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 22 of 25 — ← Prev page 1 … 20 21 [22] 23 24 25 Next page →
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-24 19:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ptc9jj$1626$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #477988 |
patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> wrote: > On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 10:31:30 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> patDolan >>> On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 10:06:14 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> patDolan wrote: >>>>> On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 9:30:25 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> <yeurohenry@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Friday, November 23, 2018 at 1:22:18 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote: >>>>>>>> I have seen the diagrams of the reduced density of field lines for >>>>>>>> moving electrons in the direction of travel, but in the opposite >>>>>>>> fashion that you describe... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I didn't describe densities of field lines, I described the generic >>>>>>> Lorentz transformation for forces. For a widely available reference, you >>>>>>> can find this (for the electromagnetic force, for example) in equation >>>>>>> 213 of W. Pauli's "Theory of Relativity" (Dover edition). This is not a >>>>>>> new or controversial insight. >>>>>> >>>>>> As I said, Pat, a simple trip to the library would have saved you a ton of >>>>>> thrashing around over nothing. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Albert Einstein was also unaware of force dilation when that force >>>>>>>> happens to be the ghostly apparition of curved spacetime. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Not true at all. Einstein (along with every other competent physicist) >>>>>>> was (is) fully aware of how the gravitational interaction transforms >>>>>>> under arbitrary (diffeomorphic) transformations of coordinates. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And just to get you on record, you are saying that Ice calculates how >>>>>>>> many Newtons are acting on the earth during his trip home? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have no idea what "Ice" is doing. The components of vectors and >>>>>>> tensors have different values in terms of different coordinate systems. >>>>>>> Anyone who is interested can compute the values for any specified >>>>>>> coordinate system (whether they are at rest in that system or not). >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables >>>>> >>>>> I don't see any numbers coming from your EFEs this morning yeurohenry. >>>>> And they will never come from the likes of Odd JanDono. Let me simplify >>>>> things by restating the situation in terms of accelerations instead of >>>>> forces so we can get the nonessential masses out of the problem. >>>>> >>>>> When at rest wrt the solar system Ice measures the earth's centrifugal >>>>> acceleration to be about .006m/s^2. On his trip home he measures it to >>>>> be about .001m/s^2. G has not changed nor has r. You are permitted to >>>>> play with the masses of the sun and earth to your heart's desire. I hope >>>>> this helps. And I do commend you for your numerical interest. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Pat, in GR the earth has no centrifugal acceleration. None. >>>> >>>> Stop trying to get GR to replicate a Newtonian explanation of things. >>>> That’s not what it’s for. >>>> >>>> Idiot. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables >>> >>> I know this Bodkin my boy. But the Newtonian illusion of acceleration >>> must have an analogous spacetime extro-intrinsic radius of curvature or >>> something that reduces to numerical acceleration in the case of poor >>> humans who can only apprehend and measure curvature's ghosts. yeurohenry >>> understands this and is working on same, I trust. >>> >> >> No. >> >> What you are saying is, explain relativity in classical terms so that I can >> understand it. Relativity is not an extension of Newtonian gravity. It is a >> rethinking from the ground up. To learn relativity you have to UNLEARN or >> at least abandon the precepts of Newtonian gravity. >> >> This is not that difficult. If you want a good book that starts from >> scratch for laypeople and develops core ideas like spacetime, Geroch’s book >> General Relativity from A to B is recommended. You should note that the >> book is about 200 pages long and he’s going to take 125 pages just to get >> to time dilation. >> >> Now if you wave this off saying, sounds like work, then just take note of >> the fact that the subject isn’t sufficiently interesting to you to overcome >> that barrier. >> >> -- >> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > Oh, so you've unlearned gravity, have you Bodkin. You are a liar. I'll > prove it to you. Use your GR skills to describe the toss of a textbook > on general relativity with an initial velocity of 1 m/s at a 45 degree > angle to the surface of the earth. Show your work, chump. Help him out Dono. > In case you don’t remember, I calculated the radius of curvature of spacetime near the surface of the earth using an object tossed a distance of 30 feet in a second by chucking it upward at an angle. There was no Newtonian gravity involved in that calculation. This is how I got the radius of 31 quadrillion feet. Now it seems that calculation went whoosh over the top of your head, and you can no longer remember anything about it. Face it Pat, this is all just magic to you, and all you can do when the king of hearts is produced is to say, wow, that was cool, now do it again with the ten of spades! -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | patDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-24 12:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a5247783-c95d-44f6-b1f4-11218c5a8b23@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #477995 |
On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 11:42:47 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > patdolan wrote: > > On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 10:31:30 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> patDolan > >>> On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 10:06:14 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> patDolan wrote: > >>>>> On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 9:30:25 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>> <yeurohenry@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> On Friday, November 23, 2018 at 1:22:18 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote: > >>>>>>>> I have seen the diagrams of the reduced density of field lines for > >>>>>>>> moving electrons in the direction of travel, but in the opposite > >>>>>>>> fashion that you describe... > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I didn't describe densities of field lines, I described the generic > >>>>>>> Lorentz transformation for forces. For a widely available reference, you > >>>>>>> can find this (for the electromagnetic force, for example) in equation > >>>>>>> 213 of W. Pauli's "Theory of Relativity" (Dover edition). This is not a > >>>>>>> new or controversial insight. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> As I said, Pat, a simple trip to the library would have saved you a ton of > >>>>>> thrashing around over nothing. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Albert Einstein was also unaware of force dilation when that force > >>>>>>>> happens to be the ghostly apparition of curved spacetime. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Not true at all. Einstein (along with every other competent physicist) > >>>>>>> was (is) fully aware of how the gravitational interaction transforms > >>>>>>> under arbitrary (diffeomorphic) transformations of coordinates. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> And just to get you on record, you are saying that Ice calculates how > >>>>>>>> many Newtons are acting on the earth during his trip home? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I have no idea what "Ice" is doing. The components of vectors and > >>>>>>> tensors have different values in terms of different coordinate systems. > >>>>>>> Anyone who is interested can compute the values for any specified > >>>>>>> coordinate system (whether they are at rest in that system or not). > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -- > >>>>>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > >>>>> > >>>>> I don't see any numbers coming from your EFEs this morning yeurohenry. > >>>>> And they will never come from the likes of Odd JanDono. Let me simplify > >>>>> things by restating the situation in terms of accelerations instead of > >>>>> forces so we can get the nonessential masses out of the problem. > >>>>> > >>>>> When at rest wrt the solar system Ice measures the earth's centrifugal > >>>>> acceleration to be about .006m/s^2. On his trip home he measures it to > >>>>> be about .001m/s^2. G has not changed nor has r. You are permitted to > >>>>> play with the masses of the sun and earth to your heart's desire. I hope > >>>>> this helps. And I do commend you for your numerical interest. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Pat, in GR the earth has no centrifugal acceleration. None. > >>>> > >>>> Stop trying to get GR to replicate a Newtonian explanation of things. > >>>> That’s not what it’s for. > >>>> > >>>> Idiot. > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > >>> > >>> I know this Bodkin my boy. But the Newtonian illusion of acceleration > >>> must have an analogous spacetime extro-intrinsic radius of curvature or > >>> something that reduces to numerical acceleration in the case of poor > >>> humans who can only apprehend and measure curvature's ghosts. yeurohenry > >>> understands this and is working on same, I trust. > >>> > >> > >> No. > >> > >> What you are saying is, explain relativity in classical terms so that I can > >> understand it. Relativity is not an extension of Newtonian gravity. It is a > >> rethinking from the ground up. To learn relativity you have to UNLEARN or > >> at least abandon the precepts of Newtonian gravity. > >> > >> This is not that difficult. If you want a good book that starts from > >> scratch for laypeople and develops core ideas like spacetime, Geroch’s book > >> General Relativity from A to B is recommended. You should note that the > >> book is about 200 pages long and he’s going to take 125 pages just to get > >> to time dilation. > >> > >> Now if you wave this off saying, sounds like work, then just take note of > >> the fact that the subject isn’t sufficiently interesting to you to overcome > >> that barrier. > >> > >> -- > >> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > > > Oh, so you've unlearned gravity, have you Bodkin. You are a liar. I'll > > prove it to you. Use your GR skills to describe the toss of a textbook > > on general relativity with an initial velocity of 1 m/s at a 45 degree > > angle to the surface of the earth. Show your work, chump. Help him out Dono. > > > > In case you don’t remember, I calculated the radius of curvature of > spacetime near the surface of the earth using an object tossed a distance > of 30 feet in a second by chucking it upward at an angle. There was no > Newtonian gravity involved in that calculation. This is how I got the > radius of 31 quadrillion feet. > > Now it seems that calculation went whoosh over the top of your head, and > you can no longer remember anything about it. > > Face it Pat, this is all just magic to you, and all you can do when the > king of hearts is produced is to say, wow, that was cool, now do it again > with the ten of spades! > > -- > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables Bodkin you filthy dog, you did no such thing. You merely typed out the English phrase *31 quadrillion feet* with no work to show for it. Anyone can find the surface of the earth rad of curv = 1 LY anywhere on the inter web. I am challenging you to put your money where your typing fingers are and explicitly find by means of the machinery of GR the maximum height above the surface of the earth that a GR textbook reaches when tossed by PointedEars from waist level while standing on the surface of the earth, in the direction of a waste paper basket 30 m away and 1 m high. Assume PE hits the target.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-25 00:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ptcprk$1ua8$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #478003 |
patDolan <patdolan@comcast.net> wrote: > On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 11:42:47 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> patdolan wrote: >>> On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 10:31:30 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> patDolan >>>>> On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 10:06:14 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> patDolan wrote: >>>>>>> On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 9:30:25 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>> <yeurohenry@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Friday, November 23, 2018 at 1:22:18 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote: >>>>>>>>>> I have seen the diagrams of the reduced density of field lines for >>>>>>>>>> moving electrons in the direction of travel, but in the opposite >>>>>>>>>> fashion that you describe... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I didn't describe densities of field lines, I described the generic >>>>>>>>> Lorentz transformation for forces. For a widely available reference, you >>>>>>>>> can find this (for the electromagnetic force, for example) in equation >>>>>>>>> 213 of W. Pauli's "Theory of Relativity" (Dover edition). This is not a >>>>>>>>> new or controversial insight. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As I said, Pat, a simple trip to the library would have saved you a ton of >>>>>>>> thrashing around over nothing. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Albert Einstein was also unaware of force dilation when that force >>>>>>>>>> happens to be the ghostly apparition of curved spacetime. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Not true at all. Einstein (along with every other competent physicist) >>>>>>>>> was (is) fully aware of how the gravitational interaction transforms >>>>>>>>> under arbitrary (diffeomorphic) transformations of coordinates. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> And just to get you on record, you are saying that Ice calculates how >>>>>>>>>> many Newtons are acting on the earth during his trip home? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I have no idea what "Ice" is doing. The components of vectors and >>>>>>>>> tensors have different values in terms of different coordinate systems. >>>>>>>>> Anyone who is interested can compute the values for any specified >>>>>>>>> coordinate system (whether they are at rest in that system or not). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't see any numbers coming from your EFEs this morning yeurohenry. >>>>>>> And they will never come from the likes of Odd JanDono. Let me simplify >>>>>>> things by restating the situation in terms of accelerations instead of >>>>>>> forces so we can get the nonessential masses out of the problem. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> When at rest wrt the solar system Ice measures the earth's centrifugal >>>>>>> acceleration to be about .006m/s^2. On his trip home he measures it to >>>>>>> be about .001m/s^2. G has not changed nor has r. You are permitted to >>>>>>> play with the masses of the sun and earth to your heart's desire. I hope >>>>>>> this helps. And I do commend you for your numerical interest. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Pat, in GR the earth has no centrifugal acceleration. None. >>>>>> >>>>>> Stop trying to get GR to replicate a Newtonian explanation of things. >>>>>> That’s not what it’s for. >>>>>> >>>>>> Idiot. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables >>>>> >>>>> I know this Bodkin my boy. But the Newtonian illusion of acceleration >>>>> must have an analogous spacetime extro-intrinsic radius of curvature or >>>>> something that reduces to numerical acceleration in the case of poor >>>>> humans who can only apprehend and measure curvature's ghosts. yeurohenry >>>>> understands this and is working on same, I trust. >>>>> >>>> >>>> No. >>>> >>>> What you are saying is, explain relativity in classical terms so that I can >>>> understand it. Relativity is not an extension of Newtonian gravity. It is a >>>> rethinking from the ground up. To learn relativity you have to UNLEARN or >>>> at least abandon the precepts of Newtonian gravity. >>>> >>>> This is not that difficult. If you want a good book that starts from >>>> scratch for laypeople and develops core ideas like spacetime, Geroch’s book >>>> General Relativity from A to B is recommended. You should note that the >>>> book is about 200 pages long and he’s going to take 125 pages just to get >>>> to time dilation. >>>> >>>> Now if you wave this off saying, sounds like work, then just take note of >>>> the fact that the subject isn’t sufficiently interesting to you to overcome >>>> that barrier. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables >>> >>> Oh, so you've unlearned gravity, have you Bodkin. You are a liar. I'll >>> prove it to you. Use your GR skills to describe the toss of a textbook >>> on general relativity with an initial velocity of 1 m/s at a 45 degree >>> angle to the surface of the earth. Show your work, chump. Help him out Dono. >>> >> >> In case you don’t remember, I calculated the radius of curvature of >> spacetime near the surface of the earth using an object tossed a distance >> of 30 feet in a second by chucking it upward at an angle. There was no >> Newtonian gravity involved in that calculation. This is how I got the >> radius of 31 quadrillion feet. >> >> Now it seems that calculation went whoosh over the top of your head, and >> you can no longer remember anything about it. >> >> Face it Pat, this is all just magic to you, and all you can do when the >> king of hearts is produced is to say, wow, that was cool, now do it again >> with the ten of spades! >> >> -- >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > Bodkin you filthy dog, you did no such thing. You merely typed out the > English phrase *31 quadrillion feet* with no work to show for it. Anyone > can find the surface of the earth rad of curv = 1 LY anywhere on the inter web. Oh dear. Ok if you don’t recall it I’ll do it again. Let’s take our calculation of radius of curvature of spacetime from observations. If I throw a ball 30 feet in 1 second, I’ll have to throw the ball at an angle upward so that it climbs about 4 feet vertically before coming back down. (The angle is about 30 degrees.) So from observation there is a sagitta of 4 feet, and there is a well-known relation between the chord length c, sagitta s, and radius of the arc R: 8Rs= c^2. As long as the sagitta is small compared to the chord length, the parabolic path is well approximated by this expression. So recall the chord length in spacetime we find from the interval, and to do this we remember that the speed of light is about a foot per nanosecond, or that a second is about a billion feet. Clearly, the 30 feet contributes a negligible amount to the interval, and so the interval is about a billion feet, and that’s the chord length c. Returning to our formula, then R is (10^18)/32 = 31 quadrillion. Now notice I did this just from observations of a tossed ball. Elsewhere in this thread you were given a formula for the radius of curvature of spacetime at a distance r from a spherically symmetric mass m. I’ll give you a hint, it involved G, m, r and the speed of light. You should try this with numbers you can look up for the mass and radius of earth. You’ll probably use SI units and so your answer will be in meters. You should get about ten quadrillion meters after the simple arithmetic. > > I am challenging you to put your money where your typing fingers are and > explicitly find by means of the machinery of GR the maximum height above > the surface of the earth that a GR textbook reaches when tossed by > PointedEars from waist level while standing on the surface of the earth, > in the direction of a waste paper basket 30 m away and 1 m high. Assume > PE hits the target. > I think if you can replicate what I did above you’ll see how straightforward it is to apply it in your example. Go ahead. Your turn now. -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-24 17:11 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <e68dd633-ba69-49a1-b7ae-ff0d35666253@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #478027 |
On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 4:20:08 PM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > patDolan patdolan> wrote: > > On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 11:42:47 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> patdolan wrote: > >>> On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 10:31:30 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> patDolan > >>>>> On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 10:06:14 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>> patDolan wrote: > >>>>>>> On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 9:30:25 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>>>> <yeurohenry@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On Friday, November 23, 2018 at 1:22:18 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> I have seen the diagrams of the reduced density of field lines for > >>>>>>>>>> moving electrons in the direction of travel, but in the opposite > >>>>>>>>>> fashion that you describe... > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I didn't describe densities of field lines, I described the generic > >>>>>>>>> Lorentz transformation for forces. For a widely available reference, you > >>>>>>>>> can find this (for the electromagnetic force, for example) in equation > >>>>>>>>> 213 of W. Pauli's "Theory of Relativity" (Dover edition). This is not a > >>>>>>>>> new or controversial insight. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> As I said, Pat, a simple trip to the library would have saved you a ton of > >>>>>>>> thrashing around over nothing. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Albert Einstein was also unaware of force dilation when that force > >>>>>>>>>> happens to be the ghostly apparition of curved spacetime. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Not true at all. Einstein (along with every other competent physicist) > >>>>>>>>> was (is) fully aware of how the gravitational interaction transforms > >>>>>>>>> under arbitrary (diffeomorphic) transformations of coordinates. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> And just to get you on record, you are saying that Ice calculates how > >>>>>>>>>> many Newtons are acting on the earth during his trip home? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I have no idea what "Ice" is doing. The components of vectors and > >>>>>>>>> tensors have different values in terms of different coordinate systems. > >>>>>>>>> Anyone who is interested can compute the values for any specified > >>>>>>>>> coordinate system (whether they are at rest in that system or not). > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I don't see any numbers coming from your EFEs this morning yeurohenry. > >>>>>>> And they will never come from the likes of Odd JanDono. Let me simplify > >>>>>>> things by restating the situation in terms of accelerations instead of > >>>>>>> forces so we can get the nonessential masses out of the problem. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> When at rest wrt the solar system Ice measures the earth's centrifugal > >>>>>>> acceleration to be about .006m/s^2. On his trip home he measures it to > >>>>>>> be about .001m/s^2. G has not changed nor has r. You are permitted to > >>>>>>> play with the masses of the sun and earth to your heart's desire. I hope > >>>>>>> this helps. And I do commend you for your numerical interest. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Pat, in GR the earth has no centrifugal acceleration. None. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Stop trying to get GR to replicate a Newtonian explanation of things. > >>>>>> That’s not what it’s for. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Idiot. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -- > >>>>>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > >>>>> > >>>>> I know this Bodkin my boy. But the Newtonian illusion of acceleration > >>>>> must have an analogous spacetime extro-intrinsic radius of curvature or > >>>>> something that reduces to numerical acceleration in the case of poor > >>>>> humans who can only apprehend and measure curvature's ghosts. yeurohenry > >>>>> understands this and is working on same, I trust. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> No. > >>>> > >>>> What you are saying is, explain relativity in classical terms so that I can > >>>> understand it. Relativity is not an extension of Newtonian gravity. It is a > >>>> rethinking from the ground up. To learn relativity you have to UNLEARN or > >>>> at least abandon the precepts of Newtonian gravity. > >>>> > >>>> This is not that difficult. If you want a good book that starts from > >>>> scratch for laypeople and develops core ideas like spacetime, Geroch’s book > >>>> General Relativity from A to B is recommended. You should note that the > >>>> book is about 200 pages long and he’s going to take 125 pages just to get > >>>> to time dilation. > >>>> > >>>> Now if you wave this off saying, sounds like work, then just take note of > >>>> the fact that the subject isn’t sufficiently interesting to you to overcome > >>>> that barrier. > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > >>> > >>> Oh, so you've unlearned gravity, have you Bodkin. You are a liar. I'll > >>> prove it to you. Use your GR skills to describe the toss of a textbook > >>> on general relativity with an initial velocity of 1 m/s at a 45 degree > >>> angle to the surface of the earth. Show your work, chump. Help him out Dono. > >>> > >> > >> In case you don’t remember, I calculated the radius of curvature of > >> spacetime near the surface of the earth using an object tossed a distance > >> of 30 feet in a second by chucking it upward at an angle. There was no > >> Newtonian gravity involved in that calculation. This is how I got the > >> radius of 31 quadrillion feet. > >> > >> Now it seems that calculation went whoosh over the top of your head, and > >> you can no longer remember anything about it. > >> > >> Face it Pat, this is all just magic to you, and all you can do when the > >> king of hearts is produced is to say, wow, that was cool, now do it again > >> with the ten of spades! > >> > >> -- > >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > > > Bodkin you filthy dog, you did no such thing. You merely typed out the > > English phrase *31 quadrillion feet* with no work to show for it. Anyone > > can find the surface of the earth rad of curv = 1 LY anywhere on the inter web. > > Oh dear. Ok if you don’t recall it I’ll do it again. Let’s take our > calculation of radius of curvature of spacetime from observations. If I > throw a ball 30 feet in 1 second, I’ll have to throw the ball at an angle > upward so that it climbs about 4 feet vertically before coming back down. > (The angle is about 30 degrees.) So from observation there is a sagitta of > 4 feet, and there is a well-known relation between the chord length c, > sagitta s, and radius of the arc R: 8Rs= c^2. As long as the sagitta is > small compared to the chord length, the parabolic path is well approximated > by this expression. So recall the chord length in spacetime we find from > the interval, and to do this we remember that the speed of light is about a > foot per nanosecond, or that a second is about a billion feet. Clearly, the > 30 feet contributes a negligible amount to the interval, and so the > interval is about a billion feet, and that’s the chord length c. Returning > to our formula, then R is (10^18)/32 = 31 quadrillion. > > Now notice I did this just from observations of a tossed ball. > > Elsewhere in this thread you were given a formula for the radius of > curvature of spacetime at a distance r from a spherically symmetric mass m. > I’ll give you a hint, it involved G, m, r and the speed of light. You > should try this with numbers you can look up for the mass and radius of > earth. You’ll probably use SI units and so your answer will be in meters. > You should get about ten quadrillion meters after the simple arithmetic. > > > > > I am challenging you to put your money where your typing fingers are and > > explicitly find by means of the machinery of GR the maximum height above > > the surface of the earth that a GR textbook reaches when tossed by > > PointedEars from waist level while standing on the surface of the earth, > > in the direction of a waste paper basket 30 m away and 1 m high. Assume > > PE hits the target. > > > > I think if you can replicate what I did above you’ll see how > straightforward it is to apply it in your example. Go ahead. Your turn now. > > > > > -- > Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables Bodkin, I have to hand it to you...for as long as you've been a part of this NG you have NEVER done soooo much work for me. Thank you. So in thanks I'm going to wait until tomorrow to rip another one in you. Nighty-nite, sleep tight.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | pnalsing@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-24 18:46 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a759bbe0-3c2f-4475-8cd9-4b4eb5c92322@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #478038 |
On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 5:11:31 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote: > Bodkin, I have to hand it to you...for as long as you've been a part of this NG you have NEVER done soooo much work for me. Thank you. So in thanks I'm going to wait until tomorrow to rip another one in you. Nighty-nite, sleep tight. The amazing thing here is that you have managed to stretch this thread out to almost 300 posts and engaged a lot of folks who know volumes about the subject matter, which you quite obviously know virtually nothing about! How did you do this? This thread should have ended after 6 or 7 posts when it became crystal clear that you are just another relativity troll with zero to contribute. You have zero chance of ripping anyone in this thread, whereas you have been ripped multiple times without even recognizing it. You don't know what you don't know, and that's a fact!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-24 19:32 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ffa91a9b-d0b0-4dc7-a804-cdbca1729bf3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #478048 |
> > You don't know what you don't know, and that's a fact! True enough. But at least I know what I don't know. You don't. And your slang English needs some work too. I'm not going to "rip" Bodkin. I'm going to "rip a new one" in Bodkin. Let me know if you or Pointed Ears need help understanding. I'll tackle Jan's word wall in the morning. I'm going out for a drink.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-24 19:36 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ec634673-2380-405c-a09e-8c8cfee2decc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #478053 |
On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 7:32:26 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote: > > > > You don't know what you don't know, and that's a fact! > > True enough. But at least I know what I don't know. You don't. > > And your slang English needs some work too. I'm not going to "rip" Bodkin. I'm going to "rip a new one" in Bodkin. Let me know if you or Pointed Ears need help understanding. > > I'll tackle Jan's word wall in the morning. I'm going out for a drink. Cognac for me, please. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | pnalsing@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-24 19:46 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <c15440d0-a8f5-493b-b78b-9fb0360174fa@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #478053 |
