Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #589377 > unrolled thread
| Started by | mapou001@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-07-14 23:01 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-07-27 11:19 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 184 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-14 23:01 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 07:25 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 08:36 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 10:41 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 11:02 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 10:46 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 13:11 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-07-17 16:30 +0200
Re: Gravity and light question Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-17 11:15 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-17 15:29 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-07-18 00:16 +0200
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 06:39 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question xxein1@att.net - 2016-07-18 09:32 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-07-18 22:55 +0200
Re: Gravity and light question john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 17:44 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-15 09:33 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 08:36 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-15 11:25 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 10:02 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 10:42 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-15 14:22 -0500
glightinos noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 10:06 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 10:40 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 10:42 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 10:51 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 11:05 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 13:23 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 11:31 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 13:40 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 11:47 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 13:56 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 11:54 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 13:58 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-07-18 10:29 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-18 11:09 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-07-19 09:45 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-19 09:59 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-19 12:59 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-19 11:15 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-07-18 09:56 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-18 10:03 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 12:22 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 12:38 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-18 11:04 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 13:25 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-18 11:45 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 14:12 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 14:19 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-18 12:24 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 14:33 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question xxein1@att.net - 2016-07-18 14:01 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 16:13 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-18 19:02 -0400
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-18 16:45 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-19 13:12 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-19 11:17 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-19 13:46 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-19 11:51 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-19 13:58 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-19 12:11 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-19 14:19 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-19 12:30 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-19 14:38 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-19 12:43 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-19 15:08 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-19 13:26 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-19 16:36 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-07-19 19:32 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-20 10:54 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 13:13 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-20 11:31 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 14:10 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-07-22 11:24 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Kent Evans <kenev@bluebarryinfo.org> - 2016-07-22 18:27 +0000
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-22 11:34 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-07-23 23:21 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-24 00:09 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-07-24 13:11 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-24 14:09 -0700
light is waves through the electronic matters of free space noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 19:16 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-24 15:22 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-24 14:12 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 07:53 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 07:37 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 09:39 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 08:12 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 10:54 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 11:56 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 17:12 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 17:10 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 16:51 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 07:24 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-07-26 19:18 +0000
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-24 15:04 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2016-07-24 18:50 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 15:05 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-25 11:16 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-07-26 11:00 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 11:52 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-27 08:29 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-31 14:01 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-31 18:45 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-08-01 08:45 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-01 15:12 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-07-26 21:36 +0200
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 15:05 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-07-27 18:36 +0200
