Cancel Ares - No one seems to understand stability theory

On 30 Jul, 23:57, "Androcles" wrote:
"hanson" wrote in message

news:IU5kk.439$Ht4.131@trnddc01...
|| "Androcles" wrote in message

...
|
| "hanson" wrote in message
| news:bs4kk.420$aA5.47@trnddc05...
| ====== ahahahAHAHAHahahaha =====
|
| "Ian Parker" wrote ...| "Androcles" wrote:
| hanson" wrote in message

|http://groups.google.com/group/sci.a...5199ec2a?hl=en
| "Ian Parker" wrote:| "hanson" wrote:

| "Ian Parker" cranked himself ...
| | "hanson" wrote:

| Ian Parker's orbit must have caused a small disturbance
| in his own mind that forced it to die down.... which is clearly
| evident in your posts wherein you assert SR/GR to affect
| complex and living systems, even the CIA... ahahaha..
| But your splendid cyber machinations which I hope do impress
| YOU are strong enough to invoke chuckles... ahahahaha...
| Thanks for the laughs, Ian. I enjoy your lunacies... Don't let me
| cramp your style... ahahaha... ahahahaha... ahahahahanson
| |
| "Ian Parker" wrote
| Be fippant if you like.... [snip crap]
| || "hanson" wrote:

| I certainly shall!... since it's because of your flipping from
| Conservative Matrices into Chaos and you forgetting the
| all important Dedekind Cut after the Cerenkov Braking
| so necessary for an Emergent Complexity Formation.
| Go look at a fish-ball or at a flock of birds... There are no
| such things as quadratures in the real world when looked
| at close up.. or even from the distance conditions where
| dimensions curl up and do vanish... ahaha... ahahahanson
| |
| "Ian Parker" wrote
| You are only showing your total ignorance. This is the BOG
| STANDARD treatment of chaos. When it happens and when
| it does not. This is BOG STANDARD stability theory. Please
| do your homework just a little bit better.This abundantly confirms
| my contention that the Einstein Hoaxers are NOT interested
| in Physics or Maths.
| | hanson wrote:

| ... IOW, Ian, you are a self-admitted, self-confessed and
| self-indicted & self-convicted Einstein Dingleberry now !
| Swallow that bitter pill that BOGgles your chaotic mind
| while you dangle from Einstein's Sphincter... hahahaha...
| -- Keep an stiff upper lip when you call the CIA for help --
| Thanks for the laughs. AHAHA.. ahaha... ahahahanson
| || "Androcles" wrote:

| If Ian's interested in physics and math ask him
| THE QUESTION and find out what his total ignorance is.
|
| THE QUESTION:
| Why did Einstein say
| speed of light from A to B is c-v,
| the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
| the "time" each way is the same?
|http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...ures/img21.gif
|
| =1= According to cretin :
| * * * *"Easy: he (Einstein) did NOT say that." -
| =2= According to moron van lintel, Einstein did not write the equation
| * * * * he (Einstein) wrote.
| =3= According to xxein:
| * * * *It is an artefactual/superficially imposed yin-yang of sorts.
| =4= According to Lamenting Shubert: Why do you want to know?
| =5= According to cretin Jimmy Black ":
| * * * *In neither system (meaning frame of reference in modern-day
| * * * *terminology) is the speed of light c-v or c+v. In both systems
| * * * *the speed of light is c."
| =6= According to the imbecile Jimmy Black, Einstein did not write
| * * * *the equation he (Einstein) wrote.
| =7= According to Dork Brue "I don't give a damn what Einstein wrote."
| =8= According to rect_Al Schwartz:"SR is GR with G=0." - Uncle Stooopid.
| =9= According to Heretic Jan Bielawski, assistant light-bulb changer.