On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 7:32:26 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote: > > > > You don't know what you don't know, and that's a fact! > > True enough. But at least I know what I don't know. You don't. So you can't comprehend simple English either! AGAIN, you don't know what you don't know, typical of a crank. > And your slang English needs some work too. I'm not going to "rip" Bodkin. I'm going to "rip a new one" in Bodkin. Let me know if you or Pointed Ears need help understanding. You have No Chance of ripping Bodkin a new one... AGAIN, you have had multiple new assholes ripped and are completely unaware of it! > I'll tackle Jan's word wall in the morning. I'm going out for a drink. As if that will solve anything... in the morning, you will *still* be just a troll.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-25 12:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pte5dq$1r1h$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #478038 |
patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> wrote: > On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 4:20:08 PM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> patDolan patdolan> wrote: >>> On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 11:42:47 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> patdolan wrote: >>>>> On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 10:31:30 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> patDolan >>>>>>> On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 10:06:14 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>> patDolan wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 9:30:25 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>>>>>> <yeurohenry@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, November 23, 2018 at 1:22:18 PM UTC-8, patdolan wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> I have seen the diagrams of the reduced density of field lines for >>>>>>>>>>>> moving electrons in the direction of travel, but in the opposite >>>>>>>>>>>> fashion that you describe... >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I didn't describe densities of field lines, I described the generic >>>>>>>>>>> Lorentz transformation for forces. For a widely available reference, you >>>>>>>>>>> can find this (for the electromagnetic force, for example) in equation >>>>>>>>>>> 213 of W. Pauli's "Theory of Relativity" (Dover edition). This is not a >>>>>>>>>>> new or controversial insight. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> As I said, Pat, a simple trip to the library would have saved you a ton of >>>>>>>>>> thrashing around over nothing. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Albert Einstein was also unaware of force dilation when that force >>>>>>>>>>>> happens to be the ghostly apparition of curved spacetime. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Not true at all. Einstein (along with every other competent physicist) >>>>>>>>>>> was (is) fully aware of how the gravitational interaction transforms >>>>>>>>>>> under arbitrary (diffeomorphic) transformations of coordinates. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> And just to get you on record, you are saying that Ice calculates how >>>>>>>>>>>> many Newtons are acting on the earth during his trip home? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I have no idea what "Ice" is doing. The components of vectors and >>>>>>>>>>> tensors have different values in terms of different coordinate systems. >>>>>>>>>>> Anyone who is interested can compute the values for any specified >>>>>>>>>>> coordinate system (whether they are at rest in that system or not). >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I don't see any numbers coming from your EFEs this morning yeurohenry. >>>>>>>>> And they will never come from the likes of Odd JanDono. Let me simplify >>>>>>>>> things by restating the situation in terms of accelerations instead of >>>>>>>>> forces so we can get the nonessential masses out of the problem. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> When at rest wrt the solar system Ice measures the earth's centrifugal >>>>>>>>> acceleration to be about .006m/s^2. On his trip home he measures it to >>>>>>>>> be about .001m/s^2. G has not changed nor has r. You are permitted to >>>>>>>>> play with the masses of the sun and earth to your heart's desire. I hope >>>>>>>>> this helps. And I do commend you for your numerical interest. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Pat, in GR the earth has no centrifugal acceleration. None. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Stop trying to get GR to replicate a Newtonian explanation of things. >>>>>>>> That’s not what it’s for. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Idiot. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I know this Bodkin my boy. But the Newtonian illusion of acceleration >>>>>>> must have an analogous spacetime extro-intrinsic radius of curvature or >>>>>>> something that reduces to numerical acceleration in the case of poor >>>>>>> humans who can only apprehend and measure curvature's ghosts. yeurohenry >>>>>>> understands this and is working on same, I trust. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> No. >>>>>> >>>>>> What you are saying is, explain relativity in classical terms so that I can >>>>>> understand it. Relativity is not an extension of Newtonian gravity. It is a >>>>>> rethinking from the ground up. To learn relativity you have to UNLEARN or >>>>>> at least abandon the precepts of Newtonian gravity. >>>>>> >>>>>> This is not that difficult. If you want a good book that starts from >>>>>> scratch for laypeople and develops core ideas like spacetime, Geroch’s book >>>>>> General Relativity from A to B is recommended. You should note that the >>>>>> book is about 200 pages long and he’s going to take 125 pages just to get >>>>>> to time dilation. >>>>>> >>>>>> Now if you wave this off saying, sounds like work, then just take note of >>>>>> the fact that the subject isn’t sufficiently interesting to you to overcome >>>>>> that barrier. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables >>>>> >>>>> Oh, so you've unlearned gravity, have you Bodkin. You are a liar. I'll >>>>> prove it to you. Use your GR skills to describe the toss of a textbook >>>>> on general relativity with an initial velocity of 1 m/s at a 45 degree >>>>> angle to the surface of the earth. Show your work, chump. Help him out Dono. >>>>> >>>> >>>> In case you don’t remember, I calculated the radius of curvature of >>>> spacetime near the surface of the earth using an object tossed a distance >>>> of 30 feet in a second by chucking it upward at an angle. There was no >>>> Newtonian gravity involved in that calculation. This is how I got the >>>> radius of 31 quadrillion feet. >>>> >>>> Now it seems that calculation went whoosh over the top of your head, and >>>> you can no longer remember anything about it. >>>> >>>> Face it Pat, this is all just magic to you, and all you can do when the >>>> king of hearts is produced is to say, wow, that was cool, now do it again >>>> with the ten of spades! >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables >>> >>> Bodkin you filthy dog, you did no such thing. You merely typed out the >>> English phrase *31 quadrillion feet* with no work to show for it. Anyone >>> can find the surface of the earth rad of curv = 1 LY anywhere on the inter web. >> >> Oh dear. Ok if you don’t recall it I’ll do it again. Let’s take our >> calculation of radius of curvature of spacetime from observations. If I >> throw a ball 30 feet in 1 second, I’ll have to throw the ball at an angle >> upward so that it climbs about 4 feet vertically before coming back down. >> (The angle is about 30 degrees.) So from observation there is a sagitta of >> 4 feet, and there is a well-known