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 13:08 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-07-28 00:15 +0200
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 09:24 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-07-29 07:05 +0200
i.q at most zero noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 14:19 -0700
Light (was: i.q at most zero) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-07-29 07:16 +0200
Re: Light (was: i.q at most zero) LIGO Fraud Investigator <mapou001@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 22:34 -0700
see _Light, a history: Fermat's complete correspondence on light_ noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 09:38 -0700
Re: see _Light, a history: Fermat's complete correspondence on light_ brandonahenley9@gmail.com - 2016-07-29 12:38 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 13:15 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 12:54 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 10:41 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 10:50 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 13:18 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 11:22 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 13:36 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 11:43 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 13:49 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 11:58 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 14:01 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 12:06 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 14:17 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 12:19 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 14:29 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-15 14:23 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 12:33 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-15 16:58 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 13:18 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 13:34 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 15:19 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 15:29 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 16:15 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 16:17 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 16:46 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 17:14 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 17:55 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 18:08 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 19:47 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-17 15:41 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-17 14:08 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 06:38 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-15 15:38 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 14:03 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-16 13:02 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-16 12:56 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-07-16 14:02 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-16 14:10 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-16 16:38 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-16 14:46 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-16 16:36 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-16 14:45 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-16 16:48 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-16 15:10 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-16 16:11 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-07-16 18:18 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-16 19:40 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-07-16 23:35 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-17 00:35 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-17 15:24 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question xxein1@att.net - 2016-07-16 22:22 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-17 15:22 -0500
all properties of light are wave(y\s, including the photon-electrical effect noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-16 17:03 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-15 16:42 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-17 16:37 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-07-17 13:15 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-17 13:17 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-17 15:41 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-07-24 17:29 +1000
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-24 00:39 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-27 12:06 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-27 10:17 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-26 21:05 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 07:47 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-27 09:19 -0700
Re: Gravity and light question Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-27 11:56 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 12:56 -0500
Re: Gravity and light question mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-27 11:19 -0700
Page 3 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 10 Next page →
| From | mapou001@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-18 10:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <17055a16-5dc4-4388-a6ff-bdafc6cf7dfa@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #589761 |
On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 9:57:07 AM UTC-7, edpr...@gmail.com wrote: > > There is a difference between the acceleration of > massive SLOW particles and > massless Speed-of-light particles > by gravity. This is precisely the fucking point. There should be no difference if the equivalence principle was true. Haysoos Martinez! I'm arguing with a cult of cretins.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-18 12:22 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nmj38p$al4$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #589762 |
On 7/18/2016 12:03 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 9:57:07 AM UTC-7, edpr...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> There is a difference between the acceleration of >> massive SLOW particles and >> massless Speed-of-light particles >> by gravity. > > This is precisely the fucking point. There should be no difference if the equivalence principle was true. > > Haysoos Martinez! I'm arguing with a cult of cretins. > What do you think the Equivalence Principle states, exactly? (Recall earlier you said you didn't give a shit what Einstein or physicists think it states. You had your own idea of what the Equivalence Principle means, apparently.) And while we're at it, what do you think "acceleration is absolute" means? (Recall that what you thought it meant is different than what physicists say it means, and they're the ones that said it in the first place.) Just for completeness, what do you think "acceleration" means? -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-18 12:38 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nmj46o$c9o$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #589762 |
