sci.physics.relativity

• Thread Index

---

• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Latter Day MMX
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Found the answer for my need of Brain Juice question!
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Found the answer for my need of Brain Juice question!
  • From: guskz
• Re: I need someone's brain juice here?
  • From: guskz
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Sue...
• Re: I need someone's brain juice here?
  • From: guskz
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Jerry
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• "The Observational Collapse of Einsteinian Physics"
  • From: Skrow
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Nikola Tesla about Relativity
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Gravitational Radiation from the source
  • From: Len Gaasenbeek
• Re: Three Ring Circus
  • From: Der alte Hexenmeister
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Jerry
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Jerry
• Re: Nikola Tesla about Relativity
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: mluttgens
• Re: Latter Day MMX
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Gravitational Radiation from the source
  • From: Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Latter Day MMX
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Latter Day MMX
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Latter Day MMX
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Nikola Tesla about Relativity
  • From: Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket
• Re: I need someone's brain juice here?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Three Ring Circus
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Will the LIGO Experiment Work?"
  • From: Der alte Hexenmeister
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Nikola Tesla about Relativity
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: I need someone's brain juice here?
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Nikola Tesla about Relativity
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: I need someone's brain juice here?
  • From: guskz
• Re: I need someone's brain juice here?
  • From: guskz
• Re: Nikola Tesla about Relativity
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: The Lorentz factor does not apply to the photon!!
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Three Ring Circus
  • From: skearney
• Re: Three Ring Circus
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Three Ring Circus
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: shuba
• Re: Three Ring Circus
  • From: skearney
• Re: Understanding the Lorentz transformations
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Three Ring Circus
  • From: skearney
• Re: "Will the LIGO Experiment Work?"
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Three Ring Circus
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Three Ring Circus
  • From: Sue...
• Re: I need someone's brain juice here?
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: I need someone's brain juice here?
  • From: guskz
• Re: I need someone's brain juice here?
  • From: guskz
• Re: Gravitational Radiation from the source
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Three Ring Circus
  • From: skearney
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Jerry
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: "Will the LIGO Experiment Work?"
  • From: Der alte Hexenmeister
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Jerry
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Der alte Hexenmeister
• Re: Understanding the Lorentz transformations
  • From: Der alte Hexenmeister
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Understanding the Lorentz transformations
  • From: Der alte Hexenmeister
• Re: Gravitational Radiation from the source
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: I need someone's brain juice here?
  • From: PD
• Re: I need someone's brain juice here?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: PD
• Re: I need someone's brain juice here?
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: I need someone's brain juice here?
  • From: guskz
• Re: "Will the LIGO Experiment Work?"
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Will the LIGO Experiment Work?"
  • From: Der alte Hexenmeister
• Re: I need someone's brain juice here?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Sue...
• I need someone's brain juice here?
  • From: guskz
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: "Will the LIGO Experiment Work?"
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: PD
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Der alte Hexenmeister
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Bilge
• Re: "Will the LIGO Experiment Work?"
  • From: Der alte Hexenmeister
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: GSS
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Gravitational Radiation from the source
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Der alte Hexenmeister
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Time Flow in Different Gravity Potentials.
  • From: Der alte Hexenmeister
• Re: Understanding the Lorentz transformations
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Understanding the Lorentz transformations
  • From: PD
• Re: Understanding the Lorentz transformations
  • From: Der alte Hexenmeister
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Will the LIGO Experiment Work?"
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Time Flow in Different Gravity Potentials.
  • From: Sue...
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: jem
• Re: Time Flow in Different Gravity Potentials.
  • From: Der alte Hexenmeister
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Time Flow in Different Gravity Potentials.
  • From: Der alte Hexenmeister
• Re: 2006 -- THE YEAR OF MOVING DIMENSIONS THEORY : STRING THEORY
  • From: Bart Chappell
• Re: Time Flow in Different Gravity Potentials.
  • From: kenseto
• "Will the LIGO Experiment Work?"
  • From: Skrow
• Re: Three Ring Circus
  • From: PD
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Der alte Hexenmeister
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: errata corrige
  • From: beda pietanza
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Jerry
• Re: Latter Day MMX
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Understanding the Lorentz transformations
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Understanding the Lorentz transformations
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Time Flow in Different Gravity Potentials.
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Time Flow in Different Gravity Potentials.
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: errata corrige
  • From: Bilge
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Three Ring Circus
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Understanding the Lorentz transformations
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Sue...
• The Lorentz factor does not apply to the photon!!
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Time Flow in Different Gravity Potentials.
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Eotvos units - pretty pictures
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Eotvos units - pretty pictures
  • From: stephen
• Three Ring Circus
  • From: skearney
• Re: Both ways at once?
  • From: Autymn D. C.
• Re: speed of light versus c, again
  • From: Autymn D. C.
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Rudi Menter
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Eotvos units - pretty pictures
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Rudi Menter
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Understanding the Lorentz transformations
  • From: Rudi Menter
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Understanding the Lorentz transformations
  • From: xray4abc
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Rudi Menter
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Bilge
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Bilge
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Jerry
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Understanding the Lorentz transformations
  • From: Rudi Menter
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Rudi Menter
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Understanding the Lorentz transformations
  • From: xray4abc
• Re: Latter Day MMX
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: Understanding the Lorentz transformations
  • From: Rudi Menter
• Understanding the Lorentz transformations
  • From: xray4abc
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Rudi Menter
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Der alte Hexenmeister
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: PD
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: PD
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: PD
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Paul B. Andersen
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "The Einstein Hoax"
  • From: JanPB
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Ken Tucker, meet Robert Brown ...
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Jerry
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Time dilation etc.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: PD
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: stephen
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: GSS
• Re: speed of light versus c, again
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Time dilation etc.
  • From: PD
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Der alte Hexenmeister
• Re: errata corrige
  • From: beda pietanza
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Mike
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Mike
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Der alte Hexenmeister
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Sue...
• "The Einstein Hoax"
  • From: Skrow
• Re: Time dilation etc.