======== ahahahaha... AHAHAHA... ========


"Ian Parker" wrote
"Androcles" wrote:
"hanson" wrote
|| "Androcles" wrote ...
| "hanson" wrote
| "Ian Parker" wrote ...
| "Androcles" wrote:
| hanson" wrote
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.astro/msg/6f7e8dfe5199ec2a?hl=en
| "Ian Parker" wrote:
| "hanson" wrote:
| "Ian Parker" cranked himself ...
|
| "hanson" wrote:
| Ian Parker's orbit must have caused a small disturbance
| in his own mind that forced it to die down.... which is clearly
| evident in your posts wherein you assert SR/GR to affect
| complex and living systems, even the CIA... ahahaha..
| But your splendid cyber machinations which I hope do impress
| YOU are strong enough to invoke chuckles... ahahahaha...
| Thanks for the laughs, Ian. I enjoy your lunacies... Don't let me
| cramp your style... ahahaha... ahahahaha... ahahahahanson
| |
| "Ian Parker" wrote
| Be fippant if you like.... [snip crap]
|
| "hanson" wrote:
| I certainly shall!... since it's because of your flipping from
| Conservative Matrices into Chaos and you forgetting the
| all important Dedekind Cut after the Cerenkov Braking
| so necessary for an Emergent Complexity Formation.
| Go look at a fish-ball or at a flock of birds... There are no
| such things as quadratures in the real world when looked
| at close up.. or even from the distance conditions where
| dimensions curl up and do vanish... ahaha... ahahahanson
| |
| "Ian Parker" wrote
| You are only showing your total ignorance. This is the BOG
| STANDARD treatment of chaos. When it happens and when
| it does not. This is BOG STANDARD stability theory. Please
| do your homework just a little bit better.This abundantly confirms
| my contention that the Einstein Hoaxers are NOT interested
| in Physics or Maths.

| hanson wrote:
| ... IOW, Ian, you are a self-admitted, self-confessed and
| self-indicted & self-convicted Einstein Dingleberry now !
| Swallow that bitter pill that BOGgles your chaotic mind
| while you dangle from Einstein's Sphincter... hahahaha...
| -- Keep an stiff upper lip when you call the CIA for help --
| Thanks for the laughs. AHAHA.. ahaha... ahahahanson
| || "Androcles" wrote:

Androcles wrote:
| If Ian's interested in physics and math ask him
| THE QUESTION and find out what his total ignorance is.
|
| THE QUESTION:
| Why did Einstein say
| speed of light from A to B is c-v,
| the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
| the "time" each way is the same?
|http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...ures/img21.gif
|
| =1= According to cretin :
| "Easy: he (Einstein) did NOT say that." -
| =2= According to moron van lintel, Einstein did not write the equation
| he (Einstein) wrote.
| =3= According to xxein:
| It is an artefactual/superficially imposed yin-yang of sorts.
| =4= According to Lamenting Shubert: Why do you want to know?
| =5= According to cretin Jimmy Black ":
| In neither system (meaning frame of reference in modern-day
| terminology) is the speed of light c-v or c+v. In both systems
| the speed of light is c."
| =6= According to the imbecile Jimmy Black, Einstein did not write
| the equation he (Einstein) wrote.
| =7= According to Dork Brue "I don't give a damn what Einstein wrote."
| =8= According to rect_Al Schwartz:"SR is GR with G=0." - Uncle Stooopid.
| =9= According to Heretic Jan Bielawski, assistant light-bulb changer.
| 'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
| light to travel from A to B doesn't equal the "time" it requires
| to travel from B to A in the stationary system, obviously.' --
| egroups.com
| (How many Polacks does it take to change a light bulb?)
| =10= According to Rabbi Albert Einstein
| 'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
| light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires
| to travel from B to A' because I SAY SO and you have to
| agree because I'm the great genius, STOOOPID, don't you
| dare question it. -- Rabbi Albert Einstein
|
| "Ian Parker" wrote:
| We are not talking about the speed of light here we are talking
| classical stability theory.
|
| hanson wrote:
| ...ahahahaha.. Ian, you made a very very bad turn here while
| you are dangling from Albert's Sphincter. Androcles will put
| you now onto the list as the new #1 worshipper of Einstein's crap.
| But thanks for the laughs... ahahahaha.. AHAHAHA... ahahanson
| | Androcles wrote:

