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


Groups > sci.physics > #562794

Re: Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought

From Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info>
Newsgroups sci.physics
Subject Re: Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought
Date 2016-03-16 10:02 +0000
Organization NewsGuy - Unlimited Usenet $23.95
Message-ID <ncbavi0khm@news7.newsguy.com> (permalink)
References <8JGdncG8ddRoLnXLnZ2dnUU7-V2dnZ2d@giganews.com> <ncadpd$vm$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw


On Tue, 15 Mar 2016 18:46:55 -0700, hanson wrote:

>
>  which IOW makes Einstein;'s Relativity out to be totally
> USELESS for any practical purpose in the real world
>

Radar guns -- relativistic doppler effect

cathode ray tubes -- relativistic electron velocity

Global positioning -- both SR and GR *must* be a foundation to
the technology

General magnetism -- relativity in the flesh

mass-energy equivalence (E=mc^2) -- nuclear energy power plants

These common, everyday applications of relativity completely
overturn your outlandish assertion.

>
> and it
> descends into the  reams of philosophy where religious undertones
> arise
>

Where the fuck does this gibberish arise?

Your entire post, in spite of its colloquial tone, is entirely
philosophical in nature.  For those without a leg to stand on,
philosophy is the only crutch.

Incidentally, the correct term is "realm" and not "ream."

The word "ream" refers to the act of inserting objects into
the ass.  I suppose the unconscious typo reveals your true
orientation.

LOL!  What a faggot loser!

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


Thread

Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-03-15 20:16 -0500
  Re: Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-03-15 18:46 -0700
    Re: Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-03-16 10:02 +0000
      Re: Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-03-16 10:24 -0700
  Re: Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought Jamie M <jmorken@shaw.ca> - 2016-03-15 19:50 -0700
    Re: Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-03-16 14:11 -0700
  Re: Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought David Bernier <david250@videotron.ca> - 2016-03-16 19:02 -0400
    Re: Mathematician pair find prime numbers aren't as random as thought The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-03-16 23:38 -0800

csiph-web