Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #896033 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-06-06 12:59 +0200 |
| Last post | 2026-07-02 00:09 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 68 — 10 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-06 12:59 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-06-06 18:07 +0000
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-06 20:19 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-06 21:23 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-06 16:57 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-06-07 10:54 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-07 13:13 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 08:25 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:06 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:21 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:50 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:59 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-08 08:46 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-06-09 13:41 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:15 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-07 13:30 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-07 13:37 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-06-07 11:40 +0000
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-07 13:58 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-06-08 10:17 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-07 21:43 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-07 21:48 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-08 07:41 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-08 09:50 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-08 10:46 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-08 19:16 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-08 19:42 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-08 16:54 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 07:34 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 10:59 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 11:06 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 20:22 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 20:55 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 10:32 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 11:00 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 20:56 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 21:01 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 21:46 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 22:03 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:10 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:22 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:31 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:40 -0700
Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 10:41 +0200
Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-07-27 01:45 -0700
Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 (Was: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 11:26 +0200
Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 [Logic Tiling] (Was: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 11:30 +0200
Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon (Re: Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 [Logic Tiling]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 11:37 +0200
The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous (Re: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-09-25 19:12 +0200
Re: The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous (Re: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-09-28 14:15 +0200
Estimating P(doom E-graphs) to < 10% (Was: The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-09-28 14:15 +0200
Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-07-27 07:13 -0700
Brova you enjoy made up nonsense? [Einstein tech cult] (Was: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 17:07 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 21:05 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-10 08:39 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-10 14:53 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-10 18:20 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-10 20:48 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-12 08:13 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-12 08:42 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-10 22:54 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-12 13:39 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-14 09:05 -0700
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-06 21:24 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-07 13:45 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-07 15:14 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-06-07 10:54 +0200
Re: Nobody understands relativity marika <marika5000@gmail.com> - 2026-07-02 00:09 +0000
Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-09 07:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <PTKdndjUXso-vLX3nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #896076 |