On 7/18/2016 12:03 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 9:57:07 AM UTC-7, edpr...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> There is a difference between the acceleration of >> massive SLOW particles and >> massless Speed-of-light particles >> by gravity. > > This is precisely the fucking point. There should be no difference if the equivalence principle was true. > > Haysoos Martinez! I'm arguing with a cult of cretins. > Don't you find it interesting that it is pretty straightforward to DERIVE (logically and mathematically) the dependence of the acceleration on the speed of the object FROM the Equivalence Principle? When I say Equivalence Principle, I'm referring to what physicists mean by that phrase, not what YOU think it means. Since the dependence of the acceleration on the speed of the object stems directly from the Equivalence Principle, it can't be in conflict with it, can it? So, to sum up, all you've managed to do is show that the experimentally MEASURED dependence of the acceleration on the speed is in conflict with YOUR version of the equivalence principle, which (no surprise) is not what physicists mean by it. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mapou001@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-18 11:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f68d88cc-58b8-42a3-ac3e-ad89ddc0d55f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #589767 |
On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 10:38:36 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 7/18/2016 12:03 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > > On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 9:57:07 AM UTC-7, edpr...@gmail.com wrote: > >> > >> There is a difference between the acceleration of > >> massive SLOW particles and > >> massless Speed-of-light particles > >> by gravity. > > > > This is precisely the fucking point. There should be no difference if the equivalence principle was true. > > > > Haysoos Martinez! I'm arguing with a cult of cretins. > > > > Don't you find it interesting that it is pretty straightforward to > DERIVE (logically and mathematically) the dependence of the acceleration > on the speed of the object FROM the Equivalence Principle? > > When I say Equivalence Principle, I'm referring to what physicists mean > by that phrase, not what YOU think it means. This is precisely why it's crap. Physicists lie all the time. The true EP is as Newton saw it. This is why the acceleration of light by gravity does not work in Newtonian physics. Newton was assuming true equivalence. Your so-called equivalence is just a chicken shit deception. It's used in order to make Einstein correct. Einstein must be correct always even though he isn't. It's Big Brother crappy physics in your face whether or not you like it. Fuck all of you and the mules you sleep with. ahahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-18 13:25 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nmj6ur$goi$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #589772 |
On 7/18/2016 1:04 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 10:38:36 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 7/18/2016 12:03 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: >>> On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 9:57:07 AM UTC-7, edpr...@gmail.com wrote: >>>> >>>> There is a difference between the acceleration of >>>> massive SLOW particles and >>>> massless Speed-of-light particles >>>> by gravity. >>> >>> This is precisely the fucking point. There should be no difference if the equivalence principle was true. >>> >>> Haysoos Martinez! I'm arguing with a cult of cretins. >>> >> >> Don't you find it interesting that it is pretty straightforward to >> DERIVE (logically and mathematically) the dependence of the acceleration >> on the speed of the object FROM the Equivalence Principle? >> >> When I say Equivalence Principle, I'm referring to what physicists mean >> by that phrase, not what YOU think it means. > > This is precisely why it's crap. Physicists lie all the time. The true EP is as Newton saw it. Maybe you'd better back up and quote Newton's equivalence principle, preferably from his writings. As far as I know, Einstein (not Newton) coined the term. > This is why > the acceleration of light by gravity does not work in Newtonian physics. Newton was assuming true equivalence. > > Your so-called equivalence is just a chicken shit deception. OK, so we've confirmed that you're not referring to the Equivalence Principle as scientists understand that term. You're referring to SOME OTHER thing you're calling the Equivalence Principle and THIS OTHER thing is what you're saying that the speed dependence of acceleration is in conflict with. On top of that, THIS OTHER thing you're attributing to Newton, for some reason. At least we know that it's not general relativity that's internally inconsistent. It's just that general relativity is not consistent with "Newton's" version of the equivalence principle. OK, we already knew that general relativity is not consistent with Newtonian mechanics. Big deal. OK, so how to deal with experimental data that shows this speed dependence of acceleration in fact happens? Doesn't that tell you that Einstein's version of the equivalence principle matches experiment, and that "Newton's" version does not? > It's used in order to make Einstein correct. Einstein must be correct always even though he isn't. Well, it's a rather elaborate deception, isn't it? I mean, the equivalence principle was published several YEARS before the first experimental evidence rolled in that showed he was right. So you're saying that Einstein read the future, knew what the experimental results were going to be, and then cobbled together his equivalence principle to match the results of the future? > It's > Big Brother crappy physics in your face whether or not you like it. Well, yeah, that's the nature of science. If experimental data says it happens, then it happens, whether or not you like it. In this way, the scientific method FORCES people to change their minds about how the world works. If you don't like that, then science ain't a great hobby for you. > > Fuck all of you and the mules you sleep with. > > ahahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha... > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mapou001@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-18 11:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d73f2963-87e7-4c59-89b9-e6d65d2bab20@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #589786 |
On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 11:25:36 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 7/18/2016 1:04 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: [crap] Fuck you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-18 14:12 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nmj9no$li0$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #589789 |