  • From: Len Gaasenbeek
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: PD
• Re: Time dilation etc.
  • From: PD
• Re: speed of light versus c, again
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: speed of light versus c, again
  • From: Josef Matz
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Time dilation etc.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Time dilation etc.
  • From: Len Gaasenbeek
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: On the Theory and Physics of the Aether
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: errata corrige
  • From: Bilge
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Bilge
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Jem
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: LameDuck
• Re: Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Sue...
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Sue...
• Explain the Law of conservation of matter and energy
  • From: Drifta12
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: speed of light versus c, again
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Time dilation etc.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: stephen
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Sue...
• Re: speed of light versus c, again
  • From: argon
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: argon
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: PD
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: PD
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: speed of light versus c, again
  • From: PD
• Re: speed of light versus c, again
  • From: argon
• Re: Gravity of Newton, relativity, and falling space
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: speed of light versus c, again
  • From: argon
• Re: The Postulates of IRT (Improved Relativity Theory)
  • From: Daniel Weston
• Re: speed of light versus c, again
  • From: PD
• Re: speed of light versus c, again
  • From: argon
• Re: speed of light versus c, again
  • From: PD
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: stephen
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Sue...
• speed of light versus c, again
  • From: argon
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: argon
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: argon
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: argon
• Re: Time dilation etc.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: Mike
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: PD
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: stephen
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Mike
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: stephen
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• "The Making of Observations in Relativistic Systems"
  • From: Skrow
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: stephen
• Re: Time dilation etc.
  • From: Len Gaasenbeek
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: Mike
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: PD
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: stephen
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: stephen
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: PD
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: GSS
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: PD
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: PD
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: PD
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Sue...
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Sue...
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: On the Theory and Physics of the Aether
  • From: shuba
• Re: errata corrige
  • From: beda pietanza
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Bilge
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: On the Theory and Physics of the Aether
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: stephen
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: stephen
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: stephen
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Sue...
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: jem
• Re: Gravity of Newton, relativity, and falling space
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: stephen
• Re: Invalidity of Special Theory of Relativity
  • From: Bilge
• Re: "Overview of the Einsteinhoax Website"
  • From: Peter Kinane
• Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: artificial sweetner
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Gravity of Newton, relativity, and falling space
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: shuba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: Eric Gisse
• consider this
  • From: artificial sweetner
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: Bill Hobba
• new theory
  • From: artificial sweetner
• intelligent created gravitons
  • From: artificial sweetner
• Re: Latter Day MMX
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: jf34i
• Re: Gravity of Newton, relativity, and falling space
  • From: snapdragon31
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Peter Kinane
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Peter Kinane
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Latter Day MMX
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: PD
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: PD
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Josef Matz
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: jem
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: PD
• Re: Gravity of Newton, relativity, and falling space
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: GSS
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Latter Day MMX
  • From: kenseto
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: Josef Matz
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: Rudi Menter
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: Josef Matz
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: PD
• "Can the Second Law of Thermodynamics Be Circumvented?"
  • From: Egap
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: PD
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: Josef Matz
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Latter Day MMX
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: gravity experiments, accuracy and what they test
  • From: glucose
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: glucose
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: glucose
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: Mike
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: Mike
• Re: Gravity of Newton, relativity, and falling space
  • From: snapdragon31
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Both ways at once?
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Bilge
• take a break!
  • From: spike
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Sue...
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Gravity of Newton, relativity, and falling space
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Gravity of Newton, relativity, and falling space
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Daniel Weston
• Re: Gravity of Newton, relativity, and falling space
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Jem
• Re: gravity experiments, accuracy and what they test
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Jem
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Jem
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Jem
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Jem
• Re: A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: O'Barr: SR is a weak theory, it is only math!
  • From: Androcles
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Aetherist
• A mechanical way to obtain source independence re SOL
  • From: Daniel Weston
• Re: gravity experiments, accuracy and what they test
  • From: gentile
• O'Barr: SR is a weak theory, it is only math!
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: Mike
• Re: Why relativists are trolls.
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• "The Scarcity of Life Bearing Planets"
  • From: Skrow
• Re: Why relativists are trolls.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: gravity experiments, accuracy and what they test
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Why relativists are trolls.
  • From: Mike
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: kenseto
• Re: gravity experiments, accuracy and what they test
  • From: NaCl
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: Josef Matz
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: mluttgens
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: kenseto
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: mluttgens
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Why relativists are trolls.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: ?? ????? ?? ???? ???????? ?????? ?? ???? ????? ?????????
  • From: Androcles
• يا جماعة فى منـح تعليميـة مجانية فى مجال برمجة الكمبيوتر
  • From: Dr_mohamed_hassan_104
• يا جماعة فى منـح تعليميـة مجانية فى مجال برمجة الكمبيوتر
  • From: Dr_mohamed_hassan_104
• يا جماعة فى منـح تعليميـة مجانية فى مجال برمجة الكمبيوتر
  • From: Dr_mohamed_hassan_104
• يا جماعة فى منـح تعليميـة مجانية فى مجال برمجة الكمبيوتر
  • From: Dr_mohamed_hassan_104
• يا جماعة فى منـح تعليميـة مجانية فى مجال برمجة الكمبيوتر
  • From: Dr_mohamed_hassan_104
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: mluttgens
• Re: Gravity of Newton, relativity, and falling space
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Gravity of Newton, relativity, and falling space
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Gravity of Newton, relativity, and falling space
  • From: snapdragon31
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Why relativists are trolls.
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: xray4abc
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: xray4abc
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Gravity of Newton, relativity, and falling space
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Gravity of Newton, relativity, and falling space
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Is it Possible For A Particle To Stay Completely Still in Space-Time?
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Is it Possible For A Particle To Stay Completely Still in Space-Time?
  • From: Mark Martin
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: "Overview of the Einsteinhoax Website"
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• gravity experiments, accuracy and what they test
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Why relativists are trolls.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: errata corrige
  • From: Bilge
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: Bilge
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Hauke Reddmann
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: GSS
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: Bilge
• Re: "Overview of the Einsteinhoax Website"
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: Bilge
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: mluttgens
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• "Overview of the Einsteinhoax Website"
  • From: Elgnis
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Gravity of Newton, relativity, and falling space
  • From: Sue...