On 06/09/2026 07:10 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: > On 06/09/2026 01:32 AM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> Den 08.06.2026 19:42, skrev Maciej Woźniak: >>> On 6/8/2026 7:16 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> >>>> Which definition of second is used in the synchronisation >>>> of the rate of atomic clocks? >> >>> Of course it's not yours. Your idiot guru >>> has forbidden synchronization of clocks >>> as it was violating his moronic symmetry - >>> and your SI idiocy has been invented >>> to enforce his madness. >>> >> >> Why do you pretend not to know? >> >> Even you must know that the SI-definition of second >> is inbuilt in an atomic clock. >> >> Or do you think that all atomic clocks must be brought >> to the museum at Greenwich to be calibrated to the old >> definition of second ? :-D >> > > What about that _length_ and _distance_ have different units, > about the _metric_ and _norm_, about _distance_ being _length_ > in _time_, that time (its elapsed duration) could be defined > according to space-contraction instead of the other way around? > > > According to "references", .... > > > Otherwise those are going to vary under gravity, under acceleration, > and so on. > > > While there's often mentioned the GPS reference frequency, > not so much the GPS station operator's and station-keeping guide, > with that receivers >> stations. > > So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" > instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, > in a museum in France". > > The NIST Particle Data Group CODATA releases the measured values of fundamental physical constants every few years, the small ones get not only more precise, also _smaller_, helping also inform that the "running constants" of physics get involved. So, physics is according to NIST CODATA, with SI: Systeme Internationale, a reduced second, i.e. not first and quite reduced. Then most people are also unawares how things like Boltzmann and Planck constants as physical constants are much mathematical constants that reflect their placement in terms for algebraic reductions again, for example the roots of x^2 +-x +-1 like the molar gas constant in the Boltzmann constant, then as with regards to Planck constant about what mathematical reductionism is ongoing in the Planckian, why those aren't exactly "physical" constants. Anyways that "time" can be defined by "an average field of quasar measurements" is a thing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-09 07:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <-nGdnaezj6g3vrX3nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #896078 |
On 06/09/2026 07:22 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: > On 06/09/2026 07:10 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: >> On 06/09/2026 01:32 AM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>> Den 08.06.2026 19:42, skrev Maciej Woźniak: >>>> On 6/8/2026 7:16 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>> >>>>> Which definition of second is used in the synchronisation >>>>> of the rate of atomic clocks? >>> >>>> Of course it's not yours. Your idiot guru >>>> has forbidden synchronization of clocks >>>> as it was violating his moronic symmetry - >>>> and your SI idiocy has been invented >>>> to enforce his madness. >>>> >>> >>> Why do you pretend not to know? >>> >>> Even you must know that the SI-definition of second >>> is inbuilt in an atomic clock. >>> >>> Or do you think that all atomic clocks must be brought >>> to the museum at Greenwich to be calibrated to the old >>> definition of second ? :-D >>> >> >> What about that _length_ and _distance_ have different units, >> about the _metric_ and _norm_, about _distance_ being _length_ >> in _time_, that time (its elapsed duration) could be defined >> according to space-contraction instead of the other way around? >> >> >> According to "references", .... >> >> >> Otherwise those are going to vary under gravity, under acceleration, >> and so on. >> >> >> While there's often mentioned the GPS reference frequency, >> not so much the GPS station operator's and station-keeping guide, >> with that receivers >> stations. >> >> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" >> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, >> in a museum in France". >> >> > > The NIST Particle Data Group CODATA releases the measured values > of fundamental physical constants every few years, the small ones > get not only more precise, also _smaller_, helping also inform that > the "running constants" of physics get involved. > > So, physics is according to NIST CODATA, with SI: Systeme > Internationale, a reduced second, i.e. not first and quite reduced. > > > Then most people are also unawares how things like Boltzmann and > Planck constants as physical constants are much mathematical constants > that reflect their placement in terms for algebraic reductions again, > for example the roots of x^2 +-x +-1 like the molar gas constant in > the Boltzmann constant, then as with regards to Planck constant about > what mathematical reductionism is ongoing in the Planckian, why > those aren't exactly "physical" constants. > > > Anyways that "time" can be defined by "an average field of quasar > measurements" is a thing. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchrotron
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-09 07:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <bIycnWjd8J1CuLX3nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #896079 |
On 06/09/2026 07:31 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: > On 06/09/2026 07:22 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: >> On 06/09/2026 07:10 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: >>> On 06/09/2026 01:32 AM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>>> Den 08.06.2026 19:42, skrev Maciej Woźniak: >>>>> On 6/8/2026 7:16 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>>> >>>>>> Which definition of second is used in the synchronisation >>>>>> of the rate of atomic clocks? >>>> >>>>> Of course it's not yours. Your idiot guru >>>>> has forbidden synchronization of clocks >>>>> as it was violating his moronic symmetry - >>>>> and your SI idiocy has been invented >>>>> to enforce his madness. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Why do you pretend not to know? >>>> >>>> Even you must know that the SI-definition of second >>>> is inbuilt in an atomic clock. >>>> >>>> Or do you think that all atomic clocks must be brought >>>> to the museum at Greenwich to be calibrated to the old >>>> definition of second ? :-D >>>> >>> >>> What about that _length_ and _distance_ have different units, >>> about the _metric_ and _norm_, about _distance_ being _length_ >>> in _time_, that time (its elapsed duration) could be defined >>> according to space-contraction instead of the other way around? >>> >>> >>> According to "references", .... >>> >>> >>> Otherwise those are going to vary under gravity, under acceleration, >>> and so on. >>> >>> >>> While there's often mentioned the GPS reference frequency, >>> not so much the GPS station operator's and station-keeping guide, >>> with that receivers >> stations. >>> >>> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" >>> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, >>> in a museum in France". >>> >>> >> >> The NIST Particle Data Group CODATA releases the measured values >> of fundamental physical constants every few years, the small ones >> get not only more precise, also _smaller_, helping also inform that >> the "running constants" of physics get involved. >> >> So, physics is according to NIST CODATA, with SI: Systeme >> Internationale, a reduced second, i.e. not first and quite reduced. >> >> >> Then most people are also unawares how things like Boltzmann and >> Planck constants as physical constants are much mathematical constants >> that reflect their placement in terms for algebraic reductions again, >> for example the roots of x^2 +-x +-1 like the molar gas constant in >> the Boltzmann constant, then as with regards to Planck constant about >> what mathematical reductionism is ongoing in the Planckian, why >> those aren't exactly "physical" constants. >> >> >> Anyways that "time" can be defined by "an average field of quasar >> measurements" is a thing. >> >> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchrotron > > So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of time", in the micro, meso, and macro. Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time. About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis, measuring time. So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time, and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space. Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that, it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that. Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 10:41 +0200 |
| Subject | Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity) |
| Message-ID | <11475ju$fsrh$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #896080 |
Hi, Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration, reached a significant milestone this summer. The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners to measure time, so forget Colorado. Bye Ross Finlayson schrieb: > > So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of > time", in the micro, meso, and macro. > > Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory > in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with > regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time. > > About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's > similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has > about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli > Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis, > measuring time. > > > So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time, > and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space. > > > Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that, > it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that. > > > Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those > on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school. > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 01:45 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity) |
| Message-ID | <0jWdnUSmIegmh_r3nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #896460 |
On 07/27/2026 01:41 AM, Mild Shock wrote: > Hi, > > Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration, > reached a significant milestone this summer. > > The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners > to measure time, so forget Colorado. > > Bye > > Ross Finlayson schrieb: >> >> So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of >> time", in the micro, meso, and macro. >> >> Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory >> in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with >> regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time. >> >> About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's >> similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has >> about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli >> Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis, >> measuring time. >> >> >> So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time, >> and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space. >> >> >> Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that, >> it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that. >> >> >> Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those >> on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school. >> >> > "Hyper [....]" Hyper-active. Tweakers aren't reliable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 11:26 +0200 |
| Subject | Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 (Was: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) |
| Message-ID | <114787q$fv28$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #896461 |
Hi, The nature of time has puzzled people -- from the ancient Greeks to the present day -- Especially the nosomatic perception of tie is a hot topic now. How does time evolve inside a GPU with multiple units or a CPU with multiple cores. GPUs even having multiple logical threads inside a group. Forget the von Neumann model of computing. You need a total new thinking of shared memory and more message passing, and have a grip of vector and matrix tiling of problems. pi-WAM already deploys logic tiling in its Seven Eleven demonstrator. So forget everything you have learned in your BASIC computer course for your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088. Bye Ross Finlayson schrieb: > On 07/27/2026 01:41 AM, Mild Shock wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration, >> reached a significant milestone this summer. >> >> The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners >> to measure time, so forget Colorado. >> >> Bye >> >> Ross Finlayson schrieb: >>> >>> So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of >>> time", in the micro, meso, and macro. >>> >>> Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory >>> in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with >>> regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time. >>> >>> About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's >>> similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has >>> about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli >>> Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis, >>> measuring time. >>> >>> >>> So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time, >>> and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space. >>> >>> >>> Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that, >>> it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that. >>> >>> >>> Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those >>> on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school. >>> >>> >> > > "Hyper [....]" Hyper-active. > > Tweakers aren't reliable. > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 11:30 +0200 |
| Subject | Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 [Logic Tiling] (Was: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) |
| Message-ID | <11478gh$fv28$4@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #896461 |
Hi, The nature of time has puzzled people -- from the ancient Greeks to the present day -- Especially the nosomatic perception of time is a hot topic now. How does time evolve inside a GPU with multiple units or a CPU with multiple cores. GPUs even having multiple logical threads inside a group. Forget the von Neumann model of computing. You need a total new thinking of shared memory and more message passing, and have a grip of vector and matrix tiling of problems. π-WAM already deploys logic tiling in its Seven Eleven demonstrator. So forget everything you have learned in your BASIC computer course for your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088. Bye Ross Finlayson schrieb: > On 07/27/2026 01:41 AM, Mild Shock wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration, >> reached a significant milestone this summer. >> >> The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners >> to measure time, so forget Colorado. >> >> Bye >> >> Ross Finlayson schrieb: >>> >>> So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of >>> time", in the micro, meso, and macro. >>> >>> Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory >>> in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with >>> regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time. >>> >>> About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's >>> similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has >>> about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli >>> Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis, >>> measuring time. >>> >>> >>> So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time, >>> and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space. >>> >>> >>> Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that, >>> it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that. >>> >>> >>> Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those >>> on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school. >>> >>> >> > > "Hyper [....]" Hyper-active. > > Tweakers aren't reliable. > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 11:37 +0200 |
| Subject | Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon (Re: Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 [Logic Tiling]) |
| Message-ID | <11478t5$fvic$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #896465 |
Hi, A nosomatic AI chirurgeon is a halfling student of sickness, and a master of the ebb and flow of the energies of life and death of data packets. He is a air bender, water bender and earth bender in one person, using OpenVINO to juggle with CPU, GPU and NPU. Last but not least he can freely switch between symbolic and neural representation of knowledge forms, there is no abyss for him. Bye Mild Shock schrieb: > Hi, > > The nature of time has puzzled people -- from the ancient > Greeks to the present day -- Especially the nosomatic > perception of time is a hot topic now. > > How does time evolve inside a GPU with multiple units > or a CPU with multiple cores. GPUs even having multiple > logical threads inside a group. > > Forget the von Neumann model of computing. You need > a total new thinking of shared memory and more > message passing, and have a grip of vector and > > matrix tiling of problems. π-WAM already deploys > logic tiling in its Seven Eleven demonstrator. So forget > everything you have learned in your BASIC computer > > course for your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088. > > Bye
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-25 19:12 +0200 |
| Subject | The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous (Re: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon) |
| Message-ID | <1196a2o$cfa0$2@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #896466 |
