Einstins
  Home FAQ Contact Sign in
 
Advanced search
MATCHING GROUPS



more...
POPULAR GROUPS

more...

found 693 articles for 0.308 sec
On Sep 1, 11:41 am, Sanny <softta...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Ptolemaic system considered earth to be in Center of Universe and > created paths for other planets as complex as possible. Comments sprinkled through. > > Ptolemaic made the assumptions based on Observations. The Observations > were correct but conclusion was wrong. > > And today we know Earth & Planets revolve round the Sun.     

Group: sci.physics.relativity · Group Profile · Search for Einstins in sci.physics.relativity
Author: PD
Date: Sep 2, 2008 06:02

On Sep 1, 11:41 am, Sanny <softta...@hotmail.com> wrote: Ptolemaic system considered earth to be in Center of Universe and created paths for other planets as complex as possible. Comments sprinkled through. Ptolemaic made the assumptions based on Observations. The Observations were correct but conclusion was wrong. And today we know Earth & Planets revolve round the Sun.
Show full article (3.32Kb) · Show article thread
On Sep 1, 9:41 am, Sanny <softta...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Ptolemaic system considered earth to be in Center of Universe and > created paths for other planets as complex as possible. > > Ptolemaic made the assumptions based on Observations. The Observations > were correct but conclusion was wrong. > > And today we know Earth & Planets revolve round the Sun. > > Einstine similarly has made a     

Group: sci.physics · Group Profile · Search for Einstins in sci.physics
Author: PD
Date: Sep 2, 2008 06:02

On Sep 1, 9:41 am, Sanny <softta...@hotmail.com> wrote: Ptolemaic system considered earth to be in Center of Universe and created paths for other planets as complex as possible. Ptolemaic made the assumptions based on Observations. The Observations were correct but conclusion was wrong. And today we know Earth & Planets revolve round the Sun. Einstine similarly has made a
Show full article (3.32Kb) · Show article thread
Timberwoof wrote: > In article <oP2dnSmkl8Mj0yHVnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@comcast.com>, > "Spaceman" <spaceman@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > >> Timberwoof wrote: >>> In article <wtydnbtFn5SbsiHVnZ2dnUVZ_r7inZ2d@comcast.com>, >>> "Spaceman" <spaceman@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: >>> >>>> Timberwoof wrote: >>>>> In article <r7GdneiQ4qkigCHVnZ2dnUVZ_gqdnZ2d@comcast.com>, >>>>> "Spaceman"     

Group: sci.physics.relativity · Group Profile · Search for Einstins in sci.physics.relativity
Author: Immortalist
Date: Sep 1, 2008 23:47

Timberwoof wrote: In article <oP2dnSmkl8Mj0yHVnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@comcast.com>, "Spaceman" <spaceman@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: Timberwoof wrote: In article <wtydnbtFn5SbsiHVnZ2dnUVZ_r7inZ2d@comcast.com>, "Spaceman" <spaceman@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: Timberwoof wrote: In article <r7GdneiQ4qkigCHVnZ2dnUVZ_gqdnZ2d@comcast.com>, "Spaceman"
Show full article (4.43Kb) · Show article thread
In article <oP2dnSmkl8Mj0yHVnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@comcast.com>, "Spaceman" <spaceman@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > Timberwoof wrote: > > In article <wtydnbtFn5SbsiHVnZ2dnUVZ_r7inZ2d@comcast.com>, > > "Spaceman" <spaceman@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > > >> Timberwoof wrote: > >>> In article <r7GdneiQ4qkigCHVnZ2dnUVZ_gqdnZ2d@comcast.com>, > >>> "Spaceman" <spaceman@yourclockmalfunctioned     

Group: sci.physics · Group Profile · Search for Einstins in sci.physics
Author: Immortalist
Date: Sep 1, 2008 23:47

In article <oP2dnSmkl8Mj0yHVnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@comcast.com>, "Spaceman" <spaceman@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: Timberwoof wrote: In article <wtydnbtFn5SbsiHVnZ2dnUVZ_r7inZ2d@comcast.com>, "Spaceman" <spaceman@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: Timberwoof wrote: In article <r7GdneiQ4qkigCHVnZ2dnUVZ_gqdnZ2d@comcast.com>, "Spaceman" <spaceman@yourclockmalfunctioned
Show full article (4.43Kb) · Show article thread
And where in you calculation do you see evidence that y=x "If n==m then y equals x" = wrong n= x+y, and m=y+x, how can you then conclude that just because n=m, y equals x thats bad math!! you already know that x=3 and y is5, so you only prove that n and m = equal -snip > I will proove 3 is equal to 5 by wrong Observations. > --------------------------------------- > > Say     

Group: sci.physics.relativity · Group Profile · Search for Einstins in sci.physics.relativity
Author: Spaceman
Date: Sep 1, 2008 15:34

And where in you calculation do you see evidence that y=x "If n==m then y equals x" = wrong n= x+y, and m=y+x, how can you then conclude that just because n=m, y equals x thats bad math!! you already know that x=3 and y is5, so you only prove that n and m = equal -snip I will proove 3 is equal to 5 by wrong Observations. --------------------------------------- Say
Show full article (4.54Kb) · Show article thread
    

Group: sci.physics · Group Profile · Search for Einstins in sci.physics
Author: Spaceman
Date: Sep 1, 2008 15:34

Show full article (4.54Kb) · Show article thread
    

Group: sci.physics.relativity · Group Profile · Search for Einstins in sci.physics.relativity
Author: Timberwoof
Date: Sep 1, 2008 15:20

Show full article (6.12Kb) · Show article thread
    

Group: sci.physics · Group Profile · Search for Einstins in sci.physics
Author: Timberwoof
Date: Sep 1, 2008 15:20

Show full article (6.12Kb) · Show article thread
    

Group: sci.physics.relativity · Group Profile · Search for Einstins in sci.physics.relativity
Author: Starman
Date: Sep 1, 2008 13:53

Show full article (0.89Kb) · Show article thread
    

Group: sci.physics · Group Profile · Search for Einstins in sci.physics
Author: Starman
Date: Sep 1, 2008 13:53

Show full article (0.89Kb) · Show article thread
1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · next