Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: jem <xxx@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 08:24:32 -0400
kenseto wrote:
"jem" <xxx@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:wKSNg.138368$LF4.66932@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
kenseto wrote:
"jem" <xxx@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:S6yNg.138313$LF4.76625@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
jem wrote:
kenseto wrote:
"jem" <xxx@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:KadNg.136674$LF4.94046@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
jem wrote:
kenseto wrote:
"jem" <xxx@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:lVTMg.136601$LF4.131391@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
kenseto wrote:
Sigh....you have to compare different type of clocks to determine what
clock
is the most accurate.
OK, so if you compare two different types of clocks and they show
different elapsed times, which one is the more accurate?
Has that one got you stumped, Seto?
No.....if you have two types of clocks the type that shows a higher
varying
amount of elapsed time is less accurate.
Wow! You did it! You said something sensible. I'm speechless.
ROTFLOL....Don't pat yourself on the back yet.
I was patting *you* on the back, Seto. You probably didn't realize it because you're so used to being patted on the head.
You failed to realize that
what I said is circular. We would not use any type of instruement as a clock
that record a varying amount of elapsed time when they are side by side.
Wow!!!! Another misinterpretation by an SRian.:-)
Well, your maiden voyage into those uncharted waters of rationality sure didn't last very long. :(
But it's fitting. Everything you've said here for years is wrong, and you think it's right, then you finally say one thing that's right, and you think it's wrong. :)
It would be ludicrous for me to try to explain to you what makes it right, so instead I'll point out that if you believe your explanation is wrong (i.e. circular), then you've yet to answer my question - i.e. how can it be determined which of two clocks is the more accurate? Well, how?
.
Ken Seto.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: kenseto
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- References:
- DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: kenseto
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: kenseto
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: Sorcerer
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: kenseto
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: Sorcerer
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: kenseto
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: Sorcerer
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: kenseto
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: jem
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: kenseto
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: jem
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: kenseto
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: jem
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: kenseto
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: jem
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: jem
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: kenseto
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: jem
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: jem
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: kenseto
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: jem
- Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- From: kenseto
- DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- Prev by Date: Re: dark matter and 'theory of everything'
- Next by Date: Re: HOCUS POCUS
- Previous by thread: Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- Next by thread: Re: DTG: A New Theory of Gravity
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|