Re: accruate "sundials"
- From: "jtaylor" <jtaylor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 09:07:25 -0300
<geraldkelleher@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1119003243.592447.190580@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To Tim
>
> You have disgraced yourselves by giving yourselves choices that you do
> not have,there is only one value for axial rotation as an independent
> motion
Why is there only one, and how can you call it "independent"?
Surely it is defined by the rotation relative to another object, and since
ALL objects are moving, why does it matter which one we pick to pretend is
stationary?
Surely you _must_ have another object against which to measure motion (of
rotation, or any other kind), and so this motion _cannot_, by definition, be
"independent".
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: accruate "sundials"
- From: geraldkelleher
- Re: accruate "sundials"
- References:
- Re: accruate "sundials"
- From: DT
- Re: accruate "sundials"
- From: geraldkelleher
- Re: accruate "sundials"
- From: jtaylor
- Re: accruate "sundials"
- From: geraldkelleher
- Re: accruate "sundials"
- From: jtaylor
- Re: accruate "sundials"
- From: geraldkelleher
- Re: accruate "sundials"
- From: jtaylor
- Re: accruate "sundials"
- From: geraldkelleher
- Re: accruate "sundials"
- From: jtaylor
- Re: accruate "sundials"
- From: geraldkelleher
- Re: accruate "sundials"
- From: Tim Auton
- Re: accruate "sundials"
- From: geraldkelleher
- Re: accruate "sundials"
- Prev by Date: Re: Enviro-looneys versus "Chemcam"
- Next by Date: Overused buzzwords are sometimes b.s. (tiny satellite)
- Previous by thread: Re: accruate "sundials"
- Next by thread: Re: accruate "sundials"
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|