• Gravity of Newton, relativity, and falling space
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: mluttgens
• Re: CHRIST: THE ARRIVAL
  • From: George Hammond
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: GSS
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: GSS
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Autymn D. C.
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Autymn D. C.
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Autymn D. C.
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Autymn D. C.
• mysterious motion, em or outgasing
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Interest in Physics
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: What is the correct explanation for the Null result of MM Exper...
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Sir Karl Popper on Einstein's Block Universe
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Simple explanation of the Sagnac effect.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Simple explanation of the Sagnac effect.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Sepp
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Sepp
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Sepp
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Sepp
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: Androcles
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Sepp
• Re: Simple explanation of the Sagnac effect.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: Roe
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: Simple explanation of the Sagnac effect.
  • From: Len Gaasenbeek
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: stephen
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: 'gravitons'
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: mluttgens
• "The Nature of Mass"
  • From: Elgnis
• 'gravitons'
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: GSS
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: mluttgens
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: There Is a Horror in Einstein's Cult
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: John Parker's anticonceptions
  • From: Androcles
• Re: cnn is asking "are we trusting the scientists too much?"
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Simple explanation of the Sagnac effect.
  • From: Androcles
• "Hollywood Physics"
  • From: tuvok
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Simple explanation of the Sagnac effect.
  • From: Len Gaasenbeek
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Aetherist
• Falling Objects, How They Fall
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: johnreed take 1C --- 2005
  • From: Joe Fischer
• John Parker's anticonceptions
  • From: shuba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Androcles
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: mluttgens
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: ESKI
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: ESKI
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: ESKI
• Re: Orbiting planet
  • From: Jim Black
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: harry
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: harry
• Re: holographic principle and relitivity
  • From: Joe Fischer
• cnn is asking "are we trusting the scientists too much?"
  • From: argon
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: argon
• Re: Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: Nick Summers
• hobba is a gay
  • From: argon
• Re: holographic principle and relitivity
  • From: Dolby
• Re: holographic principle and relitivity
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Orbiting planet
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Experimental Detection of Universal Reference Frame
  • From: GSS
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Orbiting planet
  • From: jpkurhi
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• FTL approach marker
  • From: Sue...
• "Do Virtual Photons Exist?"
  • From: Elgnis
• Merry Christmas
  • From: The_Red_Telephone
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: shuba
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Androcles
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Orbiting planet
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Orbiting planet
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: shuba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Orbiting planet
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: On the Theory and Physics of the Aether
  • From: shuba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• SR ether moving clocks
  • From: beda pietanza
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: Sue...
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: mluttgens
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: significant zero
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: significant zero
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: johnreed take 1C --- 2005
  • From: PD
• Re: johnreed take 1C --- 2005
  • From: Joe Fischer
• johnreed take 1C --- 2005
  • From: randamajor
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Simple explanation of the Sagnac effect.
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Orbiting planet
  • From: PD
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Orbiting planet
  • From: Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket
• Re: "Evidence of the Existence of the Aether"
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: PD
• Re: Greetings, NUTS
  • From: PD
• Re: Only a Fool
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Only a Fool
  • From: glucose
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Only a Fool
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Orbiting planet
  • From: jaska
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Only a Fool
  • From: glucose
• Greetings, NUTS
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: Josef Matz
• Re: Einsteinians Test Einstein about E=mc2
  • From: Joe Fischer
• "Evidence of the Existence of the Aether"
  • From: Egap
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: PD
• Re: Simple explanation of the Sagnac effect.
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: PD
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: kenseto@xxxxxxxxxx
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: kenseto@xxxxxxxxxx
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Androcles
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: Androcles
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: PD
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Hauke Reddmann
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: PD
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: PD
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: mluttgens
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Relativistic contraction of a moving rod.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Simple explanation of the Sagnac effect.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: Androcles
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: Josef Matz
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: kenseto@xxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: Relativistic contraction of a moving rod.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Simple explanation of the Sagnac effect.
  • From: Len Gaasenbeek
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: markwh04
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: ESKI
• Only a Fool
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: holographic principle and relitivity
  • From: PD
• holographic principle and relitivity
  • From: penguinista
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Simple explanation of the Sagnac effect.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Simple explanation of the Sagnac effect.
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Ping jem
  • From: AllYou!
• Simple explanation of the Sagnac effect.
  • From: Len Gaasenbeek
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Harry
• Re: Relativistic contraction of a moving rod.
  • From: Sue...
• Re: relativity problems
  • From: glucose
• Re: relativity problems
  • From: glucose
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: PD
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: glucose
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: Josef Matz
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: glucose
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: PD
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: PD
• Re: relativity problems
  • From: PD
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: PD
• Re: relativity problems
  • From: glucose
• Re: relativity problems
  • From: glucose
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: kenseto@xxxxxxxxxx
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: kenseto@xxxxxxxxxx
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: kenseto@xxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Simple explanation of the Sagnac effect.
  • From: Peter Kinane
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Invalidity of Special Theory of Relativity
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: PD
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: jem
• Re: Invalidity of Special Theory of Relativity
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: jem
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: jem
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: jem
• Re: They verified a wrong theory
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Harry
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Harry
• Re: Simple explanation of the Sagnac effect.
  • From: Peter Kinane
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Harry
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Invalidity of Special Theory of Relativity
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: em
• They verified a wrong theory
  • From: Josef Matz
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: GPS corrections
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Relativistic contraction of a moving rod.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Why relativists are trolls.
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• GPS corrections
  • From: Hauke Reddmann
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Why relativists are trolls.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Relativistic contraction of a moving rod.
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Space-time continuum
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Interesting Equation
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Interesting Equation
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: shuba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: shuba
• Space-time continuum
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Interesting Equation
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Interesting Equation
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Interesting Equation
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Gravity Magic
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: relativity problems
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ole D. Rughede
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Relativistic contraction of a moving rod.