On 7/18/2016 1:45 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 11:25:36 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 7/18/2016 1:04 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > [crap] > > Fuck you. > OK, just to summarize. 1. You claimed that the Einsteinian Equivalence Principle was inconsistent with the soundbite from Carlip about falling twice as fast, which as it turns out you misquoted originally. 2. When it was pointed out that particles and light fall according to the same rule, in accord with the equivalence principle, you disputed that the equivalence principle says what it says. 3. Then it turned out you didn't mean the Einsteinian equivalence principle at all, but some other thing you were calling the equivalence principle, something you apparently made up. 4. When it was pointed out that experimental measurement agrees with the Einsteinian Equivalence Principle and disagrees with the equivalence principle you made up, you called it a big conspiracy to make people believe things they don't like. 5. In response to all these true things being revealed, your final comment is "Fuck you." And what's your take-away from this experience? -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-18 14:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nmja47$m8e$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #589792 |
On 7/18/2016 2:12 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 7/18/2016 1:45 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: >> On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 11:25:36 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> On 7/18/2016 1:04 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: >> [crap] >> >> Fuck you. >> > > OK, just to summarize. > > 1. You claimed that the Einsteinian Equivalence Principle was > inconsistent with the soundbite from Carlip about falling twice as fast, > which as it turns out you misquoted originally. > 2. When it was pointed out that particles and light fall according to > the same rule, in accord with the equivalence principle, you disputed > that the equivalence principle says what it says. > 3. Then it turned out you didn't mean the Einsteinian equivalence > principle at all, but some other thing you were calling the equivalence > principle, something you apparently made up. > 4. When it was pointed out that experimental measurement agrees with the > Einsteinian Equivalence Principle and disagrees with the equivalence > principle you made up, you called it a big conspiracy to make people > believe things they don't like. > 5. In response to all these true things being revealed, your final > comment is "Fuck you." > > And what's your take-away from this experience? > Oh, and how's www.reddit.com/r/RebelScience coming along, since you announced you were leaving usenet, SixWings? -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mapou001@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-18 12:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f589a290-4562-4e1c-b8e1-12118f36f9b5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #589793 |
On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 12:19:41 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: [crap] Your momma. ahahaha...AHAHAHA...ahahaha...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-18 14:33 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nmjath$n9k$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #589794 |
On 7/18/2016 2:24 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 12:19:41 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > [crap] > > Your momma. > > ahahaha...AHAHAHA...ahahaha... > I love it when you get all highly-educated-sounding and "Pfbthblpfpftt!" and all. C'mon baby, talk smart some more for me. Maybe buy me a drink? -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | xxein1@att.net |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-18 14:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f09e8ac6-5ee4-4c0b-b992-568986d4f51b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #589793 |
On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 3:19:41 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 7/18/2016 2:12 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > On 7/18/2016 1:45 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > >> On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 11:25:36 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>> On 7/18/2016 1:04 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > -- > Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables xxein: OK Mr. Smartypants, the Earth was flat 3,000 yrs-ago. How can it get from flat to round in just 3,000 years? What shape will it be 3,000 years from now? Square? Are you just going to make up physics to explain whatever shape it will be only after the fact?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-18 16:13 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nmjgpk$10u5$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #589819 |
On 7/18/2016 4:01 PM, xxein1@att.net wrote: > On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 3:19:41 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 7/18/2016 2:12 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> On 7/18/2016 1:45 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: >>>> On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 11:25:36 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>> On 7/18/2016 1:04 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > >> -- >> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > xxein: OK Mr. Smartypants, the Earth was flat 3,000 yrs-ago. How can it get from > flat to round in just 3,000 years? What shape will it be 3,000 years from now? > Square? Are you just going to make up physics to explain whatever shape it will > be only after the fact? > This is pretty funny. Oh wait. Did you MEAN for it to be funny? If not, then never mind, we'll just pretend you didn't just say that. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-18 19:02 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <578d6007$0$25280$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #589826 |
On 7/18/2016 5:13 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 7/18/2016 4:01 PM, xxein1@att.net wrote: >> On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 3:19:41 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> On 7/18/2016 2:12 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> On 7/18/2016 1:45 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: >>>>> On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 11:25:36 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> On 7/18/2016 1:04 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: >> >>> -- >>> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables >> >> xxein: OK Mr. Smartypants, the Earth was flat 3,000 yrs-ago. How can >> it get from >> flat to round in just 3,000 years? What shape will it be 3,000 years >> from now? >> Square? Are you just going to make up physics to explain whatever >> shape it will >> be only after the fact? >> > > This is pretty funny. > > Oh wait. Did you MEAN for it to be funny? > > If not, then never mind, we'll just pretend you didn't just say that. Boinker if you were into amateur science and not politics, you'd know that 3000 years ago everyone KNEW the earth was round, they even calculated it's size (pretty accurate too). THEN the earth was flat and in 3000 years everyone will know the truth which was discovered by the Nazis and latter proved by the Americans that the earth is hollow with a central sun. Of course by then everyone will know that truth and you'll (or the equivalent Boinker of that age) will be arguing with kooks that no it doesn't have a liquid core. Odd, you are doomed to be a follower and never a leader.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mapou001@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-18 16:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <96ae8d70-d171-426a-9756-1d733c536d19@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #589826 |
