Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #394528
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity |
| Subject | Re: Particle physics |
| Date | 2016-10-01 15:52 -0500 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <nsp7ls$6cr$4@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | (20 earlier) <slrnnurq31.vca.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> <nslqqp$1dfl$1@gioia.aioe.org> <slrnnut4u5.od5.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> <nsm75b$4oe$1@gioia.aioe.org> <slrnnuvqbs.lc2.nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> |
On 10/1/2016 11:51 AM, Ned Latham wrote: > Odd Bodkin wrote in <nsm75b$4oe$1@gioia.aioe.org>: >> On 9/30/2016 11:33 AM, Ned Latham wrote: >>> Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> Ned Latham wrote: >>>>> Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> Ned Latham wrote: >>> >>> ----snip---- >>> >>>>>>> The 10/11-dimension universe (string theory). >>> >>> ----snip---- >>> >>>>>> It's not panning out so well. So? >>>>> >>>>> I suppose I can take it off the list. >>>>> >>>>> Let's replace it with one I forgot to include: >>>>> >>>>> Strong and Weak nuclear forces. >>>> >>>> And what do you propose instead? >>> >>> Once again you confirm either that one or the other of your >>> comprehension and your concentration is substandard, or that >>> your assertion of having read my theory is a lie. >> >> I have never said, AFAIK, that I have read your theory. > > AFAIK? You're hedging your bets on your own memory? > Se your message <lok1a1$57i$1@speranza.aioe.org>, > dated 2014/06/27. Ah, yes, this explains it. At that time you had a different web page up, which is no longer available. The context of that message is this: ======================================================= I went back and found this, which I presume that you are calling your "work". http://www.users.on.net/~nedlatham/Science/ModellingLight/index.html Could you please explain with calculations, using your model, any of the following phenomena? 1. The pattern of maxima and minima (and at what angles they should appear) for light of wavelength 490 nm entering a single slit of width 1200 nm. 2. The Balmer series of wavelengths from excited hydrogen. 3. The energy spectrum of electrons released by impact of light of wavelength 420 nm on an aluminum surface. 4. The opening angle of two photons from the decay of a 15 GeV neutral pion. All of these are calculable from the prevailing model of light and quantum mechanics. ================================================= I notice that you have done NONE of these calculations since revision of your work. Why not? > >> Are you sure you aren't confusing me with someone else? > > Let's hope for the world's sake that there's only one of you. > >>> My alternative is shown in one of the experiments proposed >>> in the third section, "Syggestions for Research". >>> >>> Perhaps you can bother yourself enough to make your assertion true? >>> >>> http://www.users.on.net/~nedlatham/Science/Physics/index.html >> >> Now that you HAVE provided your theory (it wasn't hard, three short >> one-pagers), allow me to make a few observations about it. Let me be >> clear that I see a LOT of problems with it, but I'm choosing to only >> comment on a few because that's sufficient to make the point. Any one of >> the problems that I have cited here would be sufficient for any >> physicist to dismiss the work. >> >> 1. Errors of historical record. Einstein made no "wave packet model" of >> matter as part of special relativity. > > I didn't say he did, fuckwit. Learn to read English. Here's from your website, entitled The Particle Theory of Matter: ======================================================== "Then in the twentieth centiry, Albert Einstein provided one: he put forward his theory of Special Relativity, with its postulated “wave packet” model." ====================================================== > >> He did mention a wave packet model >> of light in another paper completely unrelated to special relativity. >> This kind of error will be seen by physicists that you don't know what >> you're talking about. > > Prejudical bulldhit. Those paragraphs don't affect the theoru. They do if it's apparent you don't know what you're talking about. I'm just telling you how physicists are going to react to paragraphs like that. If you want physicists to discount them and move on, perhaps you should delete them from your "work", because they are riddled with errors. > >> 2. Missing quantitative predictions. In general, your papers don't >> do any calculations to show ANY quantitative agreement with >> measurements. > > There aren't any data from baliflu designed and interpreted experments. "baliflu...experments"? > >> I'll give you one example. You claim that there is a relationship >> between the mass of a photon and its frequency, which you call out >> in your Particle Theory of Light, Mass section. However, you do not >> give any example of this calculation actually being done to predict >> the mass of a green-light photon, for example. > > Wow. There's a sleazebag misrepresentation, if ever I saw one. > Read it again, you lying maggot: > > Mass > Taking Planck's Law and the second postulate of the Particle > Theory together yields nhf = ½(mv2 + I#2), from which the > photon's mass will be calculable if: > 1 The energy, speed and either frequency or > wavelength of photons from a source are measured, > allowing numerical substituion of n, f, v, and #; > 2 If need be, a constant k = E / nf > replaces Planck's constant to adjust for the > difference in speed from the value assumed in > Planck's Law; > 3 The correct assumptions are made > about the shape and density of the > photon, allowing the correct formula to > be substituted for I and the equation > rearranged to solve for m. > > There are no data for making such calcykations. Yet. You don't think the energy, speed, and frequency have been measured? And you're the only person I know of that is claiming that a photon has a value of I (or for that matter a shape and density). So if not you providing the formula for I and the shape and the density, then who? > > ----snip---- > > In fact, because you >> do not specify the relation between I and m for a photon, you do not even show >> it is possible to predict the mass of a green-light photon. It would >> have been extremely worth your while to do this calculation and come up >> with a number for the mass of a green-light photon because the upper >> limit of green-light photon mass has been measured, and so you showing >> compatibility of your theory with experimental results is a glaring hole. Note that you STILL don't have a single quantitative prediction from your theory. Not one. Is it any wonder that your "work" has been summarily ignored? >> >> 3. Bait-and-switch on experimental proposals. You claim that your >> experimental proposals will show that the current models are a >> failure (that is, they do not agree with experiment), but you do >> not do that. > > I claim A but I do not do that? > > You wanna restate that in English, Bubba? Here: You claim that you have presented experimental proposals that will show that the current models are a failure -- that is, they do not agree with experiment -- but you have in fact not done that. > >> For example, your proposed experiment with charged balloons and a piece >> of paper between them does not show that the predictions of weak and >> strong forces do not match experiment. > > I make no such asserion, you lying maggot. > >> What you showed is that >> attraction can happen between like-signed objects, which is KNOWN for >> any object with an induced polarization. > > Oh, goody. > >> (This induced polarization is >> in fact discussed in basic books.) But what you have NOT explained is >> not only that protons attract each other (and neutrons as well), but >> they do so with a force about a million times larger than the >> electrostatic repulsion -- that is measured, by the way. > > Bullshit. You didn't know about this factor of a million?? Where the fuck have you been? > > ----snip---- > >> 4. Lack of grasp of basic concepts. In your Particle Theory of Matter, >> you make a claim that there is a factor in the gravitational force that >> has a variable impact energy factor, which you say "varies with the >> velocity components of the potential energy between them". Potential >> energy, as that is understood by physicists, does not have velocity >> components of any kind. > > Oh, use your scone for fuck's sake. > See the term "impact energy"? E = ½(mv^2 + Iw^2) If it's E then why do you call it v in the gravity formula? Also note that ½(mv^2 + Iw^2) has absolutely nothing to do with potential energy, let alone "velocity components of the potential energy". It's GOBBLEDYGOOK. > > Quit the quibbling. > > ----snip---- > >> Thus this statement, which includes an important >> new factor, is gobbledygook to a physicist. > > To you, perhaps, but you're not a ohysicist. Cite one physicist who declares it's NOT gobbledygook. > >> Along with this you make a >> footnote observation