Androcles wrote:
| Does he wish to be known as Idiot Ian Parker or Imbecile Ian Parker?
| I'm running out of suitable titles for cretins in general and it can't
be "Dork", that's reserved for Dirks.
|
| hanson wrote:
| AHAHAHAHA... Soon you will have to invent a relativistically
| suitable title search prg. for that awesome task. I wish you luck,
| Andro... and thanks for the laughs, in particular because the
| Einstein Dingleberries do lack the ability to detect when they
| are being wound up, with suitable Newtonian resonance, to keep
| their relativistic dangling from Albert's sphincter in full swing...
| ahahahaha... ahahahaha... ahahahanson
|
Androcles wrote:
Yes indeed...http://www.urbandictionary.comcites
idiot moron fool stupid imbecile retard tool dumbass dork dolt dumb jerk
blockhead dimwit **** ****wit donkey boob asshole loser dunce ass
simpleton
jackass ignoramus nincompoop halfwit nitwit douchebag dummy douche
dunderhead ****** dope ninny dip**** fathead bonehead bafoon lunkhead oaf
half-wit numskull buffoon nerd birdbrain ****head liberal lame turkey
Note there is a progression among the witless wits:
****wit - nitwit - dimwit - halfwit
which is not apparent in the heads...
blockhead - dunderhead - fathead - bonehead
****head - lunkhead
loons, loonies, lunatics appear to be missing, one need to wait
for a full moon for those to appear; the physics related
newsgroups are a magnet for them all.
If they don't have a theory of their own they can always fall
back on Einstein's.

"Ian Parker" wrote
I have never seen such lack of understanding. You know what -
Ares is failing PRECISELY because of this lack of understanding.
Barack Obama is 100% right. Ares must go. The problem with
it is instability which no one seems to understand. It was
understood when Apollo landed on the Moon but is not understood
today.
Use the Proton - At least the Russians seem do STILL have an
understanding. -- Potter is saying GTR is useless. Well there
seems to be a palpable failure to undertand basic engineering
as well. If you cannot make Ares work, Ares must go. It probably
will anyway. - Ian Parker

hanson wrote:
ahaha... Ian, at which stage of imbibement did you write your
tripe above?.. Was it during your brief (1) "hour of power"
or when you thought that you were (2) "One with the Inverse"
or at the on-ramp to the realm where you are thinking so fast
that the (3) "answers come to you before the questions arise"
or (4) did everything (1,2,3) happen at once and brought you
down because (5) the CIA was watching you when you
confused "Ares" with "Acres" ... .......... Ian, heed this:
We do successfully treat cases and maladies like yours in
our state of the art facilities at Ravencrag:
http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix/cobrajal.htm#Hanson
http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix/co....htm#Ravencrag
We restore the STABILITY in your unstable mind again.
hanson

"hanson" wrote in message
news:ZEmkk.648$rb5.404@trnddc04...
| ======== ahahahaha... AHAHAHA... ========
|
|
| "Ian Parker" wrote
| "Androcles" wrote:
| "hanson" wrote
| || "Androcles" wrote ...
| | "hanson" wrote
| | "Ian Parker" wrote ...
|| "Androcles" wrote:
| | hanson" wrote
| http://groups.google.com/group/sci.astro/msg/6f7e8dfe5199ec2a?hl=en
| | "Ian Parker" wrote:
|| "hanson" wrote:
| | "Ian Parker" cranked himself ...
| |
| | "hanson" wrote:
| | Ian Parker's orbit must have caused a small disturbance
| | in his own mind that forced it to die down.... which is clearly
| | evident in your posts wherein you assert SR/GR to affect
| | complex and living systems, even the CIA... ahahaha..
| | But your splendid cyber machinations which I hope do impress
| | YOU are strong enough to invoke chuckles... ahahahaha...
| | Thanks for the laughs, Ian. I enjoy your lunacies... Don't let me
| | cramp your style... ahahaha... ahahahaha... ahahahahanson
| | |
| | "Ian Parker" wrote
| | Be fippant if you like.... [snip crap]
| |
| | "hanson" wrote:
| | I certainly shall!... since it's because of your flipping from
| | Conservative Matrices into Chaos and you forgetting the
| | all important Dedekind Cut after the Cerenkov Braking
| | so necessary for an Emergent Complexity Formation.
| | Go look at a fish-ball or at a flock of birds... There are no
| | such things as quadratures in the real world when looked
| | at close up.. or even from the distance conditions where
| | dimensions curl up and do vanish... ahaha... ahahahanson
| | |
| | "Ian Parker" wrote
| | You are only showing your total ignorance. This is the BOG
| | STANDARD treatment of chaos. When it happens and when
| | it does not. This is BOG STANDARD stability theory. Please
| | do your homework just a little bit better.This abundantly confirms
| | my contention that the Einstein Hoaxers are NOT interested
| | in Physics or Maths.
|
| | hanson wrote:
| | ... IOW, Ian, you are a self-admitted, self-confessed and
| | self-indicted & self-convicted Einstein Dingleberry now !
| | Swallow that bitter pill that BOGgles your chaotic mind
| | while you dangle from Einstein's Sphincter... hahahaha...
| | -- Keep an stiff upper lip when you call the CIA for help --
| | Thanks for the laughs. AHAHA.. ahaha... ahahahanson
| | || "Androcles" wrote:
|
| Androcles wrote:
| | If Ian's interested in physics and math ask him
| | THE QUESTION and find out what his total ignorance is.
| |
| | THE QUESTION:
| | Why did Einstein say
| | speed of light from A to B is c-v,
| | the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
| | the "time" each way is the same?
| |http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...ures/img21.gif
| |
| | =1= According to cretin :
| | "Easy: he (Einstein) did NOT say that." -
| | =2= According to moron van lintel, Einstein did not write the equation
| | he (Einstein) wrote.
| | =3= According to xxein:
| | It is an artefactual/superficially imposed yin-yang of sorts.
| | =4= According to Lamenting Shubert: Why do you want to know?
| | =5= According to cretin Jimmy Black ":
| | In neither system (meaning frame of reference in modern-day
| | terminology) is the speed of light c-v or c+v. In both systems
| | the speed of light is c."
| | =6= According to the imbecile Jimmy Black, Einstein did not write
| | the equation he (Einstein) wrote.
| | =7= According to Dork Brue "I don't give a damn what Einstein
wrote."
| | =8= According to rect_Al Schwartz:"SR is GR with G=0." - Uncle
Stooopid.
| | =9= According to Heretic Jan Bielawski, assistant light-bulb changer.
| | 'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
| | light to travel from A to B doesn't equal the "time" it requires
| | to travel from B to A in the stationary system, obviously.' --
| | egroups.com
| | (How many Polacks does it take to change a light bulb?)
| | =10= According to Rabbi Albert Einstein
| | 'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
| | light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires
| | to travel from B to A' because I SAY SO and you have to
| | agree because I'm the great genius, STOOOPID, don't you
| | dare question it. -- Rabbi Albert Einstein
| |
| | "Ian Parker" wrote:
| | We are not talking about the speed of light here we are talking
| | classical stability theory.
| |
| | hanson wrote:
| | ...ahahahaha.. Ian, you made a very very bad turn here while
| | you are dangling from Albert's Sphincter. Androcles will put
| | you now onto the list as the new #1 worshipper of Einstein's crap.
| | But thanks for the laughs... ahahahaha.. AHAHAHA... ahahanson
| | | Androcles wrote:
|
| Androcles wrote:
| | Does he wish to be known as Idiot Ian Parker or Imbecile Ian Parker?
| | I'm running out of suitable titles for cretins in general and it can't
| be "Dork", that's reserved for Dirks.
| |
| | hanson wrote:
| | AHAHAHAHA... Soon you will have to invent a relativistically
| | suitable title search prg. for that awesome task. I wish you luck,
| | Andro... and thanks for the laughs, in particular because the
| | Einstein Dingleberries do lack the ability to detect when they
| | are being wound up, with suitable Newtonian resonance, to keep
| | their relativistic dangling from Albert's sphincter in full swing...
| | ahahahaha... ahahahaha... ahahahanson
| |
| Androcles wrote:
| Yes indeed...http://www.urbandictionary.comcites
| idiot moron fool stupid imbecile retard tool dumbass dork dolt dumb jerk
| blockhead dimwit **** ****wit donkey boob asshole loser dunce ass
| simpleton
| jackass ignoramus nincompoop halfwit nitwit douchebag dummy douche
| dunderhead ****** dope ninny dip**** fathead bonehead bafoon lunkhead
oaf
| half-wit numskull buffoon nerd birdbrain ****head liberal lame turkey
| Note there is a progression among the witless wits:
| ****wit - nitwit - dimwit - halfwit
| which is not apparent in the heads...
| blockhead - dunderhead - fathead - bonehead
| ****head - lunkhead
| loons, loonies, lunatics appear to be missing, one need to wait
| for a full moon for those to appear; the physics related
| newsgroups are a magnet for them all.
| If they don't have a theory of their own they can always fall
| back on Einstein's.
|
| "Ian Parker" wrote
| I have never seen such lack of understanding. You know what -
| Ares is failing PRECISELY because of this lack of understanding.
| Barack Obama is 100% right. Ares must go. The problem with
| it is instability which no one seems to understand. It was
| understood when Apollo landed on the Moon but is not understood
| today.
| Use the Proton - At least the Russians seem do STILL have an
| understanding. -- Potter is saying GTR is useless. Well there
| seems to be a palpable failure to undertand basic engineering
| as well. If you cannot make Ares work, Ares must go. It probably
| will anyway. - Ian Parker
|
| hanson wrote:
| ahaha... Ian, at which stage of imbibement did you write your
| tripe above?.. Was it during your brief (1) "hour of power"
| or when you thought that you were (2) "One with the Inverse"
| or at the on-ramp to the realm where you are thinking so fast
| that the (3) "answers come to you before the questions arise"
| or (4) did everything (1,2,3) happen at once and brought you
| down because (5) the CIA was watching you when you
| confused "Ares" with "Acres" ... .......... Ian, heed this:
| We do successfully treat cases and maladies like yours in
| our state of the art facilities at Ravencrag:
| http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix/cobrajal.htm#Hanson
| http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix/co....htm#Ravencrag
| We restore the STABILITY in your unstable mind again.
| hanson
|
Let's be quite clear about this so that no mistakes are made.

Is the answer to THE QUESTION, according to Idiot Ian Parker,
"We are not talking about the speed of light here we are talking
classical stability theory." ?

For lurkers, THE QUESTION is...
Why did Einstein say
the speed of light from A to B is c-v,
the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
the "time" each way is the same?

If you are saying light travels relative to the source you are
tallking complete drivel. Double stars point out that drivel
graphically.

3 body orbits are a red herring, yes. An interesting one which takes
us into chaos and stability theory, which no one can understand.

Androcles in the Lion's Den. ********! Its people like Deborah
Lipstadt who are really in the lions den. Against anti Semites like
David Irving and Tom Potter.


- Ian Parker

On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:45:06 -0700 (PDT), Ian Parker
wrote:

If you are saying light travels relative to the source you are
tallking complete drivel. Double stars point out that drivel
graphically.

That old theory about double stars has been shown to be false. Light speed
unification occurs and prevents double imagery from ever occuring.

Binary stars now fully support ballistic theory.
Indeed, most variable star brightness curves appear to result at least partly
as a consequence of light from orbiting stars moving at c wrt its source and
c+vsin(t/T) wrt Earth.

3 body orbits are a red herring, yes. An interesting one which takes
us into chaos and stability theory, which no one can understand.

Variable star curves often indicate the presence of three or more objects in an
orbiting system.


- Ian Parker



Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

All religion involves selling a nonexistant product to gullible fools. Einstein cleverly exploited this principle with his second postulate.

On Jul 31, 6:13*pm, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:45:06 -0700 (PDT), Ian Parker
wrote:

If you are saying light travels relative to the source you are
tallking complete drivel. Double stars point out that drivel
graphically.

That old theory about double stars has been shown to be false. Light speed
unification occurs and prevents double imagery from ever occuring.

Correction: Light speed unification has been GUESSED by Wilson,
without physical cause as to what would *speed up* light through the
same path that also *slows it down*, other than pixies labeled "Wilson
Hypothetical Babbles". Nothing of the sort has been shown to occur.

On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:25:44 -0700 (PDT), PD wrote:

On Jul 31, 6:13*pm, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:45:06 -0700 (PDT), Ian Parker
wrote:

If you are saying light travels relative to the source you are
tallking complete drivel. Double stars point out that drivel
graphically.

That old theory about double stars has been shown to be false. Light speed
unification occurs and prevents double imagery from ever occuring.

Correction: Light speed unification has been GUESSED by Wilson,
without physical cause as to what would *speed up* light through the
same path that also *slows it down*, other than pixies labeled "Wilson
Hypothetical Babbles". Nothing of the sort has been shown to occur.

Diaper, light pasing through any region of space TENDS TOWARDS the equilibrium
speed relative to that region AS PER MAXWELL.

When light speeds up, the region accelerates in the opposite direction.

.....that's trivial to any physicist.


Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

All religion involves selling a nonexistant product to gullible fools. Einstein cleverly exploited this principle with his second postulate.

On Aug 1, 4:59*pm, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:25:44 -0700 (PDT), PD wrote:
On Jul 31, 6:13*pm, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:45:06 -0700 (PDT), Ian Parker
wrote:

If you are saying light travels relative to the source you are
tallking complete drivel. Double stars point out that drivel
graphically.

That old theory about double stars has been shown to be false. Light speed
unification occurs and prevents double imagery from ever occuring.

Correction: Light speed unification has been GUESSED by Wilson,
without physical cause as to what would *speed up* light through the
same path that also *slows it down*, other than pixies labeled "Wilson
Hypothetical Babbles". Nothing of the sort has been shown to occur.

Diaper, light pasing through any region of space TENDS TOWARDS the equilibrium
speed relative to that region AS PER MAXWELL.

Really? Where does Maxwell say that? Please derive this equation from
Maxwell's equations or point to where it is derived?


When light speeds up, the region accelerates in the opposite direction.

The *region* accelerates? Where are the borders of the region that
accelerates in the opposite direction? If light were to accelerate at
some point in a room, how much of the region in that room accelerates
in the opposite direction?

Or did you just have a hand cramp and mistakenly hit the Send button
in the middle of the spasm?


....that's trivial to any physicist.

Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

All religion involves selling a nonexistant product to gullible fools. Einstein cleverly exploited this principle with his second postulate.

"Ian Parker" wrote in message ...
If you are saying light travels relative to the source you are
tallking complete drivel. Double stars point out that drivel
graphically.

3 body orbits are a red herring, yes. An interesting one which takes
us into chaos and stability theory, which no one can understand.

Androcles in the Lion's Den. ********! Its people like Deborah
Lipstadt who are really in the lions den. Against anti Semites like
David Irving and Tom Potter.

It is interesting to see that Ian Parker
makes the claim that "David Irving and Tom Potter",
are "anti Semites" like most of the folks on the planet today,
and all of the neighbors of Jews through history.

I don't know about "David Irving, but
I am of the "love the sinner, hate the sin" school,
and I have many Jewish friends,
even though I "hate the sins" of Jews
that include Institutionalized Bigotry,
Institutionalized Revision of history,
and the instigation of conflict and war for power and riches.

Considering that Jews have called all of their neighbors
throughout history "anti Semites", one would think that
a few smart Jews would begin to think
and write about, and talk about,
"What makes all of these good folks "anti Semites?

Note that when Jews were operating out of Russia,
and instigating the Class Wars of the 1900's,
they used media to demonize the German People,
and after the Native Russians regained control of their government,
and the Jews migrated en mass to America and Israel,
they are using media to demonize Muslims and Russians.

Personally, I don't think it is Nature (Genetics),
I think that it is Nurture (Religious and cultural training).

Judaism is a primitive religion based on
Hamarabi's Laws and one the Egyptian concept
of one God, and Jews have not been willing to
adopt the social strategy that science has found most effective
( A modified form of "tit for tat". ),
because the present expression of Judaism
allows them to profit from the misery of non-Jews.

--
Tom Potter

http://www.geocities.com/tdp1001/index.html
http://notsocrazyideas.blogspot.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/
http://tdp1001.wiki.zoho.com
http://groups.msn.com/PotterPhotos
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...ingleberry.htm


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On Fri, 1 Aug 2008 15:08:13 -0700 (PDT), PD wrote:

On Aug 1, 4:59*pm, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:25:44 -0700 (PDT), PD wrote:
On Jul 31, 6:13*pm, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:45:06 -0700 (PDT), Ian Parker

Correction: Light speed unification has been GUESSED by Wilson,
without physical cause as to what would *speed up* light through the
same path that also *slows it down*, other than pixies labeled "Wilson
Hypothetical Babbles". Nothing of the sort has been shown to occur.

Diaper, light pasing through any region of space TENDS TOWARDS the equilibrium
speed relative to that region AS PER MAXWELL.

Really? Where does Maxwell say that? Please derive this equation from
Maxwell's equations or point to where it is derived?


When light speeds up, the region accelerates in the opposite direction.

The *region* accelerates? Where are the borders of the region that
accelerates in the opposite direction? If light were to accelerate at
some point in a room, how much of the region in that room accelerates
in the opposite direction?

Or did you just have a hand cramp and mistakenly hit the Send button
in the middle of the spasm?

Diaper, whenever YOU move, the earth moves backwards.

Learn some basic physics please.


....that's trivial to any physicist.

Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

All religion involves selling a nonexistant product to gullible fools. Einstein cleverly exploited this principle with his second postulate.



Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

All religion involves selling a nonexistant product to gullible fools. Einstein cleverly exploited this principle with his second postulate.