Hi, Non-uniform memory access (NUMA) is a computer memory design used in multiprocessing, where the memory access time depends on the memory location relative to the processor. The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous. In like 3-4 years from now, they might have 3.2 TB RAM on a SOC, by not using HBM but HBF: High Bandwidth Flash: What Is It Good For? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nTpW52nioI There might be new profession like nosomatic AI chirurgeon (I made that up): Tiny engine, immense model https://github.com/JustVugg/colibri The Brain page, Explore: the measured expert atlas of GLM-5.2 drawn as a cortex. 13,260 characterised experts in ten regions (Python, SQL, mathematics, poetry, law, Chinese…); position is measured routing affinity, not a learned embedding. We might want a brain to amputate from the Python expert sections, so that we can write code without a slow CPython runtime. Bye Mild Shock schrieb: > Hi, > > A nosomatic AI chirurgeon is a halfling student > of sickness, and a master of the ebb and flow of > the energies of life and death of data packets. > > He is a air bender, water bender and earth bender > in one person, using OpenVINO to juggle with > CPU, GPU and NPU. > > Last but not least he can freely switch between > symbolic and neural representation of knowledge > forms, there is no abyss for him. > > Bye > > Mild Shock schrieb: >> Hi, >> >> The nature of time has puzzled people -- from the ancient >> Greeks to the present day -- Especially the nosomatic >> perception of time is a hot topic now. >> >> How does time evolve inside a GPU with multiple units >> or a CPU with multiple cores. GPUs even having multiple >> logical threads inside a group. >> >> Forget the von Neumann model of computing. You need >> a total new thinking of shared memory and more >> message passing, and have a grip of vector and >> >> matrix tiling of problems. π-WAM already deploys >> logic tiling in its Seven Eleven demonstrator. So forget >> everything you have learned in your BASIC computer >> >> course for your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088. >> >> Bye >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-28 14:15 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous (Re: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon) |
| Message-ID | <119dlo6$houj$3@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #896982 |
Hi, Yesterday I had the feeling P(doom E-graphs) > 10%, since they have E-boost intiatives where they use parallism and more heuristics, also tapping into GPUs, TPUs, NPUs, etc.. you name it. So Prolog might sooner or later feel the wind of E-boost Schinkansen? Now I have the feeling the E-graph community is still in the nowhere of la la land. Reading: recording out of egraphs https://www.philipzucker.com/ WTF is "recording out" ? Look at that beauty of SWI-Prolog unifiable/3 predicate. It can even deal with cyclic terms: ?- unifiable(f(X,X,X),f(Z,b,Y), L). L = [Y=b, X=b, Z=X]. ?- unifiable(f(X,Y),f(f(A,Y),f(B,X)), L). L = [Y=f(B, X), X=f(A, Y)]. You can even code unifiable/3 in 100% Prolog itself, BTW I am not saying it would be pure. But it wont need any extensions that go beyond ISO core standard. You could even experiment with a unification that does minimization (*), but most Prolog systems don't do that for their unification: ?- unifiable(X, f(f(X)), L). L = [X=f(f(X))]. Bye (*) Gerhard Huet was all in for minimizations, but the sad news is while terms have minimal forms, equations don't really have unique minimal forms, this transpired only later. RESOLUTION D'EQUATIONS DANS DES LANGAGES D'ORDRE 1,2,.••, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/213879499 Algorithms for equivalence and reduction to minimal form https://hal.science/hal-01239749v1/document Mild Shock schrieb: > Hi, > > Non-uniform memory access (NUMA) is a computer > memory design used in multiprocessing, where the > memory access time depends on the memory location > relative to the processor. > > The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous. In like > 3-4 years from now, they might have 3.2 TB RAM > on a SOC, by not using HBM but HBF: > > High Bandwidth Flash: What Is It Good For? > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nTpW52nioI > > There might be new profession like nosomatic > AI chirurgeon (I made that up): > > Tiny engine, immense model > https://github.com/JustVugg/colibri > > The Brain page, Explore: the measured expert > atlas of GLM-5.2 drawn as a cortex. 13,260 > characterised experts in ten regions (Python, > SQL, mathematics, poetry, law, Chinese…); > > position is measured routing affinity, not a > learned embedding. We might want a brain to > amputate from the Python expert sections, so > > that we can write code without a slow > CPython runtime. > > Bye
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-28 14:15 +0200 |
| Subject | Estimating P(doom E-graphs) to < 10% (Was: The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous) |
| Message-ID | <119dlop$houj$4@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #896982 |
