Re: Attraction VS geometry
- From: "Black Knight" <Androcles@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 15:08:48 GMT
"jem" <xxx@xxxxxxx> wrote in message news:2hIdf.5136$om5.1172@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Black Knight wrote:
>
>> "jem" <xxx@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:bxHdf.5128$om5.1611@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>>Joe Fischer wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 12 Nov "Sue..." <suzysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Pioneers are the ones with the arrows in the back. Sue...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> People who post one line while quoting 50 lines,
>>>>deserve to be pioneers. :-)
>>>
>>>:)
>>
>>
>> Don't quote me, but there 50 lines below:
>>
>> The principle of equivalence is very interesting to Joe Fischer.
>> .
>> .
>> The principle of equivalence is very interesting to Joe Fischer.
>
> 50 Knight moves without a capture means it's a draw.
>
> Watch out for the White Queen.
Usenet standard result:- Draw. Everyone is happy unless they lose.
But is the game interesting?
To have a game, the rules have to be understood by both parties.
Not everyone here plays by the same rules, so I try to play by
their rules as well as my own. Watch out for the mirrored (-:
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Attraction VS geometry
- From: jem
- Re: Attraction VS geometry
- References:
- Re: Attraction VS geometry
- From: surrealistic-dream
- Re: Attraction VS geometry
- From: Joe Fischer
- Re: Attraction VS geometry
- From: jem
- Re: Attraction VS geometry
- From: Black Knight
- Re: Attraction VS geometry
- From: jem
- Re: Attraction VS geometry
- Prev by Date: Re: The physical motions of photons in free space!
- Next by Date: Re: The simple truth about TIME and other absolutes
- Previous by thread: Re: Attraction VS geometry
- Next by thread: Re: Attraction VS geometry
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|