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Relativistic contraction of a moving rod.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Simple explanation of the Sagnac effect.
  • From: Peter Kinane
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Relativistic contraction of a moving rod.
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: relativity problems
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Relativistic contraction of a moving rod.
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Relativistic contraction of a moving rod.
  • From: Len Gaasenbeek
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: Androcles
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: Len Gaasenbeek
• Re: Relativistic contraction of a moving rod.
  • From: Androcles
• Dave Touretzky, the net-lifter
  • From: Barbara Schwarz
• Re: Relativistic contraction of a moving rod.
  • From: Len Gaasenbeek
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: PD
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: PD
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: PD
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: Len Gaasenbeek
• Re: Relativistic contraction of a moving rod.
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Relativistic contraction of a moving rod.
  • From: Len Gaasenbeek
• Re: driving at the speed of light
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: glucose
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: PD
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• relativity problems
  • From: glucose
• Re: Lorentzian accurate? (Re: How can Orbital Electron Rotate...)
  • From: glucose
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: glucose
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: glucose
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: glucose
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Bilge
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: glucose
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Androcles
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: driving at the speed of light
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Relativistic contraction of a moving rod.
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Relativistic contraction of a moving rod.
  • From: Len Gaasenbeek
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: Len Gaasenbeek
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: Sue...
• "The Flaw in High Energy Physics"
  • From: Egap
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: PD
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: PD
• Challenge to Tom Roberts
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: driving at the speed of light
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: jem
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: em
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: shuba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: shuba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: shuba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: shuba
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: em
• Re: driving at the speed of light
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: em
• Re: driving at the speed of light
  • From: Sue...
• driving at the speed of light
  • From: shevek
• Re: Euclid's conundrum - Space-
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Euclid's conundrum - Space-
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Euclid's conundrum - Space-
  • From: JanPB
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Androcles
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• The face on Earth to match the face on Mars
  • From: Androcles
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: PD
• Re: Androcles apologises to George Dishman
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: ESKI
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: uucp
• Androcles apologises to George Dishman
  • From: Androcles
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: PD
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: uucp
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Androcles
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: PD
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Conversion of Physics Students into Zombies
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: wolf
• Re: Conversion of Physics Students into Zombies
  • From: wolf
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Sir Karl Popper on Einstein's Block Universe
  • From: Bilge
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: wolf
• Re: Conversion of Physics Students into Zombies
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Conversion of Physics Students into Zombies
  • From: Androcles
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: PD
• errata corrige
  • From: beda pietanza
• Re: Conversion of Physics Students into Zombies
  • From: wolf
• Re: visual rulers
  • From: beda pietanza
• Re: Conversion of Physics Students into Zombies
  • From: PD
• Re: Conversion of Physics Students into Zombies
  • From: Androcles
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: wolf
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: wolf
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Euclid's conundrum - Space-
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: PD
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: wolf
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• "Measuring Our Absolute Velocity"
  • From: Egap
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: AllYou!
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: PD
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: harry
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: jem
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: jem
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: wolf
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: O'Barr: SR Primer!
  • From: Peter Kinane
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: wolf
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: wolf
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• "The emptyness between points", by jOE FiSHER
  • From: brian a m stuckless
• Re: Update on history of relativity
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Bilge
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Androcles
• Re: O'Barr: SR Primer!
  • From: Androcles
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: O'Barr: SR Primer!
  • From: Peter Kinane
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: shuba
• one hundred years of wrong relativity? whats goen on here!?
  • From: uucp
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Dishman's dishonesty
  • From: Jerry
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Androcles
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Dishman's dishonesty
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Dishman's dishonesty
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Androcles' trolling
  • From: Androcles
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Androcles
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Sue...
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: Euclid's conundrum - Space-
  • From: Androcles
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Euclid's conundrum - Space-
  • From: Sue...
• Re: visual rulers
  • From: beda pietanza
• Re: visual rulers
  • From: beda pietanza
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Sue...
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: PD
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Dishman's dishonesty
  • From: oriel36
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Dishman's dishonesty
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: em
• Re: Dishman's dishonesty
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Dishman's dishonesty
  • From: oriel36
• Re: Euclid's conundrum - Space-
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Euclid's conundrum - Space-
  • From: brian a m stuckless
• Re: Dishman's dishonesty
  • From: Jerry
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Androcles
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Euclid's conundrum - Space-
  • From: Sue...
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: alanmc95210
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Free fall and clocks ?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Androcles' trolling
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Euclid's conundrum - Space-
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Androcles
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Dishman's dishonesty
  • From: Androcles
• the emptyness between points.. Joe Fischer
  • From: brian a m stuckless
• Re: Euclid's conundrum - Space-
  • From: brian a m stuckless
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: Free fall and clocks ?
  • From: uucp
• Re: An immortal fumble by Dork Van de merde
  • From: Jim Black
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: uucp02938
• Re: Euclid's conundrum - Space-
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Euclid's conundrum - Space-
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Truth Regarding Albert Einstein
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Euclid's conundrum - Space-
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: visual rulers
  • From: Androcles
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: Cyber world
  • From: rehamkcirtap@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: visual rulers
  • From: Perspicacious
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Stan Byers
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Free fall and clocks ?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Androcles
• visual rulers
  • From: beda pietanza
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• the emptyness between points.. Joe Fischer
  • From: brian a m stuckless
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Androcles
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Euclid's conundrum - Space-
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Truth Regarding Albert Einstein
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: "The Limitations of Mathematics in Physics"
  • From: Peter Kinane
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Free fall and clocks ?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: "The Limitations of Mathematics in Physics"
  • From: JanPB
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Androcles
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Aetherist
• Truth Regarding Albert Einstein
  • From: Nathan
• "The Limitations of Mathematics in Physics"
  • From: Ytrap
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Androcles
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: Sue...
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: PD
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Mike
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Androcles
• Cyber world
  • From: pl . moyne
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: em
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Androcles
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: catlover
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: catlover
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: brian a m stuckless
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Sue...
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Einstein in 2010
  • From: Androcles
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Why string theorists like Brian Greene are Crackpots
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Free fall and clocks ?
