Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #645182 > unrolled thread
| Started by | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-08-08 14:18 -0700 |
| Last post | 2017-08-14 19:23 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 230 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-08 14:18 -0700
I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-08 14:23 -0700
Re: I figured out charge zubeneschgenubi@gmail.com - 2017-08-08 14:44 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-08 15:58 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-08 16:03 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-08 16:34 -0700
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-08 23:34 +0000
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-09 09:54 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-09 08:05 -0700
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-08 23:28 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-08 16:44 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-08 16:47 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-08 17:05 -0700
Re: I figured out charge benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-08 21:51 -0400
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-09 06:05 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-09 06:50 -0700
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-10 03:53 +0000
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-09 02:33 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-09 06:02 -0700
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-10 03:47 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-09 20:51 -0700
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-10 18:42 +0000
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-09 09:47 -0500
Re: I figured out charge benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-09 17:44 -0400
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-09 15:23 -0700
Re: I figured out charge benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-09 20:44 -0400
Re: I figured out charge Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-08-09 16:15 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2017-08-09 08:27 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-09 10:52 -0700
Re: I figured out charge zubeneschgenubi@gmail.com - 2017-08-09 16:02 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-10 13:53 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-10 14:55 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-10 16:58 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-10 15:06 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-10 17:11 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-10 15:40 -0700
Re: I figured out charge pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-08-10 16:16 -0700
Re: I figured out charge benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-10 20:28 -0400
Re: I figured out charge pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-08-10 21:48 -0700
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-11 12:59 +0000
Re: I figured out charge Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-10 18:36 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-10 19:36 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-11 08:06 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-11 06:14 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-11 06:29 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-11 08:40 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-11 07:21 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-08-11 07:21 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-11 08:21 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-11 17:54 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-11 12:15 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-11 14:44 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-12 05:41 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-12 06:49 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-12 07:05 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-12 08:28 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-12 10:43 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-12 08:59 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-12 14:26 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-12 13:52 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-12 20:59 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-12 14:23 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-12 15:43 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 00:12 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-12 18:34 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 05:11 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 08:04 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 08:21 -0700
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-14 02:21 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 19:34 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 19:46 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 03:05 +0000
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-14 03:15 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 04:49 -0700
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-14 14:05 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 07:20 -0700
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-14 16:35 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 09:47 -0700
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-14 19:55 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 16:40 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 18:24 -0700
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-15 13:21 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 06:34 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 15:00 +0000
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-15 17:39 +0000
Re: I figured out charge benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-15 18:12 -0400
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 15:02 +0000
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 15:07 -0500
