Re: Defining physics
From: Daniel Weston (daniel009_at_webtv.net)
Date: 07/30/04
- Next message: George Hammond: "Re: GOD=G_uv BAYESIAN P=99.9 %"
- Previous message: Harry: "Re: SR wrong - no."
- In reply to: Patrick Reany: "Re: Defining physics"
- Next in thread: Patrick Reany: "Re: Defining physics"
- Reply: Patrick Reany: "Re: Defining physics"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 08:41:14 -0700
Patrick, just answer a simple question. What do you mean by proof as
used in your introductory post. The context is irrelevant. I am not
arguing with you. Just tell us what you mean by the word proved.
- Next message: George Hammond: "Re: GOD=G_uv BAYESIAN P=99.9 %"
- Previous message: Harry: "Re: SR wrong - no."
- In reply to: Patrick Reany: "Re: Defining physics"
- Next in thread: Patrick Reany: "Re: Defining physics"
- Reply: Patrick Reany: "Re: Defining physics"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
|