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Biological Evolution vs. Theological Creation
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Biological Evolution vs. Theological Creation
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: "Is There a Force of Gravity?"
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Lienard-Wiechert potential
  • From: Androcles
• Re: "Is There a Force of Gravity?"
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "General Relativity Examined"
  • From: Androcles
• Re: "Is There a Force of Gravity?"
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Harry
• Re: Lienard-Wiechert potential
  • From: David McAnally
• Re: "General Relativity Examined"
  • From: David McAnally
• Re: "Is There a Force of Gravity?"
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• "General Relativity Examined"
  • From: Ytrap
• Re: "Is There a Force of Gravity?"
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Harry
• Re: "Is There a Force of Gravity?"
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Is There a Force of Gravity?"
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Free fall and clocks ?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Lienard-Wiechert potential
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: reletivity
• Re: "Is There a Force of Gravity?"
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Is There a Force of Gravity?"
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Harry
• Re: We can only see the past, never the present, since it takes time for the observed image to reach our eyes.
  • From: Josef Matz
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Einstein in 2010
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Harry
• Unnrecoverable lost ticks
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Androcles
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: em
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Sue...
• hierarchy of phaenomena
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: "A Snapshot of a Photon"
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Is There a Force of Gravity?"
  • From: Androcles
• Re: TO: Barbara Schwarz- GOD & SCIENTOLOGY
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: TO: Barbara Schwarz- GOD & SCIENTOLOGY
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Lienard-Wiechert potential
  • From: Androcles
• Re: TO: Barbara Schwarz- GOD & SCIENTOLOGY
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: "A Snapshot of a Photon"
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Lienard-Wiechert potential
  • From: JanPB
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: "Is There a Force of Gravity?"
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Is There a Force of Gravity?"
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• New Light On The Speed of Light
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: xxein
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: xxein
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: xxein
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Free fall and clocks ?
  • From: xxein
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Which one are you ?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Androcles
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "A Snapshot of a Photon"
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: Free fall and clocks ?
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: "Is There a Force of Gravity?"
  • From: Androcles
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: "Is There a Force of Gravity?"
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Flash from a Black Hole's Cannibal Act
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: Harry
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: tuvok
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Flash from a Black Hole's Cannibal Act
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: KST: if gravity were a field
  • From: Sue...
• "Is There a Force of Gravity?"
  • From: Trats
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: Paul Cardinale
• Re: Update on history of relativity
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: tuvok
• Re: Free fall and clocks ?
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: tuvok
• Re: Which one are you ?
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Free fall and clocks ?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: tuvok
• Re: Free fall and clocks ?
  • From: Paul B. Andersen
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• We can only see the past, never the present, since it takes time for the observed image to reach our eyes.
  • From: Len Gaasenbeek
• Re: Update on history of relativity
  • From: Juan R.
• Re: Free fall and clocks ?
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: O'Barr: SR Primer!
  • From: Harry
• Re: Free fall and clocks ?
  • From: Aage Andersen
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: jem
• Re: Free fall and clocks ?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Time dilation calc
  • From: Harry
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Free fall and clocks ?
  • From: we_pretty
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Harry
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Time dilation calc
  • From: tuvok
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Flash from a Black Hole's Cannibal Act
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Flash from a Black Hole's Cannibal Act
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Update on history of relativity
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: ESKI
• Re: O'Barr: SR Primer!
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Flash from a Black Hole's Cannibal Act
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Sue...
• Re: O'Barr: SR Primer!
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Flash from a Black Hole's Cannibal Act
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: ESKI
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Sue...
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: proof for the existence of ether
  • From: ESKI
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: TTY
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: "A Snapshot of a Photon"
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: Why is SR and LET have identical math??????
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: "The Error in Relativistic Physics"
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Harry
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Harry
• Re: O'Barr: SR Primer!
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Harry
• Re: "The Error in Relativistic Physics"
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Perpetual motion
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Why is SR and LET have identical math??????
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Perpetual motion
  • From: Howard
• "The Error in Relativistic Physics"
  • From: Trats
• Re: O'Barr: SR Primer!
  • From: Paul Cardinale
• Re: PSUEdoo-"simultaneity" (defined).!!
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Harry
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Sue...
• Lienard-Wiechert potential
  • From: David McAnally
• PSUEdoo-"simultaneity" (defined).!!
  • From: brian a m stuckless
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: BernardZ
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: jem
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Harry
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Sue...
• Re: O'Barr: SR Primer!
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Harry
• Re: Magnetic Field of a Finite Wire
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Androcles
• Re: O'Barr: SR Primer!
  • From: Androcles
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Why is SR and LET have identical math??????
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: O'Barr: SR Primer!
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: O'Barr: SR Primer!
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Jerry
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Jerry
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: PD
• Re: if gravity were a field
  • From: Sue...
• Re: O'Barr: SR Primer!
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Thomas Heger
• if gravity were a field
  • From: corleone
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: corleone
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: corleone
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Mike
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: Bilge
• Re: O'Barr: SR Primer!
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: where did everbody go
  • From: PD
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: O'Barr: SR Primer!
  • From: PD
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Androcles
• O'Barr: SR Primer!
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Perpetual motion
  • From: Paul Cardinale
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Perpetual motion
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Harry
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: PD
• Re: Magnetic Field of a Finite Wire
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: stephen
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: Harry
• Re: Magnetic Field of a Finite Wire
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: Magnetic Field of a Finite Wire
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: jem
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket
• Re: Magnetic Field of a Finite Wire
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Magnetic Field of a Finite Wire
  • From: Thomas Smid
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Perpetual motion
  • From: Nick Summers
• Re: Simple question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Harry
• Re: GPS ex Einstein WAS smart
  • From: brian a m stuckless
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Harry
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Harry
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Harry
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Harry
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: The planet orbiting Algol.
  • From: Androcles
• Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
  • From: manofsan
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: John Baez
• Re: Simple question
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Differences in stellar collapse - Divergent Matter - GR
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Drop in number of posts
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Simple question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: Simple question
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Simple question
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Mike
• Re: The Properties of the Aether
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: Rates of Charged Clocks in a Static Electric Field
  • From: Norbert
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Norbert
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: ESKI
• Re: Simple question
  • From: Norbert
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Simple question
  • From: Ali
• Re: Simple question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The Properties of the Aether
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Simple question
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Simple question
  • From: Ali
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Mike
• Re: The Properties of the Aether
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Bilge
• The Properties of the Aether
  • From: Trats
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Black Knight
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Russell
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: PD
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Harry
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Harry
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Peter
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Harry
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: PD
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: No More Black Holes
  • From: BernardZ
• Re: Scientist says neutron stars, not black holes, at center of gal...
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: harry
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: The planet orbiting Algol.
  • From: Jerry
• Re: The planet orbiting Algol.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Harry
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Harry
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: PD
• Re: "A Snapshot of a Photon"
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Dennis
• Re: "A Snapshot of a Photon"
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Brits take up smoking again.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: "A Snapshot of a Photon"
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: "A Snapshot of a Photon"
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: The planet orbiting Algol.
  • From: Paul B. Andersen
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Mike
• Gravity Essay Prizes, less than four months to deadline
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: David Thomson
• mfkzt, Philosophers Stone or Exotic Matter
  • From: Gary
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: What gravity is and how it works
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: No More Black Holes
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: What gravity is and how it works
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: What gravity is and how it works
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: oriel36
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: brian a m stuckless
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Mike
• Gravity Research Foundation
  • From: Joe Fischer
• What gravity is and how it works
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: harrlin
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Peter
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Peter
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: xxein
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Bob
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: On the "contraction" of a rod in SR
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: The planet orbiting Algol.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Bob
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Bob
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: Bilge
• Goal: Zero Geodesic Deviation
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Bob
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Bob
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Bob
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Bob
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: Sue...
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: shuba
• Re: Twin Paradox Question
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Twin Paradox Question
  • From: Bob
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: vern
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Mike
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Mike
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Peter
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Peter
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Peter
• Re: electron collision
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: oriel36
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: Bilge
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Mike
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Mike
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: The planet orbiting Algol.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: "The Aether and Charges of Charlatanism"
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: demeo
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: vanep
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Hobba's misconceptions
  • From: Mike
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: ESKI
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: semilatus rectum
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: electron observation
  • From: semilatus rectum
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: semilatus rectum
• proof for the existence of ether
  • From: semilatus rectum
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Newton and Einstein
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: electron collision
  • From: semilatus rectum
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: electron collision
  • From: semilatus rectum
• Re: electron collision
  • From: semilatus rectum
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: semilatus rectum
• Re: speed higher than light
  • From: semilatus rectum
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Unified Physics and New Blackhole >> IQ in Australia
  • From: relativitybeyondeinstein
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Special Relativity as Special Case of perceptual Universes
  • From: ESKI
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: Mike
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Scientist says neutron stars, not black holes, at center of galaxies (Forwarded)
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: Howard
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: This must be the funniest NG
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Mike
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: Mike
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: What is the correct explanation for the Null result of MM Experiment?
  • From: kenseto@xxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: PD
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Joe Fischer
• "The Aether and Charges of Charlatanism"
  • From: Drac
• Re: where did everbody go
  • From: Mike
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: speed higher than light
  • From: PD
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Harry
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Harry
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Harry
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Bilge
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: shuba
• Re: A little challenge for relativists - Bilge enlightens us
  • From: Harry
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: a proposal for topology of space
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: demeo
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Eric Gisse
• a proposal for topology of space
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Bilge
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Albert Einstein's though experiment has no data or logical meaning.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: What is the correct explanation for the Null result of MM Experiment?
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: What is the correct explanation for the Null result of MM Experiment?
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Ether theory AND expanding Earth hit mainstream journals....
  • From: em
• Re: where did everbody go
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Bilge
• Re: speed higher than light
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Bilge
• Re: underestanding relativity
  • From: Perspicacious
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: [OT] Re: The World of Einstein
  • From: Howard
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Bilge
• Re: "Is There a Force of Gravity?"
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: underestanding relativity
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: "Observer Dependant" vs "Invariant"
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: underestanding relativity
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: PD
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: underestanding relativity
  • From: Jean DAVID
• Re: underestanding relativity
  • From: Jean DAVID
• Re: The planet orbiting Algol.
  • From: Paul B. Andersen
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: What is the correct explanation for the Null result of MM Experiment?
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: where did everbody go
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: underestanding relativity
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: underestanding relativity
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: where did everbody go
  • From: Mike
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Ether theory AND expanding Earth hit mainstream journals....
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Harry
• Re: speed higher than light
  • From: PD
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Einstein was dumb. ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: where did everbody go
  • From: Bilge
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Bilge
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists - Bilge enlightens us
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: where did everbody go
  • From: Greysky
• Re: speed higher than light
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: jem
• Re: Ether theory AND expanding Earth hit mainstream journals....
  • From: dennismccarthy
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Harry
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Harry
• Re: A little challenge for relativists - Bilge enlightens us
  • From: Harry
• Re: speed higher than light
  • From: Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket
• Re: underestanding relativity
  • From: Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Ether theory AND expanding Earth hit mainstream journals....
  • From: em
• Re: Ether theory AND expanding Earth hit mainstream journals....
  • From: em
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Harry
• Re: underestanding relativity
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Harry
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Harry
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Harry
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: underestanding relativity
  • From: Eric Gisse
• underestanding relativity
  • From: a
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Mike
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: What is the debate all about?
  • From: Bill Hobba
• What is the debate all about?
