Anisotropy in the gravity force, and Mercury.

On May 23, 7:30 am, rbwinn wrote:
On May 22, 9:07?pm, Eric Gisse wrote:



On May 22, 8:19 pm, rbwinn wrote:

On May 21, 1:49?pm, Eric Gisse wrote:

On May 21, 5:56 am, rbwinn wrote:
[...]

We are really seeing a flurry of mathematics out of college graduates
today.
Robert B. Winn

What would be the point? You won't understand and there isn't anything
we can say that has not been tried at least once in the past ten
****ing years of you posting your inanities. Go away, idiot welder.

Another attempt at mathematics from a college graduate. ?This one even
attempted subtraction.
Robert B. Winn

Why do you continue to whine about lack of math? You wouldn't
understand any of it even if I were to present it to you.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sure I would, Eric. College graduates cannot show any set of
transformation equations using t' not equal to t in which there is not
a distance contraction. Galileo, on the other hand has an equation in
his transformation equations which says t'=t. That means there is no
distance contraction in his transformation equations. I know that
this seems like heresy to you Harry Potter fans, but it happens to
coincide with reality.

Do you define "reality" as something other than "the results of
experimental tests?"

There is nothing in existence that gets
shorter just because it moves.

Empirical evidence is against your declaration of faith.

- Randy