relation between the chord length c, >> sagitta s, and radius of the arc R: 8Rs= c^2. As long as the sagitta is >> small compared to the chord length, the parabolic path is well approximated >> by this expression. So recall the chord length in spacetime we find from >> the interval, and to do this we remember that the speed of light is about a >> foot per nanosecond, or that a second is about a billion feet. Clearly, the >> 30 feet contributes a negligible amount to the interval, and so the >> interval is about a billion feet, and that’s the chord length c. Returning >> to our formula, then R is (10^18)/32 = 31 quadrillion. >> >> Now notice I did this just from observations of a tossed ball. >> >> Elsewhere in this thread you were given a formula for the radius of >> curvature of spacetime at a distance r from a spherically symmetric mass m. >> I’ll give you a hint, it involved G, m, r and the speed of light. You >> should try this with numbers you can look up for the mass and radius of >> earth. You’ll probably use SI units and so your answer will be in meters. >> You should get about ten quadrillion meters after the simple arithmetic. >> >>> >>> I am challenging you to put your money where your typing fingers are and >>> explicitly find by means of the machinery of GR the maximum height above >>> the surface of the earth that a GR textbook reaches when tossed by >>> PointedEars from waist level while standing on the surface of the earth, >>> in the direction of a waste paper basket 30 m away and 1 m high. Assume >>> PE hits the target. >>> >> >> I think if you can replicate what I did above you’ll see how >> straightforward it is to apply it in your example. Go ahead. Your turn now. >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > Bodkin, I have to hand it to you...for as long as you've been a part of > this NG you have NEVER done soooo much work for me. As opposed to you doing some work for yourself. > Thank you. So in thanks I'm going to wait until tomorrow to rip another > one in you. Nighty-nite, sleep tight. > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-25 00:46 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a6cbb223-2c00-4586-a3b8-b2bcc020e4e0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #478027 |
On Sunday, 25 November 2018 01:20:08 UTC+1, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Oh dear. Ok if you don’t recall it I’ll do it again. Let’s take our > calculation of radius of curvature of spacetime from observations. "observations" imagined by a fanatic moron, of course.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-25 14:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ptebv2$67j$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #478067 |
<mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote: > On Sunday, 25 November 2018 01:20:08 UTC+1, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> Oh dear. Ok if you don’t recall it I’ll do it again. Let’s take our >> calculation of radius of curvature of spacetime from observations. > > "observations" imagined by a fanatic moron, of > course. > > No, really. What I described is a simple observation you can do yourself. If you toss a ball fast enough that it covers 30 horizontal feet in 1 second, you will observe that it has to rise to an acme of 4 feet above launch point. If you don’t know how to throw a ball or make the measurement of its trajectory, then you are hopeless. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-26 10:50 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <596800ec-a0c9-46bc-95f0-431c3b45c66b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #478080 |
On Sunday, November 25, 2018 at 6:35:17 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: > <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote: > > On Sunday, 25 November 2018 01:20:08 UTC+1, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > > >> Oh dear. Ok if you don’t recall it I’ll do it again. Let’s take our > >> calculation of radius of curvature of spacetime from observations. > > > > "observations" imagined by a fanatic moron, of > > course. > > > > > > No, really. What I described is a simple observation you can do yourself. > If you toss a ball fast enough that it covers 30 horizontal feet in 1 > second, you will observe that it has to rise to an acme of 4 feet above > launch point. If you don’t know how to throw a ball or make the measurement > of its trajectory, then you are hopeless. > > -- > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables Bodkin, Bodkin, Bodkin....who is really the hopeless one? You were tasked with using the mathematical machinery of GR to derive the height the ball would achieve. Instead you first used Newton to find the height and then proceeded to use GR and your spirograph to draw line in spacetime relating to the Newtonian result. You also get a zero on your test.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-26 19:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pthh8f$1hl7$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #478193 |
patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> wrote: > On Sunday, November 25, 2018 at 6:35:17 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote: >>> On Sunday, 25 November 2018 01:20:08 UTC+1, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> >>>> Oh dear. Ok if you don’t recall it I’ll do it again. Let’s take our >>>> calculation of radius of curvature of spacetime from observations. >>> >>> "observations" imagined by a fanatic moron, of >>> course. >>> >>> >> >> No, really. What I described is a simple observation you can do yourself. >> If you toss a ball fast enough that it covers 30 horizontal feet in 1 >> second, you will observe that it has to rise to an acme of 4 feet above >> launch point. If you don’t know how to throw a ball or make the measurement >> of its trajectory, then you are hopeless. >> >> -- >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > Bodkin, Bodkin, Bodkin....who is really the hopeless one? You were > tasked with using the mathematical machinery of GR to derive the height > the ball would achieve. Which is obvious if you had followed the suggestion I gave to you to try for yourself. Recall you were given a formula elsewhere in this thread of the relation between radius of curvature of spacetime, the mass of the earth, the radius of the earth, and the constants c and G. So from this you calculate that radius and I told you what value you should get. Then you simply use the same calculation I did, but you stick in the radius you just found and solve for the sagitta, rather than do what I did which was to take an observed sagitta and calculate the radius. SURLEY you are not so incompetent that you can’t work a problem backwards once the solution forward has been explained to you. > Instead you first used Newton No I did not. This is an OBSERVATION. This comes from chucking a ball at an angle of 30 degrees above horizontal to someone over yonder 30 feet away, and then WATCHING how how high it gets against a backdrop. Have you never tossed a ball in the air? Have you never adjusted the throw to change the angle and still get it to your target? My brother and I played catch in the yard many times. Did you never? Do you do everything only from your chair?? Get up and measure something!! > to find the height and then proceeded to use GR and your spirograph to > draw line in spacetime relating to the Newtonian result. You also get a zero on your test. > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-24 19:15 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <29b7e24c-53e7-4419-9ffa-df1cacf9ca6c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #477988 |
On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 10:39:26 AM UTC-8, patdolan wrote:
> On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 10:31:30 AM UTC-8, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >
> > This is not that difficult. If you want a good book that starts from
> > scratch for laypeople and develops core ideas like spacetime, Geroch’s book
> > General Relativity from A to B is recommended.
[...]