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: rulers reciprocal measurements
  • From: xxein
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: rulers reciprocal measurements
  • From: xxein
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: where did everbody go
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: rulers reciprocal measurements
  • From: xxein
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: speed higher than light
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: speed higher than light
  • From: Jean DAVID
• Re: speed higher than light
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: significant zero
• Re: speed higher than light
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: speed higher than light
  • From: Jean DAVID
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Feico
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Feico
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: speed higher than light
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: speed higher than light
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• speed higher than light
  • From: Jean DAVID
• Re: Hypocritical, arrogant, illogical relativist.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: where did everbody go
  • From: AndyCav
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Feico Nater
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Harry
• Re: Hypocritical, arrogant, illogical relativist.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Why string theorists like Brian Greene are Crackpots
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: ianparker2
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Feico Nater
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Feico Nater
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Feico Nater
• Re: where did everbody go
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Why string theorists like Brian Greene are Crackpots
  • From: Daniel Weston
• Re: Hypocritical, arrogant, illogical relativist.
  • From: PD
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: Sue...
• Re: where did everbody go
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: significant zero
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: ianparker2
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: significant zero
• Re: Approximating the Universe
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: significant zero
• Re: where did everbody go
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: significant zero
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Michelson and Morley
  • From: Harry
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: where did everbody go
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Michelson and Morley
  • From: Feico Nater
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: Sue...
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Harry
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Harry
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Harry
• Re: rulers reciprocal measurements
  • From: beda pietanza
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Harry
• Re: rulers reciprocal measurements
  • From: beda pietanza
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Harry
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Harry
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Harry
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: significant zero
• Re: rulers reciprocal measurements
  • From: Harry
• Hypocritical, arrogant, illogical relativist.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: em
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: em
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: PD
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: bad news
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: xxein
• Re: rulers reciprocal measurements
  • From: xxein
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Why string theorists like Brian Greene are Crackpots
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: shevek
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Newton and Einstein
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: rulers reciprocal measurements
  • From: xxein
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: where did everbody go
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Newton and Einstein
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: where did everbody go
  • From: PD
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: where did everbody go
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: bad news
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Einstein was dumb. ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...
  • From: bad news
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: TomGee
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: significant zero
• Re: rulers reciprocal measurements
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: where did everbody go
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: The planet orbiting Algol.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Bilge
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: rulers reciprocal measurements
  • From: beda pietanza
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Harry
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: How can Orbital Electron Rotate Permanently without Energy Supply?
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Education tools
  • From: liska273
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: rulers reciprocal measurements
  • From: xxein
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• where did everbody go
  • From: bad news
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: significant zero
• Re: Approximating the Universe
  • From: PD
• rulers reciprocal measurements
  • From: beda pietanza
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: significant zero
• Re: The planet orbiting Algol.
  • From: Paul B. Andersen
• Re: Approximating the Universe
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Approximating the Universe
  • From: PD
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: electron collision
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: Sue...
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: PD
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: The MMX Revisited
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: significant zero
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: significant zero
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: significant zero
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: PD
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: PD
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Androcles
• Re: electron observation
  • From: PD
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: kenseto@xxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• "The Lorentz Transformation for Velocity"
  • From: Doog
• Re: Sources of confusion about Relativity
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Black Holes, Gravity, and the Speed of light
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Approximating the Universe
  • From: PD
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Sources of confusion about Relativity
  • From: jem
• Re: Sources of confusion about Relativity
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Sources of confusion about Relativity
  • From: Jem
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Why string theorists like Brian Greene are Crackpots
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: em
• Re: on bending of space time
  • From: Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Harry
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Harry
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Harry
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Androcles
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: TomGee
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Sources of confusion about Relativity
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: I Believe That General Relativity Accurately Describes Nature and that the results given by the math are essentially correct
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Black Holes, Gravity, and the Speed of light
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Sources of confusion about Relativity
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: Bilge
• Re: An attempt at a definition of "rest relative to space".
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: electron collision
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: electron collision
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: Sue...
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: The planet orbiting Algol.
  • From: Paul B. Andersen
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: dennismccarthy
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: significant zero
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: significant zero
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Stripping away the bull shit
  • From: significant zero
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Vollane
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Vollane
• Re: Sources of confusion about Relativity
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Sources of confusion about Relativity
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Sources of confusion about Relativity
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Black Holes, Gravity, and the Speed of light
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: dennismccarthy
• electron collision
  • From: Vollane
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• "The Conflict Between Quantum Theory and General Relativity"
  • From: X48
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Black Holes, Gravity, and the Speed of light
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Sources of confusion about Relativity
  • From: jem
• Re: Black holes radiate - the end of GR is there
  • From: Autymn D. C.
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: "Defining Inertial and Gravitational Accelerations"
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Why string theorists like Brian Greene are Crackpots
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: dennismccarthy
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: dennismccarthy
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: dennismccarthy
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: E = mc^2
  • From: Joe Fischer
• E = mc^2
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: again space again new space
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: What Did Eddington Prove in 1919?
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Retarded potential and funny clocks
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Sources of confusion about Relativity
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: again space again new space
  • From: resneli
• Re: Welcome! to the Physics Newsgroups
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Vollane
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Vollane
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Vollane
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Vollane
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Q-basic program for the at theory.
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Sources of confusion about Relativity
  • From: Vollane
• Re: again space again new space
  • From: resneli
• Re: again space again new space
  • From: resneli
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Sources of confusion about Relativity
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: electron observation
  • From: Vollane
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: electron observation
  • From: Vollane
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: What is the correct explanation for the Null result of MM Experiment?
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: electron observation
  • From: Vollane
• Re: What is the correct explanation for the Null result of MM Experiment?
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Gravity -- Fundamental Force or Space-Time Geometry?
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• "Defining Inertial and Gravitational Accelerations"
  • From: X48
• Re: Q-basic program for the at theory.
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Gravity -- Fundamental Force or Space-Time Geometry?
  • From: surrealistic-dream
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Approximating the Universe
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Welcome! to the Physics Newsgroups
  • From: jem
• Re: Approximating the Universe
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Retarded potential and funny clocks
  • From: Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket
• Re: on bending of space time
  • From: Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: on bending of space time
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: em
• Re: electron observation
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: I Believe That! Sure I do... LOL!
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: electron observation
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: electron observation
  • From: PD
• Re: What is the correct explanation for the Null result of MM Experiment?