Re: I figured out charge Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 19:45 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 22:18 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 22:28 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 05:49 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 06:10 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 06:25 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 09:51 -0500
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 16:13 -0500
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-16 16:09 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 10:05 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 10:10 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 13:38 -0500
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 12:51 -0500
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-16 18:26 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 18:24 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 01:46 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 19:08 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 02:28 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 19:39 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 03:22 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 04:51 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 12:39 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 06:00 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 13:22 +0000
Re: I figured out charge Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-08-17 09:01 -0500
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 09:06 -0500
Re: I figured out charge Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-08-17 09:18 -0500
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-17 15:28 +0000
Re: I figured out charge benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-17 17:39 -0400
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 07:51 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 11:02 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 09:32 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 11:57 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 10:02 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 12:05 -0500
Re: I figured out charge Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 10:10 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 11:30 -0700
Re: I figured out charge benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-17 17:30 -0400
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-17 15:18 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 08:32 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 11:03 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 09:34 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 11:58 -0500
Re: I figured out charge Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-08-17 16:00 -0500
Re: I figured out charge benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-17 17:27 -0400
Re: I figured out charge Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 09:13 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 09:36 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 12:01 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 10:05 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 10:17 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 12:21 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 10:32 -0700
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-17 20:27 +0000
Re: I figured out charge benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-17 18:18 -0400
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 17:14 -0500
Re: I figured out charge benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-17 19:21 -0400
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 05:54 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 07:59 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 06:25 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 08:33 -0500
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 08:49 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 07:25 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 08:15 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 13:56 -0500
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 13:55 -0500
Re: I figured out charge Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 12:54 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 13:37 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 21:09 +0000
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 21:10 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 07:19 -0700
Re: I figured out charge benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-17 17:50 -0400
Re: I figured out charge Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 10:13 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 10:20 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 12:26 -0500
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-17 20:10 +0000
At the start of the Big Bang, "black holes" ( Black Stars ) were much larger. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 10:13 -0700
Re: At the start of the Big Bang, "black holes" ( Black Stars ) were much larger. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 12:23 -0500
Better Servers. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2017-08-17 10:34 -0700
Better Servers. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 11:05 -0700
Re: Better Servers. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 17:11 -0500
Re: At the start of the Big Bang, "black holes" ( Black Stars ) were much larger. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-17 19:54 +0000
Re: At the start of the Big Bang, "black holes" ( Black Stars ) were much larger. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-17 19:58 +0000
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-17 15:56 +0000
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-17 15:41 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 08:57 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-17 11:16 -0500