On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 2:13:29 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > This is pretty funny. > > Oh wait. Did you MEAN for it to be funny? > > If not, then never mind, we'll just pretend you didn't just say that. All relativists sniff each other's ass. They call it peer review. But the rest of us know it's really ass review. It has always been ass review. ahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-19 13:12 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nmlqhh$8ad$5@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #589840 |
On 7/18/2016 6:45 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 2:13:29 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> This is pretty funny. >> >> Oh wait. Did you MEAN for it to be funny? >> >> If not, then never mind, we'll just pretend you didn't just say that. > > All relativists sniff each other's ass. They call it peer review. But the rest of us > know it's really ass review. It has always been ass review. Well, this is in the category of a "Pfthblbpfpffttt!" comment and is not particularly useful. Peer review is there for a reason. You may disagree with that reason and have a cogent rationale for why you think it should be abandoned. If so, you could attempt to put that cogent rationale together and write it down here. Basically, the question is about how to do some quality assurance of scientific work. If you have a better proposal, out with it. (A suggestion of "No quality assurance is recommended!" then you can imagine the immediate response.) > > ahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha... > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mapou001@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-19 11:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d0af5bc9-539c-4a21-95d3-952e10a38519@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #589964 |
On Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at 11:12:05 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >[more crap] > Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables Fuck you. Don't bother replying. I don't read your stupid shit. ahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-19 13:46 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nmlsh6$bug$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #589967 |
On 7/19/2016 1:17 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > On Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at 11:12:05 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> [more crap] >> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > Fuck you. Don't bother replying. I don't read your stupid shit. > > ahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha... > But others do. And we're right about you.... -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mapou001@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-19 11:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <abf9e067-f3d1-4ac6-902c-2dbf5fc188b6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #589972 |
On Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at 11:46:03 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 7/19/2016 1:17 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > > On Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at 11:12:05 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> [more crap] > >> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > > > Fuck you. Don't bother replying. I don't read your stupid shit. > > > > ahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha... > > > > But others do. And we're right about you.... > I don't fucking care. ahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-19 13:58 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nmlt7t$d5e$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #589973 |
On 7/19/2016 1:51 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > On Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at 11:46:03 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 7/19/2016 1:17 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: >>> On Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at 11:12:05 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> [more crap] >>>> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables >>> >>> Fuck you. Don't bother replying. I don't read your stupid shit. >>> >>> ahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha... >>> >> >> But others do. And we're right about you.... >> > > I don't fucking care. > > ahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha... > Of course you don't. That's why you're never going to get anywhere different than where you are right now -- pissed and without answers to your questions. Start caring a little more, and maybe that would change. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mapou001@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-19 12:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7b2babac-bfa7-4cb5-8dfd-aa5d970eaec4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #589974 |
On Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at 11:58:10 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 7/19/2016 1:51 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > > On Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at 11:46:03 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 7/19/2016 1:17 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > >>> On Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at 11:12:05 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>> [more crap] > >>>> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > >>> > >>> Fuck you. Don't bother replying. I don't read your stupid shit. > >>> > >>> ahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha... > >>> > >> > >> But others do. And we're right about you.... > >> > > > > I don't fucking care. > > > > ahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha... > > > > Of course you don't. That's why you're never going to get anywhere > different than where you are right now -- pissed and without answers to > your questions. Start caring a little more, and maybe that would change. I got answers, alright. This is how I know you're a fucking mental midget and an ass kisser. And I do care about good solid physics, not a bunch of stupid crap from morons. ahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web