Hi, Yesterday I had the feeling P(doom E-graphs) > 10%, since they have E-boost intiatives where they use parallism and more heuristics, also tapping into GPUs, TPUs, NPUs, etc.. you name it. So Prolog might sooner or later feel the wind of E-boost Schinkansen? Now I have the feeling the E-graph community is still in the nowhere of la la land. Reading: recording out of egraphs https://www.philipzucker.com/ WTF is "recording out" ? Look at that beauty of SWI-Prolog unifiable/3 predicate. It can even deal with cyclic terms: ?- unifiable(f(X,X,X),f(Z,b,Y), L). L = [Y=b, X=b, Z=X]. ?- unifiable(f(X,Y),f(f(A,Y),f(B,X)), L). L = [Y=f(B, X), X=f(A, Y)]. You can even code unifiable/3 in 100% Prolog itself, BTW I am not saying it would be pure. But it wont need any extensions that go beyond ISO core standard. You could even experiment with a unification that does minimization (*), but most Prolog systems don't do that for their unification: ?- unifiable(X, f(f(X)), L). L = [X=f(f(X))]. Bye (*) Gerhard Huet was all in for minimizations, but the sad news is while terms have minimal forms, equations don't really have unique minimal forms, this transpired only later. RESOLUTION D'EQUATIONS DANS DES LANGAGES D'ORDRE 1,2,.••, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/213879499 Algorithms for equivalence and reduction to minimal form https://hal.science/hal-01239749v1/document Mild Shock schrieb: > Hi, > > Non-uniform memory access (NUMA) is a computer > memory design used in multiprocessing, where the > memory access time depends on the memory location > relative to the processor. > > The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous. In like > 3-4 years from now, they might have 3.2 TB RAM > on a SOC, by not using HBM but HBF: > > High Bandwidth Flash: What Is It Good For? > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nTpW52nioI > > There might be new profession like nosomatic > AI chirurgeon (I made that up): > > Tiny engine, immense model > https://github.com/JustVugg/colibri > > The Brain page, Explore: the measured expert > atlas of GLM-5.2 drawn as a cortex. 13,260 > characterised experts in ten regions (Python, > SQL, mathematics, poetry, law, Chinese…); > > position is measured routing affinity, not a > learned embedding. We might want a brain to > amputate from the Python expert sections, so > > that we can write code without a slow > CPython runtime. > > Bye
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 07:13 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity) |
| Message-ID | <MEydnZAfLIzg-vr3nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #896460 |
On 07/27/2026 01:41 AM, Mild Shock wrote: > Hi, > > Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration, > reached a significant milestone this summer. > > The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners > to measure time, so forget Colorado. > > Bye > > Ross Finlayson schrieb: >> >> So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of >> time", in the micro, meso, and macro. >> >> Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory >> in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with >> regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time. >> >> About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's >> similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has >> about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli >> Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis, >> measuring time. >> >> >> So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time, >> and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space. >> >> >> Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that, >> it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that. >> >> >> Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those >> on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school. >> >> > Well, like Einstein says, relativity is defined by at least two different clocks - might as well be three. That's a good quote, I quote me on that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 17:07 +0200 |
| Subject | Brova you enjoy made up nonsense? [Einstein tech cult] (Was: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) |
| Message-ID | <1147s6m$gebq$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #896470 |
Hi, You refuse to undertand the NVIDIA Volta archecture. You claim to like in the sense of "That's a good quote" some completely made up nonsense? Bravo! I just copied a nasa article title, which had nothing to do with "time" per se: CLARREO Pathfinder https://science.nasa.gov/mission/clarreo-pathfinder/ Its more a very big vacuum cleaner, that can scan highly accurate measurements of sunlight reflected by the Earth and the Moon. You are just a moron, that still feels harware evelution a treat, but would like to see data from a Einstein pathfinder. As if this is not the ultimate tech cult? As always you suck, like nobody else ever sucked on the usenet. You are just completely bonkers, the bigger crank than Archimedes Plutonion and John Gabriel. Bye Ross Finlayson schrieb: > On 07/27/2026 01:41 AM, Mild Shock wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration, >> reached a significant milestone this summer. >> >> The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners >> to measure time, so forget Colorado. >> >> Bye >> >> Ross Finlayson schrieb: >>> >>> So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of >>> time", in the micro, meso, and macro. >>> >>> Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory >>> in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with >>> regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time. >>> >>> About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's >>> similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has >>> about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli >>> Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis, >>> measuring time. >>> >>> >>> So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time, >>> and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space. >>> >>> >>> Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that, >>> it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that. >>> >>> >>> Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those >>> on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school. >>> >>> >> > > > Well, like Einstein says, relativity is defined > by at least two different clocks - > might as well be three. > > > > That's a good quote, I quote me on that. > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-09 21:05 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1109npe$76mb$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #896076 |
Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson: > > So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" > instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, > in a museum in France". > > :-D -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-10 08:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <J6KcnZPfV6_dGLT3nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #896084 |
On 06/09/2026 12:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson: >> >> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" >> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, >> in a museum in France". >> >> > > :-D > Thanks for writing. I'm curious how to interpret the smiley, usually enough it's a reaction of spontaneous happiness, yet in some regards it's as like the monkey's grimace that's usually aggression or fear. Then, the idea that there are "collective clocks" and that for time there are independent metrologies of time as about the atomic clock, the synchroton clock, and the quasar clock, that would advise a lot of the context about "the clock hypothesis", and also the role of clocks with rigid measuring rods of length, for the metrology (the science of measurement) of space, the metrologies, a metrology.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-10 14:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6A29DCBE.3B20@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #896088 |
Ross Finlayson wrote: > > On 06/09/2026 12:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > > Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson: > >> > >> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" > >> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, > >> in a museum in France". > >> > >> > > > > :-D > > > > Thanks for writing. > > I'm curious how to interpret the smiley, usually enough it's > a reaction of spontaneous happiness, yet in some regards it's > as like the monkey's grimace that's usually aggression or fear. > > Then, the idea that there are "collective clocks" and that for > time there are independent metrologies of time as about > > the atomic clock, > the synchroton clock, > and the quasar clock, and the biological clock...It's LOGICAL!!! bio wise. it's ticks. it's tocks. a pretty girl on a hot stove ..is relativity. > > that would advise a lot of the context about "the clock hypothesis", > and also the role of clocks with rigid measuring rods of length, > for the metrology (the science of measurement) of space, > the metrologies, a metrology. -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-10 18:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <C5mcnTjTDYfLkLf3nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #896089 |
On 06/10/2026 02:53 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > Ross Finlayson wrote: >> >> On 06/09/2026 12:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>> Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson: >>>> >>>> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" >>>> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, >>>> in a museum in France". >>>> >>>> >>> >>> :-D >>> >> >> Thanks for writing. >> >> I'm curious how to interpret the smiley, usually enough it's >> a reaction of spontaneous happiness, yet in some regards it's >> as like the monkey's grimace that's usually aggression or fear. >> >> Then, the idea that there are "collective clocks" and that for >> time there are independent metrologies of time as about >> >> the atomic clock, >> the synchroton clock, >> and the quasar clock, > > and the biological clock...It's LOGICAL!!! bio wise. > > it's ticks. > it's tocks. > > a pretty girl on a hot stove ..is relativity. > > > >> >> that would advise a lot of the context about "the clock hypothesis", >> and also the role of clocks with rigid measuring rods of length, >> for the metrology (the science of measurement) of space, >> the metrologies, a metrology. > Shut up StarMaker, you never said any decent damn thing about science. Trite trollop, ....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-10 20:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6A2A2FF9.6313@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #896090 |
Ross Finlayson wrote: > > On 06/10/2026 02:53 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > > Ross Finlayson wrote: > >> > >> On 06/09/2026 12:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > >>> Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson: > >>>> > >>>> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" > >>>> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, > >>>> in a museum in France". > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> :-D > >>> > >> > >> Thanks for writing. > >> > >> I'm curious how to interpret the smiley, usually enough it's > >> a reaction of spontaneous happiness, yet in some regards it's > >> as like the monkey's grimace that's usually aggression or fear. > >> > >> Then, the idea that there are "collective clocks" and that for > >> time there are independent metrologies of time as about > >> > >> the atomic clock, > >> the synchroton clock, > >> and the quasar clock, > > > > and the biological clock...It's LOGICAL!!! bio wise. > > > > it's ticks. > > it's tocks. > > > > a pretty girl on a hot stove ..is relativity. > > > > > > > >> > >> that would advise a lot of the context about "the clock hypothesis", > >> and also the role of clocks with rigid measuring rods of length, > >> for the metrology (the science of measurement) of space, > >> the metrologies, a metrology. > > > > Shut up StarMaker, you never said any decent damn thing about science. > > Trite trollop, .... "decent"???? I don't belong to the majority of yous groups of lemmings. I would not want to be a member of a club that would have me... i take the road less ...traveled. "trollop"???? https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=define+trollop historically used to describe a woman perceived as sexually promiscuous like YOUR MOTHER. yo mamma. hoe your mother sucks elephant cocks. So, your father sends your mother out to the streets to make some money... she comes back and sez I made twenty dollars and ten cents! Your father ask her "Who gave you ten cents?" Your mother said..."EVERYBODY!" -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-12 08:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <RpudnWu8G_63v7H3nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #896091 |
