|
|
 Up |
  |
Author: Ian ParkerIan Parker Date: Aug 2, 2008 22:56
On 2 Aug, 16:40, Traveler nowhere.net> wrote:> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 08:30:47 -0700 (PDT), Ian Parker
>
>
>
>
>
> gmail.com> wrote:>>On 2 Aug, 15:56, Traveler nowhere.net> wrote:>>> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 03:50:48 -0700 (PDT), Eric Gisse
>
>>>>On Aug 1, 4:39 pm, Traveler nowhere.net> wrote:>
>>>>> The conclusion is obvious to anybody who does not kiss ass for a
>>>>> living. Gravity does not propagate at the speed of light as Einstein
>>>>> and his followers predict. Gravity is a universal,
>>>>> quasi-instantaneous, non-local, energy conservation phenomenon. No
>>>>> gravitational waves simply means that the general theory of relativity ...
|
| Show full article (2.97Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: TravelerTraveler Date: Aug 2, 2008 23:09
On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 12:48:24 -0700 (PDT), Eric Gisse
gmail.com> wrote:
>On Aug 2, 10:26 am, Traveler nowhere.net> wrote:
>[snip]
>>> Actually, you con artists are probably happy when you can't find your
>> gravity waves. It just means you need to steal more fucking money from
>> the taxpayer's pocket. ahahaha...
>
>Since you are so sure scientists are stealing your money, it should be
>easy to show how the money is being stolen. The budgets and grants are
>open. LIGO operates under a NSF grant - have you requested any
>information on it, or do you just sit here and complain?
ahahaha... The NSF is run by the thieves themselves. Some idiot at NSF
once got offended because I dared to insinuate that qunatum computing
is a hoax and a scam. I challenged the asshole to sue me. He chickened
out.
|
| Show full article (7.77Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: TravelerTraveler Date: Aug 2, 2008 23:11
On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 13:48:56 -0700 (PDT), PD
gmail.com> wrote:
>On Aug 2, 3:40 pm, Traveler nowhere.net> wrote:>> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 22:21:45 +0200, "Dirk Van de moortel"
>>
>>
>>
>> ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com> wrote:>>>PD
|
| Show full article (2.30Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: PDPD Date: Aug 2, 2008 23:23
On Aug 2, 4:11 pm, Traveler nowhere.net> wrote:> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 13:48:56 -0700 (PDT), PD
>
>
>
> gmail.com> wrote:>>On Aug 2, 3:40 pm, Traveler nowhere.net> wrote:>>> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 22:21:45 +0200, "Dirk Van de moortel"
>
>>> ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com> wrote:>>>>> On Aug 2, 10:46 am, Traveler nowhere.net> wrote:>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 08:25:44 -0700 (PDT), Eric Gisse
>
>
>>>>>> [crap deleted]
>
>>>>>>> Shut the fuck up if you troll for a living? ...
|
| Show full article (2.43Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Sue...Sue... Date: Aug 2, 2008 23:24
Ian Parker wrote:
> On 2 Aug, 16:40, Traveler nowhere.net> wrote:>> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 08:30:47 -0700 (PDT), Ian Parker
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> gmail.com> wrote:>>>On 2 Aug, 15:56, Traveler nowhere.net> wrote:>>>> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 03:50:48 -0700 (PDT), Eric Gisse
>>
>>>>>On Aug 1, 4:39�pm, Traveler nowhere.net> wrote:>>
>>>>>> The conclusion is obvious to anybody who does not kiss ass for a
>>>>>> living. Gravity does not propagate at the speed of light as Einstein
>>>>>> and his followers predict. Gravity is a universal,
>>>>>> quasi-instantaneous, non-local, energy conservation phenomenon. No ...
|
| Show full article (3.88Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Dirk Van de moortelDirk Van de moortel Date: Aug 2, 2008 23:29
>> Either way, you managed to do the impossible, which is to
>> Have Some Kind of Measurable Influence on Louis Savain's
>> Behaviour, i.o.w. HORROR!
>>
>> Well done :-)
>>
>> Dirk Vdm
>
> Not without precedent. I choose to believe that this newsgroup pushed
> Androcles' mind right off the cliff.
... which is exactly where it belongs :-)
Dirk Vdm
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: TravelerTraveler Date: Aug 3, 2008 00:01
On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 14:23:36 -0700 (PDT), PD
gmail.com> wrote:
>On Aug 2, 4:11 pm, Traveler nowhere.net> wrote:>> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 13:48:56 -0700 (PDT), PD
>>
>>
>>
>> gmail.com> wrote:>>>On Aug 2, 3:40 pm, Traveler
|
| Show full article (2.92Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Eric GisseEric Gisse Date: Aug 3, 2008 00:08
On Aug 2, 1:09 pm, Traveler nowhere.net> wrote:> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 12:48:24 -0700 (PDT), Eric Gisse
>
> gmail.com> wrote:>>On Aug 2, 10:26 am, Traveler nowhere.net> wrote:
>>[snip]>
>>> Actually, you con artists are probably happy when you can't find your
>>> gravity waves. It just means you need to steal more fucking money from
>>> the taxpayer's pocket. ahahaha...
>
>>Since you are so sure scientists are stealing your money, it should be
>>easy to show how the money is being stolen. The budgets and grants are
>>open. LIGO operates under a NSF grant - have you requested any
>>information on it, or do you just sit here and complain?
>
> ahahaha... The NSF is run by the thieves themselves. Some idiot at NSF
> once got offended because I dared to insinuate that qunatum computing
> is a hoax and a scam. I challenged the asshole to sue me. He chickened
> out. ...
|
| Show full article (12.03Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: TravelerTraveler Date: Aug 3, 2008 00:10
On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 13:56:22 -0700 (PDT), Ian Parker
gmail.com> wrote:
>On 2 Aug, 16:40, Traveler nowhere.net> wrote:>> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 08:30:47 -0700 (PDT), Ian Parker
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> gmail.com> wrote:>>>On 2 Aug, 15:56, Traveler
|
| Show full article (3.52Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Matthew JohnsonMatthew Johnson Date: Aug 3, 2008 00:20
In article <6lm99454c51en3fo79celcj3fcpfab38uc@ 4ax.com>, Traveler says...
[snip]
>How does this prove that a change in the electrostatic field gradient
>travels at c?
Perhaps you would have your answer already, if you were not confusing oranges
and apples. Or, to put it more precisely, thinking about a problem in one gauge,
when by the nature of the problem, it clearly requires another.
After all: once you say "electroSTATIC gradient", the 'static' part implies that
no, it does NOT travel anywhere.
Now if you wish to study a purely electrostatic problem, then the Coulumb gauge
is just fine. But once you wish to introduce changes, look out: you now need to
consider another gauge, i.e., Lorentz or even Weyl.
> I am claiming that it does not and it is instantaneous.
But this is where you cannot possibly be right.
>I further claim that it has never been shown to travel at c, your
>feeble protestations notwithstanding. If you know of an experiment
>that has ever shown that the eletrostatic field travels at c, let us
>have it.
|
| Show full article (1.29Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