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 09:45 -0500
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-16 16:05 +0000
Re: I figured out charge Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 11:01 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 09:36 -0500
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-15 04:27 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 05:20 -0700
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-15 13:34 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 06:42 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 15:02 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 09:02 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 12:45 -0500
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 15:21 -0500
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-15 17:48 +0000
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 12:42 -0500
Re: I figured out charge Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 11:25 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 19:31 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 18:31 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 19:31 -0500
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 18:01 -0500
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 18:00 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 16:40 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 23:45 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 16:58 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 17:08 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 08:42 -0500
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 08:34 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 07:30 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 11:55 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 10:21 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 12:27 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 15:16 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 15:27 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-16 09:35 -0500
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 10:24 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 11:39 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 12:10 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 12:47 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 12:28 -0500
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 12:27 -0500
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-15 12:27 -0500
Re: I figured out charge Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-14 11:28 -0700
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-16 15:23 +0000
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-13 01:06 +0000
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 00:12 +0000
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 18:01 -0500
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-13 01:01 +0000
Re: I figured out charge Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-12 10:42 -0500
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-13 02:27 +0000
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-12 19:55 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 19:59 -0700
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 20:12 -0700
Re: I figured out charge Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-13 20:22 -0700
Re: I figured out charge moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-13 01:11 +0000
Re: I figured out charge benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-11 18:18 -0400
Re: I figured out charge john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-11 16:48 -0700
Re: I figured out charge "Efftard K .Donglemeier" <sender@hotmail.com> - 2017-08-14 19:23 -0700
Page 8 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 12 Next page →
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-17 20:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <on4u76$vfb$3@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #646326 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >Odd >" No, it means that you may not have gotten your >inventory of mass right, just like you didn't get your inventory of >forces right. >" >Or your equation is wrong. >Or your understanding of Gravity is totally backwards. Odd mentioned those possibilities several times a while ago. You just blew him off. >Which is the most likely, because you have no idea how it is produced or how it interacts. People have been studying gravity and looking for deviations from the inverse square law, without seeing any. So the answer to your question is the invisible heavy stuff which you hate but any 6 year old can explain is most likely. But scientists are looking at the possibility that gravity deviates from what is known, with little success. After all, there certainly is a Nobel for them if they happen to succeed! >Let's take this one step further- the GRC on the side that doesn't >match is controlled by invisible DM which just happens to be right >where it's needed- JUST LIKE virtual particles, right? You got that backwards, John. The GRC doesn't control the placement of the dark matter. The dark matter controls the GRC. A galaxy with dark matter will have a certain characteristic GRC. That GRC happens to correspond to the dark matter that created it. So what?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-17 18:18 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <59961629$0$10762$c3e8da3$5d8fb80f@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #646355 |
On 8/17/2017 4:27 PM, Michael Moroney wrote: > john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: > >> Odd >> " No, it means that you may not have gotten your >> inventory of mass right, just like you didn't get your inventory of >> forces right. >> " >> Or your equation is wrong. >> Or your understanding of Gravity is totally backwards. > > Odd mentioned those possibilities several times a while ago. You just > blew him off. > >> Which is the most likely, because you have no idea how it is produced or how it interacts. > > People have been studying gravity and looking for deviations from the > inverse square law, without seeing any. So the answer to your question > is the invisible heavy stuff which you hate but any 6 year old can > explain is most likely. > > But scientists are looking at the possibility that gravity deviates > from what is known, with little success. After all, there certainly > is a Nobel for them if they happen to succeed! > >> Let's take this one step further- the GRC on the side that doesn't >> match is controlled by invisible DM which just happens to be right >> where it's needed- JUST LIKE virtual particles, right? > > You got that backwards, John. The GRC doesn't control the placement > of the dark matter. The dark matter controls the GRC. A galaxy > with dark matter will have a certain characteristic GRC. That > GRC happens to correspond to the dark matter that created it. So > what? > Yeah, that's it. Let's call this heavy stuff nobody can see: Aether! Yeah that's it!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-17 17:14 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <on54gq$1csl$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #646326 |
On 8/17/17 12:32 PM, john wrote: > Odd > " No, it means that you may not have gotten your > inventory of mass right, just like you didn't get your inventory of > forces right. > " > Or your equation is wrong. Yes, that is ONE of two possibilities, and that's the reason why there has been a TON of research looking for viable theories that agree with all of the other experimental results and do not require dark matter. All of these efforts so far have run into conflicts with data. You act as if no living physicist is working on that idea, and it's just not true. > Or your understanding of Gravity is totally backwards. > Which is the most likely, because you have no idea how it is produced or how it interacts. That's bullshit, John. Gravity under GR is well understood in terms of how it is produced and how it interacts. Any book on GR covers that. Now, what might be true is that those explanations that include spacetime and fields are things you dismiss as not real. At which point, a physicist is going to say, who are you, Sefton, to declare what is real and not real? > > Let's take this one step further- the GRC on the side that doesn't match is controlled by invisible DM which just happens to be right where it's needed- JUST LIKE virtual particles, right? > So, are you saying DM on the large scale is the same thing as virtual particles on the small scale? > PURE FUDGE? > Or what? > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-17 19:21 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <5996250a$0$17364$c3e8da3$dd9697d2@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #646384 |
On 8/17/2017 6:14 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 8/17/17 12:32 PM, john wrote: >> Odd >> " No, it means that you may not have gotten your >> inventory of mass right, just like you didn't get your inventory of >> forces right. >> " >> Or your equation is wrong. > > Yes, that is ONE of two possibilities, and that's the reason why there > has been a TON of research looking for viable theories that agree with > all of the other experimental results and do not require dark matter. > All of these efforts so far have run into conflicts with data. You act > as if no living physicist is working on that idea, and it's just not true. > >> Or your understanding of Gravity is totally backwards. >> Which is the most likely, because you have no idea how it is produced >> or how it interacts. > That's bullshit, John. Gravity under GR is well understood in terms of > how it is produced and how it interacts. Any book on GR covers that. You are an amateur moron, Odd. Nobody has ANY idea how gravity is produced. You are drooling babble when you say GR shows gravity is "caused" by "warps in space" by mass. Drooling spittle. You might as well be trying to tell everyone that Newton explained that gravity is caused by division by distance squared! Go back to your wooden toys. THOSE you can understand. You have no place in any science discussion. > Now, what might be true is that those explanations that include > spacetime and fields are things you dismiss as not real. At which point, > a physicist is going to say, who are you, Sefton, to declare what is > real and not real? And who are YOU anonymous toy maker to declare what is real? All math is fantasy. Hence all your arguments are fantasy. Period.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-18 05:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a405231e-ea06-4834-b993-898ce06e4f1f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #646394 |
benj Replied to Odd: " >> Or your understanding of Gravity is totally backwards. >> Which is the most likely, because you have no idea how it is produced >> or how it interacts. > That's bullshit, John. Gravity under GR is well understood in terms of > how it is produced and how it interacts. Any book on GR covers that. You are an amateur moron, Odd. Nobody has ANY idea how gravity is produced. You are drooling babble when you say GR shows gravity is "caused" by "warps in space" by mass. Drooling spittle. You might as well be trying to tell everyone that Newton explained that gravity is caused by division by distance squared! Go back to your wooden toys. THOSE you can understand. You have no place in any science discussion. > Now, what might be true is that those explanations that include > spacetime and fields are things you dismiss as not real. At which point, > a physicist is going to say, who are you, Sefton, to declare what is > real and not real? And who are YOU anonymous toy maker to declare what is real? All math is fantasy. Hence all your arguments are fantasy. Period. " I gotta agree with that, Odd. Gravity is NOT well understood. DM and DE are proof. The letter D stands for "dark" meaning unseen, not understood
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-18 07:59 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <on6oc6$1hfc$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #646427 |