> Oh, so you've unlearned gravity, have you Bodkin. You are a liar. I'll prove it to you. Use your GR skills to describe the toss of a textbook on general relativity with an initial velocity of 1 m/s at a 45 degree angle to the surface of the earth. Show your work, chump. Help him out Dono.
I decided to put here a short description showing you how this type of question is
usually dealt with in GR. I won’t calculate the actual numbers but will provide enough
detail for you to follow up on it if you are interested.
I’ll start with mostly talk, adding more technical details later.
Let’s begin with one major difference between the Newtonian and the Einsteinian
calculation of trajectories under the influence of gravity.
In Newton’s theory gravity is a force, given by the formula GMm/r^2 (for the case of two
point masses M and m). The trajectory’s equation then follows by solving the standard
“F=ma” equation in 3D, assuming the initial conditions specific to the problem, typically
the initial position and velocity of the mass you’re interested in. The problem becomes
particularly simple when the attracting mass is so large that FAPP it can be presumed
stationary (the standard “central mass” problem in undergrad physics).
OTOH in general relativity gravitation is modelled differently. It’s not a force. Instead,
the trajectory under the influence of gravity is a curve in _spacetime_ (so a curve in 4D)
whose equation is also a second-order ordinary differential equation (ODE), just like
“F=ma”, but much more complicated even in simple cases.
It’s called the geodesic equation and its coefficients are functions derived from the
geometry (the coefficents of the metric, aka. “g_ij”). These functions are called
“Christoffel symbols” (aka. “Gamma^i_jk”) and can get quite messy. So the
geodesic equation describing the trajectory you are interested in is usually
quite complicated to deal with right from the start. It can be dealt with numerically.
FORTUNATELY, in the Schwarzschild case (a spherically symmetric gravitational
field), the four second order geodesic equations can be reduced to a FIRST-order
system which makes things much more tractable analitically. This is due to the
fact that a free-falling point mass (“particle” from now) possesses THREE constants
of the motion in the Schwarzschild case:
* the “length” q of the trajectory’s tangent vector (one can think of it as the particle’s
mass in some contexts), it’s defined as <gamma’, gamma’>, where gamma is the
4D trajectory suitably parametrised, and the angle brackets denote the dot product
described by the metric,
* the particle’s “energy” E defined as -<gamma’, d/dt>, where d/dt denotes the
coordinate vector in the t direction at every point of the trajectory (the minus sign
is a convention designed to make E positive in “normal” situations),
* the particle’s “angular momentum z-component” L defined as <gamma’, d/dphi>,
again d/dphi are the coordinate vectors corresponding to the longitude phi of
spherical coordinates.
I’ll write these equations explicitly in a moment, you’ll see how this all fits with
your question.
Incidentally, I hope you are now beginning to understand why
I usually shy away from answering questions like yours when I see very little
chance of being understood: it’s a lot of careful typing and fighting the crippling
ASCII math-notation. But I noticed some sense in your exchange with Henry,
so I decided to post this. Anyway:
The reason the above quantities (q, E, L) are constant along the trajectory is
NOT supposed to be obvious, so for now you need to just accept this
is true. Their constancy is a non-trivial corollary of the symmetry properties
of the Schwarzschild solution (specifically, its insensitivity to time translations
and to rotations) PLUS a certain general property of geodesic curves in general.
This is very useful because instead of the geodesic equations we have now
a set of three FIRST-order ODEs:
[1] <gamma’, gamma’> = q
[2] <gamma’, d/dt> = -E
[3] <gamma’, d/dphi> = L
…where q, L, E are constants describing your initial condition (the initial velocity).
This is the part you must do at the beginning. This means you begin with the known,
q, E, and L. They are just some numbers.
It looks like we are missing one equation (there were FOUR geodesic equations
originally) but we are again saved by the spherical symmetry: any path of free fall
must necessarily be planar, as there is nothing in the entire setup that would prefer
any “off-kilter” direction. So without loss of generality we can assume the trajectory
in question sits entirely in the “equatorial” plane of the spherical coordinate system:
theta = pi/2
Thus the entire problem becomes a 3D one (in the variables t, r, and phi), so the
three equations above are sufficient to solve the problem entirely.
A TINY WARNING: the reduction of second-order ODE to first-order done this
way (it goes by the generic name of “the first integral” approach) can in principle
allow more solutions than the original geodesic one, so one ought to pay a tiny bit
of attention and not accept those “fake” (aka. “envelope”) solutions.
OK, so now the gorier details. We need to write the Schwarzschild metric
first (in the units of G = c = 1):
ds^2 = -(1 - 2M/r) dt^2 + dr^2/(1 - 2M/r) + r^2 dtheta^2 + r^2 sin^2(theta) dphi^2
Since our trajectory sits in the equatorial plane theta = pi/2, we have dtheta = 0 and
sin(theta) = 1, so in fact:
ds^2 = -(1 - 2M/r) dt^2 + dr^2/(1 - 2M/r) + r^2 dphi^2
What we need are the coefficients of the above:
g_tt = -(1 - 2M/r)
g_rr = 1/(1- 2M/r)
g_phi,phi = r^2
Now we can write the equations [1]-[3] explicitly. Start with the general expression
for the gamma velocity vector:
gamma’ = t’ d/dt + r’ d/dr + phi’ d/dphi ,
…where in this context t, r, and phi denote the coordinate components of gamma,
i.e. they are the _very functions_ we are after (they are what you’d get from “F=ma” in
the Newtonian case).
The primes denote their derivatives (wrt. to their parameter,
which could be the particle’s proper time, for example; there is a small degree of
freedom in choosing that parameter, it’s not anything essential for the problem.
Because of this bit of freedom, we can assume without losing any generality that
q = -1. So I’ll start using -1 for q very soon).
