Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #590930

Re: Gravity and light question

Show all headers | View raw

Odd Bodkin wrote:

> On 7/26/2016 2:36 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Given your history, you should not presume that you know what physicists
>> mean by anything, or everything, either.  Reading a lot of books is not
>> equivalent to understanding what they are about.
> 
> Maybe, but the more I read, the more I learn, and the more I discover
> that my understanding to that point is validated. That's what learning
> means.

You cannot be sure until a professional tells you so.  And the record shows 
that a professional has corrected you on what I would consider basics more 
than one time here.  So as for uppity, *you* have something that you can 
improve.

> As for you lecturing me about not knowing what physicists mean by
> anything,

It was merely a recommendation (“should”).

> I would caution any web designer and Star Trek fanboy

First of all, you have no clue what you are talking about there.

Second: There we have it again.  While I refer to your *postings* *here*, 
and measure you *only* *by* *them*, you keep referring to my occupation and 
hobbies (I already regret telling you about that).  What does have to do 
with anything?  You are not a physicist either, so you have no advantage 
there.

So will you please stop making your “web designer” (I am not one, I work as 
a *software* *developer* with expertise in Web _development_) “and Star Trek 
fanboy” (I am not one, I am a Star Trek follower) argument?  Not only is it 
fallacious, it is getting old.  TIA.

> […] As far as I'm concerned, your credentials and right to claim level of
> understanding are no better than mine.

Well, I did not claim anything.  However, there is more professional physics 
in my life than you know.  I would gladly tell you the details, but 
unfortunately you have shown that you cannot be trusted.

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

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

csiph-web