On 06/10/2026 08:48 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > Ross Finlayson wrote: >> >> On 06/10/2026 02:53 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >>> Ross Finlayson wrote: >>>> >>>> On 06/09/2026 12:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>>>> Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson: >>>>>> >>>>>> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" >>>>>> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, >>>>>> in a museum in France". >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> :-D >>>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks for writing. >>>> >>>> I'm curious how to interpret the smiley, usually enough it's >>>> a reaction of spontaneous happiness, yet in some regards it's >>>> as like the monkey's grimace that's usually aggression or fear. >>>> >>>> Then, the idea that there are "collective clocks" and that for >>>> time there are independent metrologies of time as about >>>> >>>> the atomic clock, >>>> the synchroton clock, >>>> and the quasar clock, >>> >>> and the biological clock...It's LOGICAL!!! bio wise. >>> >>> it's ticks. >>> it's tocks. >>> >>> a pretty girl on a hot stove ..is relativity. >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> that would advise a lot of the context about "the clock hypothesis", >>>> and also the role of clocks with rigid measuring rods of length, >>>> for the metrology (the science of measurement) of space, >>>> the metrologies, a metrology. >>> >> >> Shut up StarMaker, you never said any decent damn thing about science. >> >> Trite trollop, .... > > "decent"???? I don't belong to the majority of yous groups of lemmings. > > > I would not want to be a member of a club that would have me... > > > i take the road less ...traveled. > > > "trollop"???? > > https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=define+trollop > > historically used to describe a woman perceived as sexually promiscuous > > like YOUR MOTHER. > > yo mamma. > > > hoe > > your mother sucks elephant cocks. > > So, your father sends your mother out to the streets to make some money... > she comes back and sez I made twenty dollars and ten cents! > > Your father ask her "Who gave you ten cents?" > > Your mother said..."EVERYBODY!" > > > Rude. And old.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-12 08:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <OMKdnX_1uplKtbH3nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #896099 |
On 06/12/2026 08:13 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: > On 06/10/2026 08:48 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >> Ross Finlayson wrote: >>> >>> On 06/10/2026 02:53 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>> Ross Finlayson wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 06/09/2026 12:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>>>>> Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars" >>>>>>> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom, >>>>>>> in a museum in France". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> :-D >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for writing. >>>>> >>>>> I'm curious how to interpret the smiley, usually enough it's >>>>> a reaction of spontaneous happiness, yet in some regards it's >>>>> as like the monkey's grimace that's usually aggression or fear. >>>>> >>>>> Then, the idea that there are "collective clocks" and that for >>>>> time there are independent metrologies of time as about >>>>> >>>>> the atomic clock, >>>>> the synchroton clock, >>>>> and the quasar clock, >>>> >>>> and the biological clock...It's LOGICAL!!! bio wise. >>>> >>>> it's ticks. >>>> it's tocks. >>>> >>>> a pretty girl on a hot stove ..is relativity. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> that would advise a lot of the context about "the clock hypothesis", >>>>> and also the role of clocks with rigid measuring rods of length, >>>>> for the metrology (the science of measurement) of space, >>>>> the metrologies, a metrology. >>>> >>> >>> Shut up StarMaker, you never said any decent damn thing about science. >>> >>> Trite trollop, .... >> >> "decent"???? I don't belong to the majority of yous groups of lemmings. >> >> >> I would not want to be a member of a club that would have me... >> >> >> i take the road less ...traveled. >> >> >> "trollop"???? >> >> https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=define+trollop >> >> historically used to describe a woman perceived as sexually promiscuous >> >> like YOUR MOTHER. >> >> yo mamma. >> >> >> hoe >> >> your mother sucks elephant cocks. >> >> So, your father sends your mother out to the streets to make some >> money... >> she comes back and sez I made twenty dollars and ten cents! >> >> Your father ask her "Who gave you ten cents?" >> >> Your mother said..."EVERYBODY!" >> >> >> > > Rude. And old. > > The other day somewhere we were having a conversation about "trash-talk", or variously "the burn". I came up with this. "You're going to lose so bad, you're going to wish you had won." "That trash-talk is weak." "Worked on you."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web