So we get the equations [1]-[3] (if you are not familiar with the way symbols like
“dr” and “d/dr” work, just accept the equatiuons below on faith, it’s not at all
difficult but it would take us on yet another detour):
[1] (t’)^2 g_tt + (r’)^2 g_rr + (phi’)^2 g_phi,phi = q
[2] t’ g_tt = -E
[3] phi’ g_phi,phi = L
Three equations for three unknown functions t, r, phi. If you plug in the expressions
for g_tt, etc., and rearrange things a bit, you’ll get the following set:
[1] -E^2/(1 - 2M/r) + (r’)^2/(1 - 2M/r) + L/r^2 = q
[2] t’ (1 - 2M/r) = E
[3] phi’ r^2 = L
If we plug t’ from [2] and phi’ from [3] into [1], we get the equation for the r-coordinate
(q = -1):
[4] (r’)^2 + (1 - 2M/r) (L/r^2 + 1) = E^2
This is a simple equation to analyse and solve, as it happens to be mathematically
exactly equivalent to the _Newtonian_ case of a unit point mass moving in the
(admittedly a bit odd-looking) potential:
V(r) = (1/2) (1 - 2M/r) (L/r^2 + 1)
Henry’s condition on the circular stable orbit around the Sun (r^3 w^2 = M) comes
from analysing the above potential by the usual simple calculus method of differentiating
V and setting the dV/dr to zero. The stable minimum is an unpleasant expression
but for L much larger than M it simplifies to he following approximation:
r =~ L^2/M (the approx. radius of the stable circular orbit),
…which translates to r^3 w^2 = M (where w = phi’ according to our notation).
So basically that’s the outline, let’s recap the steps:
Step 1. Figure out the constants E and L from the initial conditions you assume,
Step 2. Solve equation [4], again using your initial conditions,
Step 3. Once you got the function r, calculate the functions t and phi by plugging r
into equations [2] and [3] and solving.
—
Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-24 11:22 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <61e0ca1e-2f62-4070-85bd-a17acc53c938@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #477986 |
On Saturday, 24 November 2018 19:31:30 UTC+1, Odd Bodkin wrote: > What you are saying is, explain relativity in classical terms so that I can > understand it. Relativity is not an extension of Newtonian gravity. It is a > rethinking from the ground up. To learn relativity you have to UNLEARN or > at least abandon the precepts of Newtonian gravity. In other words, you have to abandon common sense and get stupid, like Odd.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-24 19:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <2c5de0e4-21ea-6f19-36f2-760256c3b815@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #477975 |
patDolan wrote: > When at rest wrt the solar system Ice measures the earth's centrifugal acceleration to be about .006m/s^2. No, he does not measure *any* *centrifugal* acceleration *at all*. Because he has to be *on Earth*, NOT at rest WRT the solar system, in order to measure any (and even that will be difficult as there would only be the atmosphere above him). Centrifugal force is only an *apparent* force, and centrifugal acceleration is only an *apparent* acceleration, measurable *only* in the *non*-inertial reference frame. | LAW Ⅰ. | | Every body [remains] in its state of rest, or of uniform motion in a | [straight] line, unless it is compelled to change that state by forces | impressed [on it]. —Isaac Newton: «Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica»; Motte translation (1729), modernized original translation: <https://books.google.ch/books?id=Tm0FAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA19#v=onepage&q&f=false> That is, Earth would continue in a straight line if there were not a *centripetal* force (directed towards the center) that prevented it from doing so. This *centripetal* force is, according to Newton, the gravitational force: <http://www.cornell.edu/video/richard-feynman-messenger-lecture-1-law-of-gravitation> Perhaps you understand this popular rendition of this basic fact better: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nfzNfr_yCw> > [more nonsense] It is futile for you to attempt to discuss special or general relativity when you already fail Newtonian mechanics. Shut up and study. -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-24 19:24 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <414593b6-441a-fbaa-8807-defc4bec2275@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #477982 |
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > This *centripetal* force is, according to Newton, the gravitational force: > > <http://www.cornell.edu/video/richard-feynman-messenger-lecture-1-law-of-gravitation> > > Perhaps you understand this popular rendition of this basic fact better: > > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nfzNfr_yCw> Sorry, I found clickbait. I meant this: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xx2OXDz5-1Y> -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-24 10:33 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ad87c1e6-24c6-4de7-9e85-275f164fed9e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #477983 |
On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 10:24:28 AM UTC-8, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > > This *centripetal* force is, according to Newton, the gravitational force: > > > > <http://www.cornell.edu/video/richard-feynman-messenger-lecture-1-law-of-gravitation> > > > > Perhaps you understand this popular rendition of this basic fact better: > > > > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nfzNfr_yCw> > > Sorry, I found clickbait. I meant this: > > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xx2OXDz5-1Y> > > -- > PointedEars > > Twitter: @PointedEars2 > Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail. Point Ears, okay you learned English, great. Let's use *inferred* instead. Try and keep an adult perspective here instead of taking up bandwidth with useless grammatical stuff. You wanna have a grammatical contest, both formal and slang (one is as legitimate a means of communication as the other) I'm happy to take you on at another time. You feel me, spider?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-24 19:54 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <39bafb46-f8de-8b07-83ae-fdcc71c698d2@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #477987 |
patdolan wrote: > On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 10:24:28 AM UTC-8, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >>> This *centripetal* force is, according to Newton, the gravitational force: >>> >>> <http://www.cornell.edu/video/richard-feynman-messenger-lecture-1-law-of-gravitation> >>> >>> Perhaps you understand this popular rendition of this basic fact better: >>> […] >> >> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xx2OXDz5-1Y> >> […] > > Point Ears, okay you learned English, great. I learned English about 30 years ago. By contrast, you cannot even write my nickname correctly… > Let's use *inferred* instead. Try and keep an adult perspective here instead of taking up bandwidth with useless grammatical stuff. You wanna have a grammatical contest, both formal and slang (one is as legitimate a means of communication as the other) I'm happy to take you on at another time. You feel me, spider? I have no idea what you are blathering about, and probably you haven’t, too. Take your pills, and get well soon. -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-25 04:36 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <73f6e0f6-33a5-dc20-b303-0faa03e915c3@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #477983 |
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >> This *centripetal* force is, according to Newton, the gravitational force: >> >> <http://www.cornell.edu/video/richard-feynman-messenger-lecture-1-law-of-gravitation> >> >> Perhaps you understand this popular rendition of this basic fact better: >> […] > > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xx2OXDz5-1Y> (I had actually posted this before, shortly after this thread started.) Here is another nice (and by comparison complete) explanation of uniform circular motion and the centripetal force. It is only about 6 minutes long, and contains a simple exercise (with solution) to test one’s understanding of the subject: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZj6DuB0vvo> -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 22 of 25 — ← Prev page 1 … 20 21 [22] 23 24 25 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web