On 8/18/17 7:54 AM, john wrote: > benj > Replied to Odd: > " >>> Or your understanding of Gravity is totally backwards. >>> Which is the most likely, because you have no idea how it is produced >>> or how it interacts. > >> That's bullshit, John. Gravity under GR is well understood in terms of >> how it is produced and how it interacts. Any book on GR covers that. > > You are an amateur moron, Odd. Nobody has ANY idea how gravity is > produced. What? Whaaaat? You say this on the basis of what? You've read nothing? > You are drooling babble when you say GR shows gravity is > "caused" by "warps in space" by mass. Drooling spittle. Well, like I said John, just because an explanation does not match your expectations of a cutaway exhibit at a science museum doesn't make it drooling spittle. It just makes it an explanation that you have no clue about, and you disparage it to try to make it sound not worthwhile. > You might as > well be trying to tell everyone that Newton explained that gravity is > caused by division by distance squared! Go back to your wooden toys. > THOSE you can understand. You have no place in any science discussion. Bullshit. Newton was pretty clear about not proposing any cause to gravity, while Einstein and physicists since have forked from that position, saying that the cause is now pretty clear. > >> Now, what might be true is that those explanations that include >> spacetime and fields are things you dismiss as not real. At which point, >> a physicist is going to say, who are you, Sefton, to declare what is >> real and not real? > > And who are YOU anonymous toy maker to declare what is real? All math is > fantasy. Hence all your arguments are fantasy. Period. " And who are YOU, John Sefton, to declare that math has nothing to do with reality? > > I gotta agree with that, Odd. > Gravity is NOT well understood. > DM and DE are proof. > The letter D stands for "dark" meaning unseen, not understood > No, Dark means not luminous, like the matter in stars, you idiot. It means that it doesn't interact electromagnetically like other matter, you idiot. Stop trying to paint things according to your own interpretation of the words. Idiot. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-18 06:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6b9f6883-010e-4417-8d84-44c0c94194c0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #646428 |
Odd -In physical cosmology and astronomy, dark energy is an unknown form of energy which is hypothesized to permeate all of space, tending to accelerate the expansion of the universe.- The "dark" in DE AND in DM equally refers to the fact that we know nothing about it. "Unknown". Or do you say, Odd, that the energy is "unseen", like, hey! MOST forms of energy? Twit
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-18 08:33 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <on6qaf$1kuh$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #646431 |
On 8/18/17 8:25 AM, john wrote: > Odd > -In physical cosmology and astronomy, dark energy is an unknown form of energy which is hypothesized to permeate all of space, tending to accelerate the expansion of the universe.- > > The "dark" in DE AND in DM equally refers to the fact that we know nothing about it. > "Unknown". > Or do you say, Odd, that the energy is "unseen", like, hey! MOST forms of energy? > Twit > John, remember the shopping cart example, where the cart seemed to stop even though the cataloged forces all added to zero, and it turned out that there was another force involved, a mysterious one called "friction" so named because it seemed to cause this odd behavior? Remember neutrinos, John, which were predicted decades before they were detected, because in beta decays, the laws of conservation of momentum and energy seemed to be violated? And in 1940, what was known about neutrinos? Nothing, except that they appeared to be massless and they carried energy and momentum. Did that make the idea nonsense? Did the very idea that this had to be hypothesized tell you that conservation of energy and conservation of momentum were nonsense physics? Was it ILLOGICAL to propose neutrinos long before they were seen? Yes or no answer, John, will suffice? -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-18 08:49 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <on6ra1$1mb2$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #646432 |
On 8/18/17 8:33 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 8/18/17 8:25 AM, john wrote: >> Odd >> -In physical cosmology and astronomy, dark energy is an unknown form >> of energy which is hypothesized to permeate all of space, tending to >> accelerate the expansion of the universe.- >> >> The "dark" in DE AND in DM equally refers to the fact that we know >> nothing about it. >> "Unknown". >> Or do you say, Odd, that the energy is "unseen", like, hey! MOST forms >> of energy? >> Twit >> > > John, remember the shopping cart example, where the cart seemed to stop > even though the cataloged forces all added to zero, and it turned out > that there was another force involved, a mysterious one called > "friction" so named because it seemed to cause this odd behavior? > > Remember neutrinos, John, which were predicted decades before they were > detected, because in beta decays, the laws of conservation of momentum > and energy seemed to be violated? And in 1940, what was known about > neutrinos? Nothing, except that they appeared to be massless and they > carried energy and momentum. Did that make the idea nonsense? Did the > very idea that this had to be hypothesized tell you that conservation of > energy and conservation of momentum were nonsense physics? Was it > ILLOGICAL to propose neutrinos long before they were seen? > > Yes or no answer, John, will suffice? > > Scientists have been making hypotheses of things not yet seen for centuries. - Joule explored the idea of "energy", an immaterial thing in an era where immaterial things were unheard of. What was it? Some kind of fluid? - Dalton showed with simple proportions that chemicals were likely made of atoms, but this was two hundred years before anyone had any convincing proof that atoms even existed. They weren't in fact shown to have reality until 1905 when they were shown to explain Brownian motion! - Darwin proposed the idea of something in gametes that passed on genetic information, though he had no idea what that something was. Was it a structure? Was it an organelle? Did it even exist, or was it a fabrication? It wasn't until Watson and Crick discovered DNA that the answer was in hand. Until then, it was a complete unknown. - Purely out of an attempt to merge quantum mechanics and special relativity, Dirac noticed that there should be a whole class of particles not yet seen, if this theory was true, and antimatter was proposed though no one had any idea what this meant or where it was or had any idea where it could be found. And then a positron was actually observed. - Neutrinos were predicted almost three decades before they were discovered, and the prediction came purely from an effort to salvage conservation of energy and conservation of momentum, which could not accurately account for experimental data in beta decay. - Long before there was any evidence of any structure inside protons, Gell-Mann just noticed a pattern in the catalog of particles and proposed that there might be things inside, which he called quarks, that would account for the patterns. Keep in mind, no evidence for quarks up to that point, none at all. But if this were right, then there would be an omega-minus particle not yet seen. Then it was seen. Now, John, you are saying that all this is nonsense science, that science has absolutely no business proposing completely new and yet-unseen things just to save physical theories or laws of physics. Let the laws die! you say. These predicted things are all epicycles, layered on to save the theories! you say. You call it ILLOGICAL to think this way. Junk science, with no solid thinking. No model, you say. And yet, today, you acknowledge the existence of all those things discovered by junk science -- energy, atoms, genes, antimatter, neutrinos, quarks. But do the same thing for something like dark matter, proposed to save the known laws of gravity, and here you bellow again: "Junk science! Epicycles! No logic! No model!" -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-18 07:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <12a9aea8-4329-4369-aca3-9be00bc7bbef@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #646433 |
Odd "Scientists have been making hypotheses of things not yet seen for centuries" So why do you jump so strongly against mine?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-18 08:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fc90d0a8-571d-4864-879a-fef5703c7c81@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #646435 |
Odd I used to play chess against a guy with 185 IQ. He was president of the chess club at university. He had an eidetic memory- he knew all the openings to the 40th move. We played for $10 a game. On my 3rd move, I would immediately sacrifice for position- there were a number of avenues to do this and mess up his position. Get him on the untraveled paths, and his knowledge is shit. After awhile he quit playing me any more. I was winning all the time, but he figured it was all crap. Is that how you feel, Odd?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-18 13:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <on7d8m$vrt$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #646437 |
On 8/18/17 10:15 AM, john wrote: > Odd > I used to play chess against a guy with 185 IQ. > He was president of the chess club at university. > He had an eidetic memory- he knew all the openings to the 40th move. > We played for $10 a game. > > On my 3rd move, I would immediately sacrifice for position- there were a number of avenues to do this and mess up his position. Get him on the untraveled paths, and his knowledge is shit. After awhile he quit playing me any more. I was winning all the time, but he figured it was all crap. > > Is that how you feel, Odd? > What? No. Don't flatter yourself. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-18 13:55 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <on7d7j$vrt$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #646435 |
On 8/18/17 9:25 AM, john wrote: > Odd > "Scientists have been making hypotheses of things not yet seen for centuries" > So why do you jump so strongly against mine? > GREAT QUESTION! So first let's agree that there is NOTHING WRONG with hypotheses involving yet-unseen things. This is a critical aspect of doing science. Physicists do it, you want to do it. So please, please, please do not criticize physicists for doing this critical activity that you are doing yourself. It only makes you look completely hypocritical. So it isn't JUST the activity of speculation that is important here. There are several other key things that go into making a hypothesis, which YOU HAVE NOT DONE. This is what marks the difference between what you do and what physicists do, and you dismiss these things as being unimportant, but they are critical also. 1. Any hypothesis raised has to be consistent with ALL existing corroborated data collected to date. This requires the theorist to be familiar with the data, by doing lots and lots of reading. This was done with they hypotheses of energy, atoms, antimatter, genes, quarks, dark matter. 2. Any hypothesis raised has to be accompanied by a mathematical expression of the same, so that QUANTITATIVE predictions can be made using the mathematics, so that they can be compared to experiment. This requires learning and practicing some mathematical skills. This was done with the hypotheses of energy, atoms, antimatter, genes, quarks, dark matter. 3. Any hypothesis must be TESTABLE with observations that distinguish it from competing theories within a reasonable amount of time, and any hypothesis that is untestable is considered unscientific. The proposals of these tests cam with the hypotheses of energy, atoms, antimatter, genes, quarks, and dark matter. 4. If there are any firm predictions of the hypothesis that are in conflict with existing data, no matter how many things the hypothesis gets right, then the hypothesis is WRONG and is tossed. I could list a litany of them here, including supersymmetry, SU(5) GUTs, phlogiston, and LeSage gravity. You'll note, John, that ALL of the complaints about your hypotheses are not about you making hypotheses. They're about you ignoring the four other criteria that I've listed above. You ignore them because you're not really interested in doing the WORK of science, you just like the speculation part. Well, John, speculation is not enough to be science. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-18 12:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <10d42193-8c5e-4602-a08f-1357e3f6c117@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #646435 |
On Friday, August 18, 2017 at 10:25:10 AM UTC-4, john wrote: > Odd > "Scientists have been making hypotheses of things not yet seen for centuries" > So why do you jump so strongly against mine? Then show the calculations that predict something that can be measured. Right now you have just wild conjecture at best. But what is the real problem is you post here saying that is the way it must be. IOW, you have no expectation that your ideas have any chance of being wrong. Presented with evidence that your ideas contradict known observations you simply rant and rage. If even once you said something like: I have this concept of matter, what do you think? Does it make sense? OR After being told some facts, you could say: I did not know that and it doesn't match my ideas. Maybe I should adjust my ideas. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-18 13:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <dab19c8b-1e77-4147-87c6-743129fba7a0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #646445 |
Well, I'm adjusting from opposite galactic arms being antimatter, to opposite arms being a different form of matter. The true antimatter is the next Fractal layer down (or up), which is totally opposite spin. Our layer is enforced to be Matter.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-18 21:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <on7l1u$1hnk$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #646448 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > Well, I'm adjusting from opposite galactic arms being antimatter, to > opposite arms being a different form of matter. > The true antimatter is the next Fractal layer down (or up), which is > totally opposite spin. Our layer is enforced to be Matter. > So in the spirit of what I told you about the criteria of science, where are your testable quantitative predictions, your comparison with all existing data, etc? -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-18 21:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <on7l44$1hr2$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #646450 |
Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> wrote: > john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: >> Well, I'm adjusting from opposite galactic arms being antimatter, to >> opposite arms being a different form of matter. >> The true antimatter is the next Fractal layer down (or up), which is >> totally opposite spin. Our layer is enforced to be Matter. >> > > So in the spirit of what I told you about the criteria of science, where > are your testable quantitative predictions, your comparison with all > existing data, etc? > Remember that idle speculation is just that and isn't science. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-18 07:19 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e3cdd9c3-82f2-4440-9635-618dba90b76f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #646431 |
Anyway, getting back to Matter/antimatter. When, within the atom of Matter, the right-spinning electron is rotated/revolved with precession like IT wants to go, it carries along its opposite number- what would have been the positron, had they split up- as a left-spinning down electron, precessing like a right-spinning (top) electron wants to. OPPOSITE to the way it would precess, had it been in the antimatter atom. So, the down electron, and opposite galactic arms, are only half-antimatter. The down electron is the positron, as I've said before, being forced to precess opposite to what it would in antimatter. The proton is derived from spinning aether which is 10^31 times as large as that from which the electron is built, AND spinning the opposite direction. True antimatter CANNOT exist at our size dimension- it is reserved for Matter.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-17 17:50 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <59960fad$0$20860$b1db1813$15bdbe48@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #646313 |
On 8/17/2017 1:05 PM, john wrote: > Odd > "model predictions produces sheep, and that the way to avoid being a" > "Checking" data against model predictions- if it doesn't fit, it's the data that's wrong, because of invisible heavy stuff. > So funny. > It is an absolute HOOT, John! Odd and all other true believers make one huge mistake (BB) and then when things start to not fit reality anymore THEY TRY TO CHANGE REALITY! Yeah it "invisible" "virtual" this an that that explains everything! Yet if you point out that waves need a medium, they deny that it exists because nobody knows now to measure it (other than the properties of empty space) but then turn around and proclaim that "dark matter" which is as unmeasurable as aether certainly MUST be true! Bwahahahaha! What rank amateurs. These theories are an embarrassment to real science.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-17 10:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <72160d2e-09f7-4df7-92cb-1e167cac4196@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #646305 |
On Thursday, August 17, 2017 at 12:36:15 PM UTC-4, john wrote: > ed > "Physics. Not much controversy or disagreement among physicists. " > Or sheep. Ah, back to the JM school of argument, just call the other people names. Sorry, John. That doesn't work with me. > What great comedy! Tell us more magical math There is a lot of magic related to math. But it would just bore you since you cannot accept any mathematical calculations. ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 12 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web