Resultage
  Home FAQ Contact Sign in
 
Advanced search
MATCHING GROUPS



more...
POPULAR GROUPS

more...

found 10 articles for 0.303 sec
no-one seriously questioned Copernicus, who did not try to get his friend, Pope Urban, to put his stuff into the writ. Galileo would not even reply to a respectful query from Kepler -- talk about your sleepwalkers! Newton merely algebraized Kepler's three orbital constraints, and stole the solution from Hooke, to boot -- on the shoulders of a giant, who was physically a dwarf; hence, the joke     

Group: soc.history.whatif · Group Profile · Search for Resultage in soc.history.whatif
Author: spudnik
Date: Sep 6, 2008 20:48

no-one seriously questioned Copernicus, who did not try to get his friend, Pope Urban, to put his stuff into the writ. Galileo would not even reply to a respectful query from Kepler -- talk about your sleepwalkers! Newton merely algebraized Kepler's three orbital constraints, and stole the solution from Hooke, to boot -- on the shoulders of a giant, who was physically a dwarf; hence, the joke
Show full article (5.17Kb) · Show article thread
oh, the lines; as soon as I can make heads or tails (or even edges) out of your syntax! maybe, you should go back to "line-numbers," just for our benefit, the enormous Pea-net Gallery (query: is that a reference to G.W.Carver?) > > Can't you read between the lines? thus: oh, Sagan did some numbertheory?... well, that'll humanize him a bit; the real Doctor Stranglelove had his own program     

Group: sci.physics · Group Profile · Search for Resultage in sci.physics
Author: spudnik
Date: Sep 6, 2008 20:48

yes, I'd killfile him if I were better equipt; this is a brief detour from avoiding "HSJ: peristalsis occurreth" threads of my own volition, and thank YOU, HSJ, for the label. so, you really didn't bother with the resultage, either, but "student-level" seems to be an over-estimate; if a student actually was interested in numbertheory, all of this would ne'er have existed. oh, but, he's no
Show full article (5.17Kb) · Show article thread
still haven't found that quotage. anyway, I should extirpate monsieur Klein's name from Kaluza's, since he is the progenitor of the original "compactified dimensional" scheme.... well, he also gave us hte first funnystring! so, like, was there ever any mention of which dimension was compactified, or is it just/otherwise the same as the other three ... <a-hem> time is NOT a dimension, or     

Group: alt.math.undergrad · Group Profile · Search for Resultage in alt.math.undergrad
Author: spudnik
Date: Sep 6, 2008 20:08

still haven't found that quotage. anyway, I should extirpate monsieur Klein's name from Kaluza's, since he is the progenitor of the original "compactified dimensional" scheme.... well, he also gave us hte first funnystring! so, like, was there ever any mention of which dimension was compactified, or is it just/otherwise the same as the other three ... <a-hem> time is NOT a dimension, or
Show full article (3.80Kb) · Show article thread
Space998@hotmail.com wrote: > I wouldn't shill for any of the popularizers -- > except for the one whose book just came out, but > I haven't finished reading it at the bookstore > -- but the "landscape" is hardly a problem, > except of popsci variety. Smolin's argument seems > to be quite phoney -- though he has lots > of excellent results in math -- when > he sets "fruitloops" against "funnystrings"     

Group: alt.math.undergrad · Group Profile · Search for Resultage in alt.math.undergrad
Author: spudnik
Date: Sep 6, 2008 19:56

Space998@hotmail.com wrote: I wouldn't shill for any of the popularizers -- except for the one whose book just came out, but I haven't finished reading it at the bookstore -- but the "landscape" is hardly a problem, except of popsci variety. Smolin's argument seems to be quite phoney -- though he has lots of excellent results in math -- when he sets "fruitloops" against "funnystrings"
Show full article (3.31Kb) · Show article thread
I wouldn't shill for any of the popularizers -- except for the one whose book just came out, but I haven't finished reading it at the bookstore -- but the "landscape" is hardly a problem, except of popsci variety. Smolin's argument seems to be quite phoney -- though he has lots of excellent results in math -- when he sets "fruitloops" against "funnystrings" e.g. I will try to find the argument     

Group: sci.physics.relativity · Group Profile · Search for Resultage in sci.physics.relativity
Author: spudnik
Date: Jun 14, 2008 12:11

I wouldn't shill for any of the popularizers -- except for the one whose book just came out, but I haven't finished reading it at the bookstore -- but the "landscape" is hardly a problem, except of popsci variety. Smolin's argument seems to be quite phoney -- though he has lots of excellent results in math -- when he sets "fruitloops" against "funnystrings" e.g. I will try to find the argument
Show full article (1.12Kb) · Show article thread
    

Group: sci.physics · Group Profile · Search for Resultage in sci.physics
Author: spudnik
Date: Jun 14, 2008 12:11

Show full article (1.12Kb) · Show article thread
    

Group: sci.physics.relativity · Group Profile · Search for Resultage in sci.physics.relativity
Author: David Bernier
Date: Jun 10, 2008 20:48

Show full article (1.17Kb) · Show article thread
    

Group: sci.physics · Group Profile · Search for Resultage in sci.physics
Author: David Bernier
Date: Jun 10, 2008 20:48

Show full article (1.17Kb) · Show article thread
    

Group: sci.physics.relativity · Group Profile · Search for Resultage in sci.physics.relativity
Author: Space998
Date: Jun 10, 2008 18:06

Show full article (0.82Kb) · Show article thread
    

Group: sci.physics · Group Profile · Search for Resultage in sci.physics
Author: Space998
Date: Jun 10, 2008 18:06

Show full article (0.82Kb) · Show article thread