about "Einstein's postulation of variable mass" >> which is another error of historical record as I have pointed out >> elsewhere in this thread. > > Without variable mass, the GR explanation of the precession of > Mercury's perihelion doesn't work. What on earth are you talking about? Where in the HELL do you think "variable mass" appears ANYWHERE in the expressions for the precession of the perihelion of Mercury? Go ahead and pull out the formulas from any source on GR you'd like, and then point to the place where you see mention of variable mass or the formula you wrote for variable mass. > Invariant mass means that the > centripetal force increases inversely with the square of the > distance between them and with no other factor. The > relativistic increase in Mercury's momrntum, however, means > that the centrifugal force increases more than that. Its > preihelion will regress, not precess. > >> As I said, this is just four, > > Failed attempts, Bubba. Try to lift your game. > I don't have to convince YOU that there's a problem with your work. I'm just offering explanations for why your work has been ignored to date. If you honestly don't believe any of these things are issues that you have to fix, that's up to you. I will bet that if you don't fix them, you will continue to get exactly the same notice from physicists that you've gotten to date. Your move, Bubba. I've got no skin in the game. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-10 15:26 -0700
Re: Particle physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-09-10 17:59 -0500
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-10 16:16 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-10 16:18 -0700
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-10 16:47 -0700
Re: Particle physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-11 00:15 +0000
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-10 17:30 -0700
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-10 19:03 -0700
Re: Particle physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-11 04:19 +0000
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-10 17:53 -0700
Re: Particle physics Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-11 05:35 +0200
Re: Particle physics Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-09-21 13:16 +1000
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-11 13:12 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-14 12:35 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-14 16:53 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-14 20:36 -0700
Re: Particle physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-15 15:24 +0000
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-15 14:43 -0700
Re: Particle physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-09-15 17:25 -0500
Re: Particle physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-16 03:14 +0000
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-15 15:50 -0700
Re: Particle physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-16 03:20 +0000
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-16 18:01 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-17 16:30 -0700
Re: Particle physics Michael Moroney <moroney@TheWorld.com> - 2016-09-18 03:12 +0000
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-18 13:10 -0700
Re: Particle physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-19 01:06 +0000
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-18 17:52 -0700
Re: Particle physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-19 14:26 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 11:29 -0500
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-18 18:41 -0700
Re: Particle physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-19 15:12 +0000
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-18 18:46 -0700
Re: Particle physics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-09-19 14:31 +0000
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-19 15:21 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-19 23:44 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-20 08:37 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-20 17:51 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-22 13:42 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-22 21:54 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 07:02 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-23 22:13 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-24 12:42 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-25 02:29 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 16:59 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-26 02:42 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 08:18 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-26 14:32 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 09:46 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-26 22:00 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 08:48 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-28 11:47 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 09:25 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-29 00:34 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 10:05 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 01:52 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 07:19 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 02:22 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 07:27 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 14:08 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 09:20 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 16:50 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 12:26 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-01 16:57 +0000
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 02:30 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 07:56 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 14:12 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 09:31 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 16:56 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 14:59 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-02 02:33 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 15:00 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-02 02:47 +0000
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 02:35 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 08:02 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 02:43 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 08:09 -0500
Re: Particle physics Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-10-01 16:52 +0200
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 02:53 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 08:12 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 14:20 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 09:33 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 17:05 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 15:00 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-02 02:40 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-01 20:50 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-02 05:28 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-02 04:39 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-02 12:07 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-02 05:52 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-02 14:05 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-02 07:33 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-02 21:42 +0000
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-02 22:01 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-02 15:07 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-03 01:35 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-02 19:49 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-03 03:58 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-03 04:43 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-03 13:46 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-03 07:56 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-03 20:35 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 17:06 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-03 22:48 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-03 15:08 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-03 22:49 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 09:30 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-03 22:11 +0000
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-03 22:18 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-06 09:56 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-07 03:05 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 07:45 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-07 13:50 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 09:35 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-07 20:47 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 16:22 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-08 14:35 +0000
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 03:07 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 08:14 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 03:18 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 08:17 -0500
Re: Particle physics Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-10-01 16:57 +0200
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 04:03 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 08:19 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 14:25 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 09:47 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 17:15 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 14:59 -0500
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 08:29 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 14:48 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 09:55 -0500
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 10:20 -0500
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 10:38 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 17:46 +0000
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 17:33 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 08:23 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-03 14:17 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 12:30 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-03 20:50 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 16:04 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-03 22:33 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-04 09:54 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-05 02:47 +0000
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-05 06:09 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 16:24 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-03 22:38 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-04 09:54 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-05 02:26 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-05 04:31 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-05 17:04 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-05 13:06 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-06 00:08 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-06 09:14 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-07 02:22 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-06 07:23 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-07 02:52 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-06 21:25 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-07 06:16 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-07 06:44 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-07 20:29 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-07 20:08 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-08 14:17 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-08 15:18 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-09 02:42 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-09 04:50 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-09 12:42 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-09 06:19 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-09 20:34 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-09 19:24 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-10 03:11 +0000
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-10 03:20 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-10 04:24 -0700
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-10 14:20 +0000
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-10 03:21 +0000
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-09 02:44 +0000
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-07 09:25 +0000
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-07 12:22 +0000
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-07 12:25 +0000
Re: Particle physics Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-10-01 17:01 +0200
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 04:21 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 08:54 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 16:33 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 12:25 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-01 16:51 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 15:52 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-02 02:09 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 09:21 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-03 22:04 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 17:16 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-03 23:19 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-04 09:54 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-05 02:33 +0000
Re: Particle physics Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-10-05 18:11 +0200
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-05 14:26 -0500
Re: Particle physics Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-10-01 10:16 +0200
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-01 17:36 +0000
Re: Particle physics Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-10-01 20:53 +0200
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-02 02:18 +0000
Re: Particle physics Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-10-05 18:00 +0200
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-10-05 17:29 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 17:01 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-26 02:39 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 08:18 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-26 14:22 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 09:44 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-26 21:42 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 06:12 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-28 10:59 +0000
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-28 04:46 -0700
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 09:09 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-28 20:05 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 16:35 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-29 12:13 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 10:22 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-30 01:40 +0000
Re: Particle physics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 07:16 -0500
Re: Particle physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-09-28 10:38 -0500
Re: Particle physics Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2016-09-28 20:21 +0000
Re: Particle physics Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-09-28 20:35 -0500
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-19 17:19 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-20 09:11 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-20 12:17 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-20 15:23 -0700
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-20 20:06 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-20 16:09 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-21 10:56 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-21 10:58 -0700
Re: Particle physics akashaheights@gmail.com - 2016-09-22 13:46 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-23 14:34 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-24 11:52 -0700
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-24 15:17 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-24 16:03 -0700
Re: Particle physics Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-24 18:12 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-26 11:18 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-26 15:34 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-27 12:57 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-28 10:04 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-28 10:29 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-29 13:04 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-30 13:08 -0700
Re: Particle physics Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 13:08 +0200
Re: Particle physics Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 13:23 +0200
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-01 12:10 -0700
Re: Particle physics Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 21:50 +0200
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-01 14:56 -0700
Re: Particle physics Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 08:23 +0200
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-02 11:18 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-02 15:09 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-03 15:53 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-04 14:31 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-07 11:01 -0700
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-08 15:14 -0700
Re: Particle physics Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-10-09 19:27 +0200
Re: Particle physics numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-09 11:39 -0700
csiph-web