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Welcome! to the Physics Newsgroups
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: em
• Re: Welcome! to the Physics Newsgroups
  • From: Gary Eickmeier
• Re: I Believe That General Relativity Accurately Describes Nature and that the results given by the math are essentially correct
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Q-basic program for the at theory.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: electron observation
  • From: Vollane
• Re: electron observation
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Welcome! to the Physics Newsgroups
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• electron observation
  • From: Vollane
• Re: A Look at Quantum "Spookiness"
  • From: Andreas Most
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: Vollane
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Revised ether theory
  • From: Vollane
• Re: Biological Evolution vs. Theological Creation
  • From: jdee
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Update on history of relativity
  • From: shuba
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: dennismccarthy
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: shevek
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: shevek
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Merry-go-round
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: dennismccarthy
• Merry-go-round
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Ether theory AND expanding Earth hit mainstream journals....
  • From: dennismccarthy
• Re: What is the correct explanation for the Null result of MM Experiment?
  • From: Dastardly Fiend
• Re: Ether theory AND expanding Earth hit mainstream journals....
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Approximating the Universe
  • From: PD
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: dennismccarthy
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: dennismccarthy
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: dennismccarthy
• Re: Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: kenseto@xxxxxxxxxx
• Re: I Believe That General Relativity Accurately Describes Nature and that the results given by the math are essentially correct
  • From: Bilge
• Re: symmetrical and asymmetrical twins
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: What is the correct explanation for the Null result of MM Experiment?
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Approximating the Universe
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: What is the correct explanation for the Null result of MM Experiment?
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: What is the correct explanation for the Null result of MM Experiment?
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Approximating the Universe
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Albert Einstein as a Philosopher of Science
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: FASCISM , was Re: On basic formalism of SR - 2
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Update on history of relativity
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Harry
• Sci Am proposes SR wrong and Aether exists
  • From: David Thomson
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: stephen
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: symmetrical and asymmetrical twins
  • From: dennismccarthy
• "Is General Relativity Compatible With Special Relativity?"
  • From: X48
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Harry
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: ether theory
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Approximating the Universe
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Approximating the Universe
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: em
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Celebrating and Mourning in Einstein's Cult
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Celebrating and Mourning in Einstein's Cult
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Why string theorists like Brian Greene are Crackpots
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Expansion and balloon analogy
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Why string theorists like Brian Greene are Crackpots
  • From: Androcles
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: ether theory (was: Re: Eotvos.)
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: Expansion and balloon analogy
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Q-basic program for the at theory.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: A Look at Quantum "Spookiness"
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: YBM
• Re: Expansion and balloon analogy
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: I Believe That General Relativity Accurately Describes Nature and that the results given by the math are essentially correct
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Bilge
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: Celebrating and Mourning in Einstein's Cult
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: I Believe That General Relativity Accurately Describes Nature and that the results given by the math are essentially correct
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: again space again new space
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Expansion and balloon analogy
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Approximating the Universe
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Expansion and balloon analogy
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Approximating the Universe
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Q-basic program for the at theory.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: A Look at Quantum "Spookiness"
  • From: Andreas Most
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Every now and then...
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Ether theory AND expanding Earth hit mainstream journals....
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Ether theory AND expanding Earth hit mainstream journals....
  • From: dennismccarthy
• Re: Revised ether theory
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Trying to Understand Relativity
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Ether theory AND expanding Earth hit mainstream journals....
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: "The Matter of "Dark Matter"
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Approximating the Universe
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: NOT ANOTHER STUPID ether theory thread (was: ether theory (was Re: Eotvos.))
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: Approximating the Universe
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: on bending of space time
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Ether theory AND expanding Earth hit mainstream journals....
  • From: dennismccarthy
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Expansion and balloon analogy
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: relativity? paradox?
  • From: Harry
• ether theory (was: Re: Eotvos.)
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Paul Cardinale
• Re: Revised ether theory
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: stephen
• Re: Celebrating and Mourning in Einstein's Cult
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Why string theorists like Brian Greene are Crackpots
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Harry
• Re: Celebrating and Mourning in Einstein's Cult
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: jem
• Re: Light is a DUAL wave
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: The planet orbiting Algol.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: A Look at Quantum "Spookiness"
  • From: Andreas Most
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: relativity? paradox?
  • From: Ulala
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: Expansion and balloon analogy
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: The planet orbiting Algol.
  • From: Paul B. Andersen
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: relativity? paradox?
  • From: Harry
• Re: Q-basic program for the at theory.
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: relativity? paradox?
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: A Look at Quantum "Spookiness"
  • From: Autymn D. C.
• Re: A Look at Quantum "Spookiness"
  • From: Autymn D. C.
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: A Look at Quantum "Spookiness"
  • From: Autymn D. C.
• Re: again space again new space
  • From: resneli
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: em
• Re: relativity? paradox?
  • From: Ulala
• Theoretical Verses
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: em
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: G the gravitational constant
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Cubic Complex Variables / Applications
  • From: Symmetry Observer
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: em
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Aetherist
• Re: Eotvos.
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Q-basic program for the at theory.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: on bending of space time
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Every now and then...
  • From: Joe Fischer
• Every now and then...
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: relativity? paradox?
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: on bending of space time
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: Approximating the Universe
  • From: Henry Haapalainen
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Celebrating and Mourning in Einstein's Cult
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: G the gravitational constant
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: shevek
• Re: Expansion and balloon analogy
  • From: Bilge
• Re: on bending of space time
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: John Kennaugh
• Re: Expansion and balloon analogy
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Harry
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: Paul Cardinale
• Re: relativity? paradox?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Biological Evolution vs. Theological Creation
  • From: Harry
• "The Matter of "Dark Matter"
  • From: X84
• Re: relativity? paradox?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Approximating the Universe
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Non-expanding universe
  • From: mluttgens
• Re: Celebrating and Mourning in Einstein's Cult
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: anybody wants to read something in german?
  • From: Thomas Heger
• Re: A little challenge for relativists.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Approximating the Universe
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Is the black hole's spin holding it up?
  • From: jem
• Re: A Look at Quantum "Spookiness"
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould