan from Seattle , WA |
| Message-ID | <aeadf64c-77bb-473b-9c9c-17ee397eb000@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #477151 |
On Thursday, November 15, 2018 at 9:37:40 AM UTC-8, patd...@comcast.net wrote: > On Thursday, November 15, 2018 at 9:31:45 AM UTC-8, Dono, wrote: > > On Thursday, November 15, 2018 at 8:57:58 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > > patdolan <patdolan> wrote: > > > > > > > >>>>>> Um...how weak would gravity effects have to be in order to not effect > > > >>>>>> the outcome, Michael Moroney? > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Smaller than the measurement errors. That's the standard that scientists > > > >>>>> and engineers use. Don't forget that part of measurement and measurement- > > > >>>>> related computation is estimating the range of all errors. You'll see that > > > >>>>> in ALL modern science papers, they track the accumulated error range and > > > >>>>> use this number to show the possibility that the observed results are by > > > >>>>> random chance. That number must be very small for valid results. But > > > >>>>> you cannot use SR math to model an earth orbiting a gravitating sun. That > > > >>>>> effect is in no way too small to ignore by using SR. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Thank you Micheal M. Now consider a neighborhood where the radius of > > > >>>> spacetime curvature is, oh let's say 31 quadrillion feet. In your > > > >>>> opinion is such a neighborhood flat enough to perform reliably accurate testing of SR? > > > >>>> > > > >>> > > > >>> What’s the measurement precision? > > > >>> > > > >>> -- > > > >>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > > >> > > > >> The |(delta x) - (delta t*c)| will be around 10 billion feet in the one > > > >> case and 100 feet in the other. > > > > > > > > And what is your answer Michael Moroney--backbone of macaroni--month full > > > > of baloney--pockets full of spumoni? I would like to compare your answer to Bodkins. > > > > > > > > > > How old are you? You’re behaving like a six-year-old. > > > > > > -- > > > Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > > > The imbecile is 46 years old. And he already has dementia. > > Which imbecile? Bodkin or me? Only you would ask such a question. Imbecile.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-15 18:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pske22$o2t$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #477151 |
<patdolan@comcast.net> wrote: > On Thursday, November 15, 2018 at 9:31:45 AM UTC-8, Dono, wrote: >> On Thursday, November 15, 2018 at 8:57:58 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> patdolan <patdolan> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>>>> Um...how weak would gravity effects have to be in order to not effect >>>>>>>>> the outcome, Michael Moroney? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Smaller than the measurement errors. That's the standard that scientists >>>>>>>> and engineers use. Don't forget that part of measurement and measurement- >>>>>>>> related computation is estimating the range of all errors. You'll see that >>>>>>>> in ALL modern science papers, they track the accumulated error range and >>>>>>>> use this number to show the possibility that the observed results are by >>>>>>>> random chance. That number must be very small for valid results. But >>>>>>>> you cannot use SR math to model an earth orbiting a gravitating sun. That >>>>>>>> effect is in no way too small to ignore by using SR. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you Micheal M. Now consider a neighborhood where the radius of >>>>>>> spacetime curvature is, oh let's say 31 quadrillion feet. In your >>>>>>> opinion is such a neighborhood flat enough to perform reliably >>>>>>> accurate testing of SR? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> What’s the measurement precision? >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables >>>>> >>>>> The |(delta x) - (delta t*c)| will be around 10 billion feet in the one >>>>> case and 100 feet in the other. >>>> >>>> And what is your answer Michael Moroney--backbone of macaroni--month full >>>> of baloney--pockets full of spumoni? I would like to compare your answer to Bodkins. >>>> >>> >>> How old are you? You’re behaving like a six-year-old. >>> >>> -- >>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables >> >> The imbecile is 46 years old. And he already has dementia. > > Which imbecile? Bodkin or me? > I’m younger than 46. Figure it out. -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-15 01:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <psij5n$1om0$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #477095 |
patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> wrote: > On Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 3:56:19 PM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> patdolan <patdolan> wrote: >>> On Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 8:35:05 AM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote: >>>> patdolan <patdolan> writes: >>>> >>>> >>>>>> There you go ahead, trying to combine gravity and SR, despite being >>>>>> corrected. You can't use SR where gravity is involved. You just can't, >>>>>> SR assumes no gravity or gravity effects so weak they don't affect the >>>>>> outcome. >>>> >>>>> Um...how weak would gravity effects have to be in order to not effect >>>>> the outcome, Michael Moroney? >>>> >>>> Smaller than the measurement errors. That's the standard that scientists >>>> and engineers use. Don't forget that part of measurement and measurement- >>>> related computation is estimating the range of all errors. You'll see that >>>> in ALL modern science papers, they track the accumulated error range and >>>> use this number to show the possibility that the observed results are by >>>> random chance. That number must be very small for valid results. But >>>> you cannot use SR math to model an earth orbiting a gravitating sun. That >>>> effect is in no way too small to ignore by using SR. >>> >>> Thank you Micheal M. Now consider a neighborhood where the radius of >>> spacetime curvature is, oh let's say 31 quadrillion feet. In your >>> opinion is such a neighborhood flat enough to perform reliably accurate testing of SR? >>> >> >> What’s the measurement precision? >> >> -- >> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > The |(delta x) - (delta t*c)| will be around 10 billion feet in the one > case and 100 feet in the other. > Doesn’t answer my question. Do you know what the question means? -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | patd <patdolan@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-14 19:14 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <21271a30-1af0-4c94-a0de-fb5d39916721@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #477097 |
On Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 5:46:36 PM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > patdolan <> wrote: > > On Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 3:56:19 PM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> patdolan <patdolan> wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 8:35:05 AM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote: > >>>> patdolan <patdolan> writes: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>> There you go ahead, trying to combine gravity and SR, despite being > >>>>>> corrected. You can't use SR where gravity is involved. You just can't, > >>>>>> SR assumes no gravity or gravity effects so weak they don't affect the > >>>>>> outcome. > >>>> > >>>>> Um...how weak would gravity effects have to be in order to not effect > >>>>> the outcome, Michael Moroney? > >>>> > >>>> Smaller than the measurement errors. That's the standard that scientists > >>>> and engineers use. Don't forget that part of measurement and measurement- > >>>> related computation is estimating the range of all errors. You'll see that > >>>> in ALL modern science papers, they track the accumulated error range and > >>>> use this number to show the possibility that the observed results are by > >>>> random chance. That number must be very small for valid results. But > >>>> you cannot use SR math to model an earth orbiting a gravitating sun. That > >>>> effect is in no way too small to ignore by using SR. > >>> > >>> Thank you Micheal M. Now consider a neighborhood where the radius of > >>> spacetime curvature is, oh let's say 31 quadrillion feet. In your > >>> opinion is such a neighborhood flat enough to perform reliably accurate testing of SR? > >>> > >> > >> What’s the measurement precision? > >> > >> -- > >> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > > > The |(delta x) - (delta t*c)| will be around 10 billion feet in the one > > case and 100 feet in the other. > > > > Doesn’t answer my question. Do you know what the question means? > > -- > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables Does nanosecond resolution work as an answer for you? If so, then do you declare that instruments that can reliably measure nanosecond intervals be used in a region of spacetime where there is a 31 quadrillion foot radius of curvature to reliably identify relativistic phenomena? This is getting boring Bodkin. Let's move things to their inevitable conclusion where I win again.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mitchrae3323@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-14 19:29 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <1c1ef7ad-1718-406e-a313-c463b0e89bbd@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #477109 |
Move fast in space your rate is slow. Move slow in space your rate is fast. There is no paradox. Mitchell Raemsch
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 25 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 25 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web