Re: c = constant is still under discussion in this group
- From: "Rudolf Drabek" <newsrudy@xxxxxx>
- Date: 28 Jun 2006 15:51:36 -0700
Eric Gisse schrieb:
Rudolf Drabek wrote:But it was not good enough to convince all people in this group.
[...]
All very true. Yes, c being constant is under "debate" in this
newsgroup but it is the kind of debate that is irrelevant. Whether the
speed of light is constant or not has long ago been solved by
physicists.
Whatever is the reason for.
Until now I have noticed, that I could not understand the arguments
Read the arguments of people who say "c+v is valid!" very, very
carefully. Read how they respond to the arguments of other people. You
will notice something.
really.
And some are using words like fucking and so on if they are in trouble.
I hope that it can be avoided in this thread between all contibutors.
So I wanted to setup an experiment that is so simple and clear -for me,
but dd1 said its nonsense- ,
that we can discuss it on friendly level until we hopefully can agree
about c +- v or c.
Rudi
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: c = constant is still under discussion in this group
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: c = constant is still under discussion in this group
- From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
- Re: c = constant is still under discussion in this group
- References:
- c = constant is still under discussion in this group
- From: Rudolf Drabek
- Re: c = constant is still under discussion in this group
- From: Eric Gisse
- c = constant is still under discussion in this group
- Prev by Date: Verner Vergon - one of the biggest cretins (still) alive
- Next by Date: Re: c = constant is still under discussion in this group
- Previous by thread: Re: c = constant is still under discussion in this group
- Next by thread: Re: c = constant is still under discussion in this group
- Index(es):